Canon XTi or Evolt E510?

[SSSKKK]

I am driving myself (and my husband) crazy with this decision:rolleyes:
I have researched and over analyzed, and have narrowed my choice to these 2 cameras.
I have a $1000 budget for the body and lens.
I mainly want to take photos of my kids sporting events (...baseball, basketball and martial arts...some indoors, some outdoors), landscapes of mountains and oceans while hiking, family events, my psycho dog, and, as I get more experienced-I will experiment and shoot anything.
I am new to the DSLR world, but am willing to learn by mistakes and love to experiment and learn through doing.:)
Is there any reason I should get one of these cameras over the other?
Thanks!!

[coldrain]

What lenses would you have in mind for either choice?

[Rooz]

they're both very good dslr's and i'm sure you'll be happy with either.

one thing is for sure since you are so torn between the 2...

if you buy the xti for every great pic you take you'll be saying "thank God i bought the xti" and for every bad run of pics you take you'll be saying "I wish i bought the e510." and vice versa. lol :D

the truth is neither of those dslr's will take good pics OR bad pics on their own. both are capable of taking good and bad. only one factor will make the difference. You.

[Norm in Fujino]

Is there any reason I should get one of these cameras over the other?
Thanks!!

Someone else will have to do the rah-rah for the XTi, but on the E-510 side you've got the only effective anti-dust system on any current dSLR and in-body Image Stabilization, which means that all your lenses will be image-stabilized--and from all the samples I've seen on Olympus fora, it really works. The drawback may be a bit worse high-ISO noise, although the samples I've seen also throw that chestnut into question. The E-510 also has indisputably better kit lenses, and a larger stable of designed-for-digital lenses. With the uses you have in mind, however, the kit lenses should serve admirably.

(Another Olympus plus is in-body pixel mapping; on all other makes of camera you have to send the body back to service to have this done, at charge. Of course, you never need it -- until you need it ;) )

Rooz is really right, tho. They'll both take great pictures in the right hands. They won't take good pictures without your trial-and-error input.

[coldrain]

Someone else will have to do the rah-rah for the XTi, but on the E-510 side you've got the only effective anti-dust system on any current dSLR and in-body Image Stabilization, which means that all your lenses will be image-stabilized--and from all the samples I've seen on Olympus fora, it really works. The drawback may be a bit worse high-ISO noise, although the samples I've seen also throw that chestnut into question. The E-510 also has indisputably better kit lenses, and a larger stable of designed-for-digital lenses. With the uses you have in mind, however, the kit lenses should serve admirably.

(Another Olympus plus is in-body pixel mapping; on all other makes of camera you have to send the body back to service to have this done, at charge. Of course, you never need it -- until you need it ;) )

Rooz is really right, tho. They'll both take great pictures in the right hands. They won't take good pictures without your trial-and-error input.
If you actually read about the E-510 and E-410, you will know it is quite a bit noisier!
Just because Olympus applies some quite heavy noise reduction, resulting in very soft results, as standard, does not mean the sensor is not more noisy...
Another bother for me would be the Olympus' manual focus. You do not have real control, the lenses have a rather unusual fly by wire manual focus, sort of like compact digital cameras have. And that can be a BIG bother for forinstance manual focussing with macro. You will keep overshooting focus.

Other plusses of the XTi are a better and faster AF system, and a nicer image format.
Both have their plusses and minusses.
For me the big attraction of the E-510 would be the live preview. And for the XTi, the image quality and AF.

[Riley]

If you actually read about the E-510 and E-410, you will know it is quite a bit noisier!

Well you probably should have read more, or read something else, because you wasted your time and ours. Thats no so anymore, Olympus have done a lot to control noise in this iteration of the Panasonic nMOS sensor. But you can make an anecdotal test of this yourself with review images. Open PhotoShop, Noise Ninja, click reset/ click Profile-Image/read & record noise index. The following figures come from the E-410 which has the same sensor as E-510.

