PDA

View Full Version : E-410/e-510



IMSassafras
04-16-2007, 11:53 AM
I have been researching the D-SLR market for about two years and have been paying very close attention the the Olympus E-series. I've been dragging my feet all this time and didn't really know why until I opened up a Photography magazine and found the new offering from Olympus - the E-410 and E-510. The feature that made me smile was "Live View".

The confusing part....
What makes these cameras different? They seem like twins with a $100 price difference. Is this a marketing ploy or are there really some clear, unmistakable upgrades in the E-510?

Warmly,

Sassafras

Riley
04-16-2007, 12:30 PM
well i cant give you any sort of detailed list but from what i know this far

the 510 has IS, in body stabilisation, while the 410 has an auto iso boost
the 510 has a larger grip, is there more battery power ? *shrug

no doubt there is more, but it wont be all that significant i think
personally, for an additional $100 i think IS is hard to pass up

IMSassafras
04-16-2007, 01:03 PM
Thanks for the quick response.

The magazine I read said that both cameras have the same Stabilization - MIS. But I read the review at this site on the 410 and it says that it has DIS and the 510 has OIS. So,... who's right?

Sass

DonSchap
04-16-2007, 01:09 PM
... no doubt there is more, but it wont be all that significant i think personally, for an additional $100 i think IS is hard to pass up


I tend to agree ... why they even intro'd the Oly E-410 leaves one to wonder what their motivation could have been.

As Long John Silver once silver, during a image shoot:
"Arrr, Young Jim ... Image Stability ... she be the only way!" ;)

Riley
04-16-2007, 01:18 PM
Thanks for the quick response.

The magazine I read said that both cameras have the same Stabilization - MIS. But I read the review at this site on the 410 and it says that it has DIS and the 510 has OIS. So,... who's right?

Sass

ok, what theyre saying about 410 is marketing speel
it doesnt have stabilisation, what it does is increase the iso so that shutter speeds come up to a safe level to avoid camera shake.

i dont know about MIS/DIS, but IS is image stabilisation, OIS is Optical Image Stabilisation, its a Panasonic term and refers to stabilisation in lenses, as opposed to IS which is in the body. The difference between those two, IS will give you slow shutter speeds without blur with any lens, where OIS does the same thing but is only aboard the lens you buy it with.
(thats a bit simplistic but i hope it helps)

Riley
04-16-2007, 01:27 PM
I tend to agree ... why they even intro'd the Oly E-410 leaves one to wonder what their motivation could have been.

As Long John Silver once silver, during a image shoot:
"Arrr, Young Jim ... Image Stability ... she be the only way!" ;)

their intention is to produce 3 types of camera and lenses from now on.
S: Small
G: Enthusiast
P: Professional

It is obvious there is a lot of parts commonality with E-410/E-510, I think 510 will get a flip LCD upgrade down the track.

The P1 will be significantly different, and we still dont know a lot about it. But if you are into the book of Ruth, my gleaning of it is this

Available from july/august. [August]
Faster AF, More AF points (maybe 12-14),
5-6 fps and larger buffer.
Live preview with more robust screen. [Flip LCD]
in-body Image stabilisation. [IS]
at least 10mpix

tonay
04-16-2007, 05:13 PM
What about the 1 vs. 2 lens kits? In general it seems that everyone recommends against the "kit" lenses. Is that the case w/ the new lenses coming out w/ this camera or is it still wait and see?

Gary24
04-16-2007, 06:10 PM
Popular Photography has a review on both camera's in this months issue. I have not read it yet but looking forward to it.

Riley
04-16-2007, 08:56 PM
What about the 1 vs. 2 lens kits? In general it seems that everyone recommends against the "kit" lenses. Is that the case w/ the new lenses coming out w/ this camera or is it still wait and see?

yes, thats because mostly they arnt good, in the case of Olympus the kit lenses arnt too bad, but they are slow at F 3.5-5.6
out of the twin kit though, the 40-150 is a decent lens at a low price

http://www.wrotniak.net/photo/oly-e/lenses.html

eternabella
04-17-2007, 08:58 AM
I just pre-ordered the 510 with the 2 lens kit... I have the 500 with the 2 lens kid but the 510 comes with 2 diff lenses. I also have another 14-42 lens that we purchased separately.

I'm really looking forward to the 510 arriving... Ritzcamera told me sometime in the next 2 weeks, but we all know how that goes.

