PDA

View Full Version : A620 Looks like my new camera



raven15
02-23-2009, 11:42 PM
When the price drops and I have more money, in about a year, if the A630 doesn't seem even better. Why didn't they make this a year ago?

A few thoughts:
What, no weather sealing?! The fools!!!
Did they know that xD cards went out of fashion, and in fact never were in fashion? Just think of the space they could save by switching to dual micro-SD :).
I am skeptical it will fit in my pocket, the E-410 was already pretty tight. I'd rather have a camera that fits in my pocket than a rotating LCD screen, though it has it's uses I'm sure.

But:
More focus points a huge plus, I hope they also mean faster focusing in dim and low contrast conditions
I always like bracketing, ISO and flash exposure bracketing look interesting
12 MP, though 3200 ISO.... Hmmm, well the new 12 MP sensor apparently doesn't band so maybe. I am tired of seeing bands when I bring up shadows, so that is good.
More dedicated buttons... good

jekostas
02-24-2009, 12:31 AM
You meant E-620, right?

raven15
02-24-2009, 01:35 AM
Eh, right, I must have been confusing it with an old Canon point and shoot! But, the more I look at it the more I see. That is a lot of features in a little camera!

kgosden
02-24-2009, 10:30 AM
I had the opportunity to handle the E30 over the weekend. I thought it was as bit too big for my tastes. I guess the whole E-5x0 series experience has biased me a bit. After playing with the E30 I was glad it was priced too high to be a sensible upgrade. The only features that I really liked were the dual control wheels, bigger view finder, flip out LCD and 5 frame bracketing. Of all of those the E-620 misses the one I want most, 5 frame bracketing. It brings the possibility of handheld HDR. That may make it a non-upgrade for me. Add in that as a E-520 owner I need all new batteries and chargers and my buy in cost goes up.

Since I just moved to the E-520 I guess I will see how I feel in June...

Phill D
02-24-2009, 12:43 PM
Well I must have been asleep for a while I didn't see that one coming. E620 well I didn't see it at Focus on Imaging on Sunday if it was there. Let's see what the DR is like.

raven15
02-25-2009, 02:13 AM
Yup, it's official, I want this camera pretty bad pretty soon. Superior autofocus and IS... I could have used both today... sounds so nice... if only it was out now... and I had more money... and I didn't already have a fully functional camera... I hope it still fits in my pocket... I'd like the 35mm macro to fill the gap between my 9-18 and 70-300 while I'm daydreaming... just think, 18x2=35, 35x2=70 perfect fit to quarter the frame of the other lenses... :D

leandrod
02-26-2009, 07:55 PM
What, no weather sealing?! The fools!

No, ­at would have made ­e camera much bigger, heavier, more expenſive. Leave ­at for ­e E-3, or a ſucce▀or model.

Speaking of ­at, ­ere are quite ſome po▀ibilities of features combinations. I gue▀ ­e E-3 is ripe for a ſucce▀or, perhaps two: a faster, top-end model, perhaps wi■ integrated vertical grip, and a ſmaller, yet wea­erſealed one.



Did they know that xD cards went out of fashion, and in fact never were in fashion? Just think of the space they could save by switching to dual micro-SD :).

Why not Compact Flash wi■ μ-sD? There is a μ-sDľxD adapter already being uſed as a tranſition device at Fuji and Olympus compact models.

Rooz
02-26-2009, 08:06 PM
no video. thats a big call from oly.

raven15
02-26-2009, 09:33 PM
I know there is a myth going around DPreview that watersealing would make the camera bigger and heavier, but take it from an engineer with experience in the water resources industry, it's false. The density of rubber is similar to the density of plastic, and a ring of the plastic body part would be removed to make room for the rubber, hence no net gain in size or weight (or at least no more than +/- 5 grams, depending on the rubber or plastic or other materials used).

It would add a small amount to the price. A small fraction of that would be materials cost because even expensive rubber (neoprene or teflon or some exotic material) would only add a few cents to the camera. Then tack on custom manufacturing of the rubber seals to the right shape, and the process of sticking them on the camera body. Plus the actual design costs of the sealed parts themselves. I'd say it would add about $20-$50 per camera, a price I'd be happy to pay. (I also have experience with cost estimating of labor and materials.) But, lack of weather sealing doesn't stop me from wanting the camera, as it check most of the other boxes I need to consider upgrading.

raven15
02-26-2009, 09:42 PM
I am not sure if I am surprised or not at lack of video. Since Olympus has had live view on DSLR's for years it seems like a relatively small step. It could be that they felt their autofocusing isn't good enough yet (unlike Nikon who has no qualms), so they would wait for that to develop. Or it could be that they wanted to launch it with their micro 4/3's camera's to give more impetus to the launch. Who knows.

I wouldn't mind video, there are times when it would be useful, but it's not a deal breaker. I do recall with my old P&S at Yellowstone a geyser went off in the middle of the day. The light was horrible and after a few dozen shots it became apparent that no amount of shooting would change the light or look more spectacular. So I switched to video and got the motion and thunder of the water, which was ultimately much more impressive. There is a place for video for certain.

leandrod
02-27-2009, 06:31 AM
I know there is a myth going around DPreview that watersealing would make the camera bigger and heavier, but take it from an engineer with experience in the water resources industry, it's false.