E-410 iso1600 NR OFF 35
E-410 iso1600 NR NORMAL 21
E-410 iso800 NR NORMAL 17

XTi iso1600 NR 42
XTi iso800 NR 29

Its not a foolproof test, but it at the very least proves that E-510 is in the same ballpark. Even though the figures suggest it is less noisy than XTi


Just because Olympus applies some quite heavy noise reduction, resulting in very soft results, as standard, does not mean the sensor is not more noisy...focus.

Which is nonsense because Noise Reduction (NR) can be turned OFF on Olympus cameras, and probably should be. The default setting has NR on NORMAL and there are other settings one can use both higher and lower noise control. Unlike Canon which is a part of the cameras processing the DIGIC chip, and therefore forgives detail for noise. Sharpness can be controlled in camera to various settings. It is no less sharp than XTi, which has junk for a kit lens anyway.


Another bother for me would be the Olympus' manual focus. You do not have real control, the lenses have a rather unusual fly by wire manual focus, sort of like compact digital cameras have. And that can be a BIG bother for forinstance manual focussing with macro. You will keep overshooting focus.

The fly by wire focus is a little odd to get used to, but it works ok, and you can see what you are focussing by using LiveViews magnification, you cant do that on the XTi. Instead Canons AF can give some quite inaccurate readings particularly in macro.


Other plusses of the XTi are a better and faster AF system, and a nicer image format.

The 510 has a new faster AF system, but still just 3 point. No tests have been concluded that suggest the XTi's AF is faster than the new E-510. I believe it probably still is, but not by a whole lot. One thing about Olympus AF is you rarely get backfocus issues which some canons are prone to.


Both have their plusses and minusses.
For me the big attraction of the E-510 would be the live preview. And for the XTi, the image quality and AF.

This isnt true either, the 510 has a much wider range of features than the older XTi. LiveView, dust buster that works very well, anti-shake IS in normal and panning modes, pixel mapping, and far far superior kit lenses. You would buy an E-510 for its advanced featureset and better lens system.

The XTi has a slightly larger OVF (optical viewfinder) but no brighter, and a 9 point AF system. If in the end you must have an XTi buy it body only, the kit lens is worthless.

Coldrain 1/10

say cheese

[kenbalbari]

If you actually read about the E-510 and E-410, you will know it is quite a bit noisier!

I've actually read just about every professional review I could find, and I think that's overstating it. The better reviews provide full sized samples at each ISO, and my eyes also tell me they're very close. I do think the XTi wins narrowly at ISO 1600. But with the noise filter set on low, it's very close, and at ISO 800 and below, tough to pick a winner. And I really like the flexibility the E-410 and E-510 give you by allowing you to turn the noise filter off.

ISO 1600:
http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/canon/digital_rebel_xti-review/IMG_0053.JPG
http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/olympus/e410-review/testscene-1600-low.jpg

ISO 800:
http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/canon/digital_rebel_xti-review/IMG_0052.JPG
http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/olympus/e410-review/testscene-800-low.jpg
http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/olympus/e410-review/testscene-800-off.jpg

I also think the "fly by wire" focus system works well. It's something that might be noticeable to those who are already used to mechanically linked focus, but for most it isn't an issue. And, for manually focusing macro shots, liveview ends up being a big benefit, allowing you to zoom in on the LCD and get more precision than is possible from even the best viewfinders.

On the other hand, while I personally prefer the overall package the E-510 offers, I think there are some good points in favor of the XTi especially when it comes to the sports shooting.

For one, when autofocusing on moving objects is when you will really see an advantage to the 9 point autofocus system (same as 30D), as opposed to the 3 point system on the E-510. Another is that, if shooting jpeg of a high contrast scene, such as bright sunlight, at default settings the XTi seems to give you a bit more exposure latitude, to avoid clipping highlights. I doubt whether there is too much of a problem in practice there with the E-510 if you turn down the contrast in those situations, but I have seen where it has been an issue for some, including one pro wedding photographer who wanted to shoot straight from camera jpegs of a bride and groom in bright sunlight, while still properly exposing faces.

Still, for some other types of shooting the E-510 has it's own advantages. Including in body IS for walkaround shooting, the use of live view for tripod work, and a nice lightweight kit with those kit lenses for hiking and travel.