Riley
04-17-2007, 09:03 AM
thats quicker than my information, which says June 1
i bet its fabulous

eternabella
04-17-2007, 09:21 AM
thats quicker than my information, which says June 1
i bet its fabulous


Yea per Amazon.com they're saying July 10th
Per the Olympus website they're saying June
Per the man I spoke with at Ritz Camera when they called to verify my order, it should be in in a couple weeks.

LOL

i can only hope Ritz is true, but I'm expecting June/July timeframe.

Riley
04-17-2007, 09:27 AM
i still think June 1
that gives what 6-8 weeks separation between roll outs of 410/510/P1 respectively

tonay
04-17-2007, 01:24 PM
As a newbie - would you recommend body only and some lenses or a kit.

If lenses - which ones? The main focus will be family etc... and I'd like to stay in that $1000 range.

Thanks

Riley
04-17-2007, 01:44 PM
you might not do much better under 1000
the weakness is the shorter focal, replacing the 14-42 with something faster 14-54 is US$430
the other kit lens the 40-150 is fine at US$230 (cheap)

the reality is, the twin lens kit is pretty good value, and sees you thru 28-300mm (EFL)

http://www.wrotniak.net/photo/oly-e/lenses.html

tonay
04-17-2007, 02:18 PM
Excellent.

If the reviews come out as great as thought - I'm on it.

Which month was the review in popular photography? Looked in the april issue at the library and no mention. Did I miss it somehow?

This camera will beat the sony right? I'm reading so far it's cleaner on the higher ISO's?

eternabella
04-17-2007, 04:11 PM
i still think June 1
that gives what 6-8 weeks separation between roll outs of 410/510/P1 respectively



true. now i just have to "settle" for using my 500 and new lens/flash that just came yesterday in the meantime :D

Gary24
04-17-2007, 05:24 PM
Excellent.

If the reviews come out as great as thought - I'm on it.

Which month was the review in popular photography? Looked in the april issue at the library and no mention. Did I miss it somehow?

This camera will beat the sony right? I'm reading so far it's cleaner on the higher ISO's?

It's the current issues (just got it in the mail yesterday) and it's not a full review yet but a look at the pre-production model.

Gary24
04-17-2007, 05:37 PM
It's the current issues (just got it in the mail yesterday) and it's not a full review yet but a look at the pre-production model.

http://www.popphoto.com/cameras/3886/first-look-olympus-e-410-and-e-510.html

IMSassafras
04-17-2007, 06:03 PM
I put some money down on an E-510 today and I'm 3rd in line for this camera. :) Also, May is the expected arrival date at this location; The reason for the one month early arrival is the shop really sold a lot of Olympus cameras in the past year or two and have been rewarded with the early shipment. I am really excited!! This will be my first Digital SLR.

Warmly,
Sassafras

Gary24
04-18-2007, 05:04 AM
http://www.popphoto.com/cameras/3886/first-look-olympus-e-410-and-e-510.html

Actually this is not the article I am talking about either :rolleyes: Guess it will be on their web site after the mag has been on the news stands for a bit. It is the May 2007 issue with a sunset picture on the cover.

eternabella
04-18-2007, 09:05 AM
Yea, I'm waiting on mine from Ritz. It's funny because I called again and the guy said some were coming in tomororw, so to check back tomorrow... but the guy did NOT sound too familiar with the product so I'm definitely not holding my breath :D

acs
05-06-2007, 05:58 AM
Why the E-400/410? 'Cos its small, and for some folks that matters.

Wayback last century, when Olympus launched the OM1 film camera. it was the smallest SLR you could buy. And all the other manufacturers followed Olympus' lead (hence Pentax ME's etc.). So the OM1 really changed the shape of film SLR's.

Because the OM series was light and small, it was a favourite of folks for whom weight was critical - you didn't want to go hauling big iron like a Nikon up a mountain, unless you needed something to bang nails in with ;-) .

And now, shortly after the E-400 came out, Nikon introduced the D40. Watch the rest follow, if they can.

John_Reed
05-06-2007, 07:06 PM
Why the E-400/410? 'Cos its small, and for some folks that matters.

Wayback last century, when Olympus launched the OM1 film camera. it was the smallest SLR you could buy. And all the other manufacturers followed Olympus' lead (hence Pentax ME's etc.). So the OM1 really changed the shape of film SLR's.

Because the OM series was light and small, it was a favourite of folks for whom weight was critical - you didn't want to go hauling big iron like a Nikon up a mountain, unless you needed something to bang nails in with ;-) .

And now, shortly after the E-400 came out, Nikon introduced the D40. Watch the rest follow, if they can.I do believe it was even smaller than the OM-1 (I owned an OM-1, then a couple of successive OM-2s).