┐Does your experience applies to cameras? Olympus at leaſt had to deviſe ſome new ſtuff for digital cameras, old practice was not enough.

┐Is ­ere an example of twin cameras where the ſealed verſion waſnĺt ſignificantly different from the unſealed?

Norm in Fujino
02-27-2009, 11:14 AM
You guys are too much. At the price point quoted, weather sealing (by Oly's standards) would be toooo much. How are they going to discriminate their flagship if they put weathersealing on everything? I think the 620 looks extremely good with the present specs, assuming the IQ is adequate.

Phill D
02-28-2009, 02:01 AM
I agree Norm the E620 looks pretty good to me too. Shame it was anounced at the Focus on Imaging show a couple of days after I visited. The Safari group seem to have got a good scoop preview when they visited on Tuesday. Don't think I'll be upgrading anytime soon though as I'd really like that PanLeica 14-140 zoom so I'm saving up.

Rooz
02-28-2009, 02:06 AM
I am not sure if I am surprised or not at lack of video. Since Olympus has had live view on DSLR's for years it seems like a relatively small step. It could be that they felt their autofocusing isn't good enough yet (unlike Nikon who has no qualms), so they would wait for that to develop. Or it could be that they wanted to launch it with their micro 4/3's camera's to give more impetus to the launch. Who knows.

I wouldn't mind video, there are times when it would be useful, but it's not a deal breaker. I do recall with my old P&S at Yellowstone a geyser went off in the middle of the day. The light was horrible and after a few dozen shots it became apparent that no amount of shooting would change the light or look more spectacular. So I switched to video and got the motion and thunder of the water, which was ultimately much more impressive. There is a place for video for certain.

when i say its a big call, i mean that they are gambling that canon, nikon and sony all fail to put video into their entry models. if they do, oly is in pretty deep shit imo cos that market segment will buy the camera with video.

as for weathersealing...its outrageous that people demand weathersealing for this level of camera.

Phill D
02-28-2009, 02:19 AM
Rooz I think you are right but its a matter of timing. The Panasonic G1 will have HD video soon too so I think video in entry level DSLRs will be coming fairly quickly to all the makes. Oly however really needed to improve their low end cameras to have more impact over the current Canon/Nikon/Sony offerings so I guess the E620 is going to be the new base to add video to in the future. I'd be suprised if the swing/tilt LCD doesn't become pretty standard to everyone soon as well. As for weathersealing I think Raven proved that the non sealed cameras are pretty good anyway for the casual user. What he did with his camera would certainly have put my stress levels up somewhat.

Rooz
03-25-2009, 04:33 PM
when i say its a big call, i mean that they are gambling that canon, nikon and sony all fail to put video into their entry models. if they do, oly is in pretty deep shit imo cos that market segment will buy the camera with video.

the gamble just bit em in the ass...big time. as good as the e620 may be as a photographic tool, imo, its dead in the water now.

raven15
03-25-2009, 09:42 PM
20 fps? No focusing in video mode? Color me unimpressed, the differences between the XTi and the XSi were much more important than between this and the XSi, this is a pretty minor upgrade. Though not a bad camera, it is simply not noticeably a better camera than the XSi.

Plus, I was just reading the comments on the Canon forum. People actually pay huge money for an "L" lens that's not sharp at f/4? Anyone who chooses the 500D/T1 over the E-620 needs to have their head checked.

Elisha
03-25-2009, 09:50 PM
the 500D gives you a higher ISO option. the XSi only let you do ISO1600.
i'm with Rooz on this one....the E-620 does not look good in comparison anymore.

Armanius
03-30-2009, 10:34 AM
What I like about the E-620 the most is:

- Size (smaller than E-5xx and only slightly larger than E-4xx)
- In-body IS
- Articulated LCD screen

What I hope for is:

- Improved high ISO performance

What I don't think is necessary:

- 2 additional megapixels
- art filters

Weatherproofing would have been awesome, but Rooz is right. Put weatherproofing on the E-620, and why would anyone buy the flagship model? Hopefully the price of the E-620 will drop to a more reasonable $500-600 range. Well, at least it's not as overpriced as the E-30.

swpars
04-12-2009, 11:44 AM
20 fps? No focusing in video mode? Color me unimpressed, the differences between the XTi and the XSi were much more important than between this and the XSi, this is a pretty minor upgrade. Though not a bad camera, it is simply not noticeably a better camera than the XSi.

Plus, I was just reading the comments on the Canon forum. People actually pay huge money for an "L" lens that's not sharp at f/4? Anyone who chooses the 500D/T1 over the E-620 needs to have their head checked.

The E-620 ought to do just fine with no video.

If someone really wants a useful video mode in an SLR-like camera at less than $2500 for the body alone, IMO, they'll go to the Panasonic G1 variant that shoots video and has AF in video mode. Most consumers will probably find the lack of AF in video mode appalling.