I think it might depend on a number of factors, one of which might be whether there is going to be a budget in the future for higher end lenses for some of these specific types of shooting. Is the 70-200 f2.8 L (or perhaps the f4L or the Sigma 70-200 f2.8EX) in the cards in the future for outdoor sports? Or the 300mm f4 L? How about the 85mm f1.8 for indoor basketball?

I really like most of what Olympus has to offer on the lens side, as far as quality for the price. But you don't have the same range of selections as with Canon. You also don't have near the same number of third party offerings. So there are some system advantages with Canon. There really isn't a good affordable basketball lens for the Olympus, for example. But if the Sigma 30mm f1.4 would do, it would also make a good portrait and all around low light event lens. So it might come down to which is the better fit for lenses (and perhaps other accessories like flash).

[Rooz]

And, for manually focusing macro shots, liveview ends up being a big benefit, allowing you to zoom in on the LCD and get more precision than is possible from even the best viewfinders.

not so sure about that. for macro you need as much visibilty of DOF, light and colour as possible. there is no point zooming into a macro if it doesn't represent the frame you are going to be taking.

so really it plays to the LCD preview's weaknesses not strengths.

[fionndruinne]

It's really sounding like the E-510 & E-410 are the next step up from cameras like the XTi. You've got:

The only effective anti-dust system
In-camera stabilization (with the E-510)
Customizable noise reduction options
Live-view (really useful sometimes... not so useful others)
(and really that live-view zoom on manual focus does seem nice: what it does is display your focal point at closer to full-size, which you can't get with the optical viewfinder - manual focus only gets hard with the viewfinder because the image is so small)

Now, it's true that the high ISO quality is a little less than the XTi, but not so noticably so, and it might be possible to get better results by really familiarizing oneself with the NR settings. The Olympus kit lenses are much better than that unimpressive Canon kit lens, and if you buy the two-lens kit, that's a super deal. On the other hand, beyond kits, Canon has a much larger and often more affordable range of lenses available. There are things which make this a toss-up in some respects, but personally in-cam stabilization might make it a done deal for me, along with the dust reduction maybe.

[coldrain]

Just ignore Riley's rant, they are always the same.

If you want to know just how noisy the Olympus' actually are, read reviews that actually touch on that.

Standard the E-410 is not very noisy in JPEG, but that loses you a LOT of detail due to the very aggressive noise reduction. What also happens is a LOT of sharpening, which you will notice when you just turn the noise reduction lower.
When you turn the noise reduction off, and the sharpness down, you get the best, but very noisy, results.

As DPreview puts it:
From a noise point of view there's little difference between these three ten megapixel digital SLRs up to ISO 400. At ISO 800 and 1600 the E-410 has the cleanest looking gray and black patches although this is clearly at the expense of detail lost to noise reduction, especially at ISO 1600. The noisiest 'flat area' patches come from the Nikon D40X although it doesnt 'smear' as much detail at ISO 1600. From an overall performance point of view the Canon EOS 400D (Rebel XTi) with its CMOS sensor once more delivers the best compromise between noise and detail.

Olympus has clearly not tied the Noise Filter and baseline Sharpness settings together which means that if you turn down (or switch off) the Noise Filter the image becomes oversharpened (as the default sharpness level is high to compensate for the softening effect of the Noise Filter). So, there's actually plenty more detail at ISO 100 than you would see with the camera's default settings, turn the Noise Filter off and you can see this but you also see how much underlying noise there really is. The best compromise we found was that from ISO 100 to 400 you could get away with turning the Noise Filter Off and setting Sharpness to -2 (right hand image below). At ISO 800 and 1600 some Noise Filter may be required, but a setting of 'Low' normally works well.

What dpreview also notes:
Maximum sensitivity actually ISO 1250 not ISO 1600 as indicated

Besides being more noisy, the sensor of the E-410/510 also clips highlights much faster than the Sony CCD and Canon CMOS from the Nikon D40X and Canon XTi/400D.