But the Pen-F was a half-frame 35mm camera (benefits of small sensor, even then?) that was also an SLR, just deserves mention for its rank as the smallest SLR (that I know of, anyway)

Riley
05-06-2007, 07:23 PM
I do believe it was even smaller than the OM-1 (I owned an OM-1, then a couple of successive OM-2s).

But the Pen-F was a half-frame 35mm camera (benefits of small sensor, even then?) that was also an SLR, just deserves mention for its rank as the smallest SLR (that I know of, anyway)

smallest SLR would be the Pentax 110 Auto, but the Olympus Pen F was the smallest practical SLR camera

John_Reed
05-08-2007, 09:47 AM
smallest SLR would be the Pentax 110 Auto, but the Olympus Pen F was the smallest practical SLR cameraBut why did you say that the Pentax was the smallest, but the Pen F was the smallest "practical" SLR? Maybe because the Pen F used 35mm film and the Pentax must've used 110 cartridges, is that the reason?

Riley
05-08-2007, 10:04 AM
But why did you say that the Pentax was the smallest, but the Pen F was the smallest "practical" SLR? Maybe because the Pen F used 35mm film and the Pentax must've used 110 cartridges, is that the reason?

got it in one John ;)
plus 110 is really tiny, like 3 3/4" long and barely 1 5/8" high without the finder prism. The prime lens is 1 1/8" in diameter. All lenses are F2.8 and the shutter is also the mirror.

where the Pen F is more conventional, except for the same poro mirror assembly that E-300 E-330 and L1 have

acs
05-12-2007, 02:56 AM
Didn't mention Pen F 'cos its half-frame (ie 72 shots on a 36 exposure film). But glad you guys did: I've heard that the zuiko lenses were as good as ever, and that it took great pictures. They did a Pen EE compact as well, father in law had one, his transparencies were very good.
Sense we're wandering from the subject here...
ACS

EricJames
06-06-2007, 11:20 AM
Anyone get their 510, yet? I'm debating whether to buy it as my first DSLR. :cool:

kgosden
06-06-2007, 12:25 PM
Picked up my 2 lens kit Monday to replace my E-500. It was $950 at HH Gregg here in Atlanta. I have had limited chance to play with it. So far i am thrilled with the high ISO performance. 800 is certainly usable for decent sized prints. 1600 would be acceptable for those family/party shots that never get bigger than 5x7 or so. At that size I think the noise would disappear. I have only viewed my few test shots on my laptop. But at ~1024x768 on a 14" display you do not notice the noise until 1600 and then it looks like fine grain.

Live View is a bit disconcerting on a DSLR at first. I think it will be useful as I wanted that feature for IR which is so much easier on P&S cameras because of live LCD's. The LCD is very good and you can certainly hold the camera overhead and out about 10-12 inches. The LCD is not perfect from that position, but I could tell roughly where I was aiming. The magnified focus feature works quite well too.

The new kit lenses look ok and are certainly light, but they are a stop or so slower than those from the E-500. Since they seem to work fine on the E-500 I will probably bundle them with that camera when I pass it to my dad.

kgosden
06-06-2007, 12:44 PM
Just a few ISO samples. These are 100% crops from shots of a dark hallway in my office SHQ JPGs. IS was enabled and noise filter was set to low.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/85465382@N00/533630645/

John_Reed
06-07-2007, 05:36 PM
Those IS vs. No-IS samples are both readable, even though you CAN see that those with IS are sharper. I notice you were shooting at 1/15, but your focal length wasn't properly reported (0mm?). What was the shooting FL?

Do you have any feel by now for how well the IS system is working, stop-wise?

kgosden
06-07-2007, 07:44 PM
John, the focal length was not listed for the IS vs non-IS as I was responding to a thread over at DPReview regarding IS and non-4/3 lenses. The only such lens I have is one I bought to play with, an OM 35mm shift lens. The issue I have with the testing of IS vs no IS is the inability to generate consistent shake at a level that can be expected to be corrected. To try and equalize things I did 3 in a row with and 3 without IS while trying to keep the camera stable in between since it was manual focus.

I will say that Live View with the 7x focus magnifier really makes it easier to manual focus old lenses. It also makes me think I might even use the 35mm shift since you can easily play with the lens while seeing the results. Much better than through a viewfinder. I only wanted Live View for the potential aid in IR photos. P&S cameras still seem to be much easier to use there since you can compose through the filter. I put on my R72 filter a few days ago and had very mixed results. I need to do some real testing there. That's what the weekend is for...