As dpreview finds:
Dynamic Range less than competition (highlights by about three quarters of a stop; 0.7 EV)

So, while the E-410 and E-510 are ok DLSRs, they do have downsides. And the biggest downside of the whole 4/3 system remains the smaller sensor, just as it has been in the past.
No idea why Riley always wants to dispute that.

And yes, the fly by wire manual focus really is not accurate enough, ask any experienced macro photographer how they like that.

[Norm in Fujino]

Rather than an argument about IQ by a bunch of people most of whom haven't used both cameras, try looking at some actual images:

Galleries from Jeff's reviews of the XTi and E-410:

Canon XTi (http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/canon/digital_rebel_xti-review/gallery.shtml)
Olympus E-410 (http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/olympus/e410-review/gallery.shtml)

At the same time, images can be deceiving. Some people complained about the noise in the ISO800 image from the Olympus (see below), until I pointed out the same ISO800 image from the Canon--which in this case is worse, even though taken with a $450 Sigma 15-30mm lens. What does that prove? Not much, or rather, that you can get good and bad images from both cameras. I've certainly seen some excellent images at all ISOs from the Oly by several photographers whom I respect, so I know it's possible.

Don't click on the following unless you're prepared for the bandwidth requirements. They're both full-size images.
Canon XTi (400d) ISO 800 full size image (http://http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/canon/digital_rebel_xti-review/IMG_0144.JPG)
This was with a $450 Sigma 15-30mm lens.

Olympus E-400 ISO 800 full size image (http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/olympus/e410-review/P6130025.JPG)
Taken with the 14-42mm "kit" lens.

BTW, I am an "experienced" (cough) macro photographer, and focus-by-wire is perfectly capable of accurate focusing, particularly with the 10x enlargement possible with liveview on the E-330, E-410, and E-510. It does require a bit of getting used to at first, since it has a different tactile sensation compared to a mechanical linkage.

http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c197/Peregrinor/P6017077_1aw1.jpg
(Olympus E-300 + ZD 50mm f2.0 macro + EX25 extension tube)

[coldrain]

Norm, what does a lens have to do with noise? Nothing at all, right?
So why do you mention this particulat Sigma? It is not like this is some kind of top lens anyway...

I have no idea what is so hard to understand about Olympus' noise reduction.
The two photos you liked to... the Canon hardly applies any noise reduction, the Olympus applies a lot (standard settings).

So you are trying to judge what? That with lots of noise reduction applied the photo is not so noisy? Is that not what the noise reduction is about?
What you do lose is detail. So, that is what it is about.
Detail + noise levels.

If you do not mind the very soft results after the noise reduction, then by all means be happy with the high ISO results of the standard JPEG settings of the Olympus. If on the other hand you want to know how the noise performance of the Olympus actually is, just shoot in RAW and use a 3rd party RAW convertor. You then will get the same level of detail you will get from a 400D, but with more noise.

Does that matter? That is personal. We were just pointing out the pro's and cons of the two cameras. If you want to make yourself believe that the E-410/510 sensor performs as well as the bigger competition, then ok...

Much better results can be obtained by shooting RAW, and then using a noise reduction program like noise ninja when needed in post processing. That goes for both the XTi/400D and E-510/410. But then still the XTi has the advantage, since its sensor is less noisy.

[Norm in Fujino]

Coldrain, sensor noise is only one part of the IQ equation, and even more so, only one part of the overall camera-selection process, and I meant only to point out that things are now getting close enough to make it a horse race, even in the higher ISOs. On the other hand, I know full well that a different photographer, using different conditions or procedures, could have reversed the results of those two photos; I really referenced those two because they were part of a discussion of IQ that I found rather amusing over on DPReview; they showed that online photographs don't always portray the results that one thinks they will show. Specifically, one poster argued that the E-410 photographs (including the one in the church) were hardly worthy of a 1.5MP camera, to which I retorted with the XTi example, which is clearly worse, my point being merely that you really shouldn't draw firm conclusions from either of them.