John_Reed
06-07-2007, 09:03 PM
John, the focal length was not listed for the IS vs non-IS as I was responding to a thread over at DPReview regarding IS and non-4/3 lenses. The only such lens I have is one I bought to play with, an OM 35mm shift lens. The issue I have with the testing of IS vs no IS is the inability to generate consistent shake at a level that can be expected to be corrected. To try and equalize things I did 3 in a row with and 3 without IS while trying to keep the camera stable in between since it was manual focus.

I will say that Live View with the 7x focus magnifier really makes it easier to manual focus old lenses. It also makes me think I might even use the 35mm shift since you can easily play with the lens while seeing the results. Much better than through a viewfinder. I only wanted Live View for the potential aid in IR photos. P&S cameras still seem to be much easier to use there since you can compose through the filter. I put on my R72 filter a few days ago and had very mixed results. I need to do some real testing there. That's what the weekend is for...I keep feeling the pressure to move up to DSLR, for me the 4/3 anti-shake bodies seem to be a good thing, depending on how well they perform, and lens availability. For birding, I've got a few friends using the "Bigma" lens, the 50-500 zoom from Sigma; I was hoping for something like the same reach in a 4/3 camera with quite a lot less weight and bulk. So your E510 is very interesting, especially if the IS is a good performer. I'll be watching your posts with great interest!

Riley
06-07-2007, 10:57 PM
guys, my understanding is that IS doesnt work with legacy glass
the reason would be it needs confirmation of FL, and there is no communication
hence if you use an OM lens, the EXIF will record a 0 for focal length

there is this though

http://forums.clubsnap.com/showthread.php?t=286309

kgosden
06-08-2007, 06:46 AM
I saw that goofy trick the other day. Fortunately for my camera I am inept at soldering and electronics work, but smart enough to know it :)

I think that the debate is still that there does not seem to be much more than general statements from Olympus as to how the IS is implemented. Especially since it is not defeated on the menu when a non-4/3 lens is attached. The OS is smart enough to tell you there is no Olympus xD card when you try panorama mode without one so why not a similar message for IS? Too bad they don't allow manual input of the focal length like Pentax. Personally I could care less as I don't expect to have much use for any non-4/3's lenses except, if I can justify the price a Canon 24mm tilt/shift. Too bad Olympus doesn't have a nice t/s lens in 4/3's. It is one area where that 2x crop factor hurts since I really want a wide t/s.

Riley
06-08-2007, 06:59 AM
if you need tilt shift, look away from Olympus

Personally, i shoot interiors for a living almost every day, and havnt needed one since we transited away from slide film to digital. Post processing does all the corrections for that now so i think they are redundant

kgosden
06-08-2007, 12:39 PM
Oh, I know Oly only has shift. The only viable t/s is the Canon 24mm, but it runs over $1k; too much for an experimental toy. I agree on these being redundant for interior and architecture shots, but not for landscape work. Aside from the bigger negative, one reason larger format film cameras are still popular for landscapes is the t/s capability, and mainly the tilt function. The ability to angle the plane of focus relative to the plane of the film/sensor is the chief attraction. Sure a nice wide angle and the increased DOF of 4/3's helps, but it is not the same thing.

Check out this review (http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/article_pages/tilt_and_shift_ts-e.html)for interesting info including a comparison of PS correction to lens correction.

Riley
06-08-2007, 01:08 PM
gotcha
i see what your about now
yes a pano tool wouldnt be the same as the distortions are different
coincidently Olympus OM had 2 shift lenses 24 and 35 i think
not as good for 4/3 because of the 1.92 crop
they work out at about 48 and 70mm and theyre worth a packet on ebay


you could look at the Oly 7-14/F4 for urban scenes
it is rectilinear corrected and has virtually no distortion
no other UWA lens performs like this

image attributed to Greg Chappel

kgosden
06-08-2007, 07:31 PM
I like the 7-14, but $1500 is a bit steep. I do think about it a lot, but I still have the 11-22 to play with while we see what the new wide zoom due out next year will be. I am hoping, as are others, that it will be a 8-midteens and under $1k. Cost is the same reason I haven't spent the +$1000 for the Canon 24mm t/s. And I know Olympus had a 24mm as well, but both the Oly's are shift only. I could afford the 35mm for trying the concept out. Figured I could always sell it for about what I spent. There are also a few Russian t/s lenses based largely on the Canon design. But they too are 35mm (70mm 4/3's). Another alternative is to adapt a bellows for full t/s control, but that still extends the focal length.

Riley
06-08-2007, 09:02 PM
as some of those shift lens are $1000 anyway
you could actually get another body and take 2 images simultaneously
would be an interesting view of street action
20Mp 8x3 images from Olympus !

laichoon
06-12-2007, 10:39 AM
I bought the E510 last week and found that if I have the built-in flash out of its socket, the red-eye reduction flashes are fired no matter what mode I set the flash to (auto, red-eye reduction, off, slow, etc). This is rather annoying as it takes a couple of seconds and sometimes I do want to use the built-in flash without red-eye reduction. I ended up having to disable the auto-pop-up function and using an external flash. Has anyone encountered the same problem, or is my camera mal-functioning?

Riley
06-12-2007, 11:13 AM
finding you query very difficult to interpret
but
could it be that the focus assist part of the flash is kicking in
de-activate it in menus

kgosden
06-12-2007, 03:33 PM
I agree it sounds like the focus assist, but there is not enough detail. I am also guessing the camera is in full Auto mode. I never use this mode, but I believe that it overrides most user options.

IMSassafras
06-12-2007, 04:01 PM
I bought the E510 last week and found that if I have the built-in flash out of its socket, the red-eye reduction flashes are fired no matter what mode I set the flash to (auto, red-eye reduction, off, slow, etc). This is rather annoying as it takes a couple of seconds and sometimes I do want to use the built-in flash without red-eye reduction. I ended up having to disable the auto-pop-up function and using an external flash. Has anyone encountered the same problem, or is my camera mal-functioning?

Laichoon,

I purchased the E-510 yesterday. I was able to play with it a little after charging the battery for 4 1/2 hours (grumble). I too experienced the same red-eye reduction feature when the flash automatically popped up. After reading your message, I played with the flash and every time the red-eye reduction would flash as well. It took a little reading of the manual to figure it out, but this is what you have to do...

Turn your mode dial to M (Manual Mode). If you want to use the flash, then pop-up the flash manually. If not, then make sure the flash is down. That's it!!!

I wish all questions were this easy. :cool:


Warmly,
Sassafras

kgosden
06-12-2007, 07:28 PM
Manual mode is not the answer. In manual mode he will need to set both the shutter speed and aperture, the camera will set neither, that is why it is called manual mode. Of the 4 non-scene modes ONLY A (auto) will always popup the flash. Even with AF illumination set to ON (it is under the 1st wrench menu) it will only popup the flash in Auto mode. However, in other modes, P(rogram), A(perture) and M(anual) it will use the AF illuminator of the flash only if the flash is manually raised. I just verified this on my E-510.

Riley
06-12-2007, 08:03 PM
will it try to focus assist anyway though, in low light

laichoon
06-12-2007, 09:12 PM
Sorry I wasn't clear in my description; I was trying to keep it short. As kgosden wrote, in auto mode the camera will popup the flash, although this can be disabled by setting the "auto pop up" to "off" (page 79 of the manual). In other modes such as P(rogram), the user has to pop up the flash manually. My problem, however, is that, whenever the flash is up (whether automatically or manually), it will fire a series of pre-flashes lasting 2-3s when the shutter release button is depressed. This happens regardless of the flash mode. There are a total of 11 different modes the built-in flash can be set to: auto, auto with red-eye reduction, fill-in flash, flash-off, slow sync with red-eye reduction, slow sync (first curtain), slow sync (2nd curtain), etc. I thought the series of flashes (which occurs with an audible rattling sound) is for red-eye reduction, not focus assist, but perhaps I am wrong? Other cameras I have used emit a single pre-burst for red-eye reduction. The E510 is the first camera I have used that keeps the flash blinking for so long. If the flashing that comes with the rattling is for red-eye reduction (rather than focus assist), I would have expected it to occur only if I set the flash mode to either "red-eye reduction" or "slow sync with red-eye reduction", and not the other modes, including "flash-off". I want to be able to use the built-in flash for flash photography without the 3s delay caused by the pre-flashes. For instance, I want to take a picture of a moving subject in a dimly-lit room, and by the time the shutter actually releases 3s later, the subject is no longer in the same pose. For now, I am using an external flash, but I really would like to use the built-in flash, if I can bypass the long 3s pre-flashes. Is it possible that the unit I have is defective, or that the firmware has to be updated?

kgosden
06-12-2007, 10:38 PM
So have you tried to disable the AF illumination? The behavior you describe is clearly the AF illumination. When I disable it on my E-510 and manually raise the flash I only get flash for exposure. AF illumination occurs even when flash for exposure is off.

laichoon
06-13-2007, 04:50 AM
Yes, you are absolutely right. After I disabled the AF illuminator, the rattling and long delay went away. Thanks so much !!