The original poster here did not ask which sensor has less absolute noise, but what reasons one might have for choosing one camera over the other. I've seen several threads in other fora that suggest the E-410 and E-510 are neck and neck for overall IQ (which includes but is not limited to the issue of noise) with cameras like the 30D and XTi. The fact that vehement arguments are unfolding shows just how close it seems to be (back in the days of the E-300 the noise issue, for sure, was no race). I say "seems to be" because I haven't personally shot with either the E-410, the E-510, or the XTi, so yes, I'm simply passing on third-hand information and observations. I don't usually trust other people's photographs when making my decisions, anyway, since other people don't necessarily shoot the way I shoot.

I think there are good reasons a person can suggest for going with either system, depending on individual needs (availability of prime lenses, dust removal, preference for one aspect ratio over the other, etc., etc.), but I'd personally avoid a choice devolving to the single issue of pixel peeping for noise. My feeling is that for the OP's purposes, the issue of noise is overblown, since you get a choice of settings that lets one smooth out noise with in-camera NR (no doubt fine for everyday snaps) or, turn it off entirely, as has been pointed out. In the latter case, noise can be handled more effectively with computer-based NR programs like Neatimage, and that seems to be a good process for advanced photographers.

At this point, to be honest, I'm still waiting on the sidelines. I really would like the in-body IS of the E-510, but both cameras are still too fresh on the market for my tastes, and I'm waiting for a couple of firmware upgrades to see what happens--or else for the E-3 in November.

[coldrain]

So we agree basically... both DSLRs have their plusses and minusses.

And the E-510 is the nicest entry level DSLR to the feel by far.

[Riley]

cheers Norm

http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/OlympusE510/verdict.shtml


Compared to Canon EOS 400D / XTi
Canon’s EOS 400D / Rebel XTi is the best-selling 10 Megapixel DSLR right now, so a natural rival to the E-510. The Canon comes in comfortably cheaper than the E-510 and offers roughly similar quality, along with a far superior 9-point auto-focus system and bigger viewfinder. Beyond this though, the E-510 has the edge. It features built-in anti-shake, Live View and superior anti-dust capabilities, not to mention a better kit lens. The E-510 is far better-featured overall, so if you’re considering the Canon but can afford a little more, you should definitely also take a look at the Olympus.

http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/OlympusE510/noise.shtml


As it stands here though, the E-510 by default exhibits similar noise and noise reduction levels to the Canon 400D / XTi and Nikon D40x, although is sadly missing the 3200 ISO option of the latter.

The thing about noise control with E-510 is this, you have the ability to control it. To massage noise 'in camera' will inevitably defeat detail, so if you accept NR in camera as a control, you will lose detail. This is also true to Canon's XTi as well, excepting that it is managed by the DIGIC chip, and you cannot turn that off.

That said, on the E-510 at least, whether you choose to shoot RAW or jpeg, noise control is best conducted in post processing with a tool like Noise Ninja.

image attached is a 100% crop edited from Cameralabs review of E-510 with NR OFF compared against Canon's XTi and can be found at the above page

[Riley]

Just ignore Riley's rant, they are always the same.

as opposed to the sites Canon salesperson, who feels the need to trash anything unCanon



So, while the E-410 and E-510 are ok DLSRs, they do have downsides. And the biggest downside of the whole 4/3 system remains the smaller sensor, just as it has been in the past.
No idea why Riley always wants to dispute that.

if larger sensors where the ultimate answer, then coldrain you should buy a larger sensor 1.52x Nikon, fact is, it doesnt make any observable difference

geen idee

[SSSKKK]

Decision made-I hope to get the 510 within a week.
Thanks for your opinions, but ultimately, it came down to the feel of the cameras in my hands. I know either will take good, or bad, pictures. The variable is me :rolleyes:, and how I apply practice and learning to my shoots. One thing I know for sure is that I will be learning how to take better picts than I could with my point and shoot.
Can someone who has used the 510 recommend settings for sports with the tele kit lens? (primarily baseball right now) I will start there and tweak as I learn how to use the camera.

[Norm in Fujino]

The ergonomics is a good enough reason at this point. Please see my private message to you.