Olympus E-620 previews

[Norm in Fujino]

DCResource (http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/olympus/e620-review/index.shtml)

DPReview (http://www.dpreview.com/previews/olympuse620/)

Imaging Resource (http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/E620/E620A.HTM)

Four-Thirds-Photo (http://fourthirdsphoto.com/e620preview/02.php)

Four-Thirds-User (http://fourthirds-user.com/2009/02/olympus_e620_preproduction_review.php)

[Rooz]

this looks like an outstanding entry level camera.

[raven15]

There are a LOT of features in that little thing. I thought the E-410 had a lot, but this camera takes that and adds 30%. Ability to calibrate lenses, four types of bracketing, flippy LCD, etc.

[Visual Reality]

Back-lit buttons, excellent.


There are a LOT of features in that little thing. I thought the E-410 had a lot, but this camera takes that and adds 30%. Ability to calibrate lenses, four types of bracketing, flippy LCD, etc.
Isn't this an update to the E-520?

[Rooz]

from what i can gather its a new body altogether not much bigger than an e420. olympus got the flip screen right aswell from the E3. not like sony's pisspoor effort or CaNikon who havent even bothered.

[leandrod]

Some points to note on DC Reſource’s review:

1) Beſides Olympus flaſh guns, ðere are alſo units by Metz and Quantum;
2) xD is ſtill a pain;
3) The battery is proprietary but ðere are good, cheap clones, ſpecially in Europe (Eneloop & allii).

[jekostas]

Back-lit buttons, excellent.


Isn't this an update to the E-520?

It looks more like the E-5xx series got completely replaced. From specs (and various previews) this looks more like a goodly amount of the guts from the E-30 in a smaller body.
Can't really blame Olympus. The E-510 was pretty well-received but they didn't update the E-520 nearly enough to keep up with the competition.

[Rhys]

Everything I see from Olympus now, I like a lot.

I'm probably going to stick with Canon for the moment but... that Zeiss glass is very tempting. If this wedding season kicks off with some profitable events this year then I might well look into getting an Olympus - purely because it's smaller, lighter and more compact. The image quality at high ISO, I'd have to check out thoroughly but I don't think it's going to present a real problem.

The compactness and light weight is what really draws me to Olympus.

[jekostas]

Everything I see from Olympus now, I like a lot.

I'm probably going to stick with Canon for the moment but... that Zeiss glass is very tempting. If this wedding season kicks off with some profitable events this year then I might well look into getting an Olympus - purely because it's smaller, lighter and more compact. The image quality at high ISO, I'd have to check out thoroughly but I don't think it's going to present a real problem.

The compactness and light weight is what really draws me to Olympus.

Yes, come to the dark side... mwahahahaha!

Kidding. Yeah, Zeiss glass is damn nice for the pricing out there right now, just be forewarned that good primes are few and far between. The strength of the system really is the high-quality zooms.

[laydros]

I'm frustrated with the Sony/MinO system, so I know I wouldn't be happy with Oly as a primary camera, but the E-4xx with a pancake lens to keep in my pocket instead of a compact sure seems like a nice idea. That and the f/2 zooms, wowza.

[Rhys]

Yes, come to the dark side... mwahahahaha!

Kidding. Yeah, Zeiss glass is damn nice for the pricing out there right now, just be forewarned that good primes are few and far between. The strength of the system really is the high-quality zooms.

Yes - I see what you mean - there really isn't a good portrait lens there. The choices are 25 f2.8, 35 f3.5, 50 f2.0. Of those, the 35 is what I'd call the ideal portrait length of that lot. I guess you have to use 50, which I feel is a little long.

I notice they brought in an ultra premium line of lenses. That tells me that the lowest consumer grade was good enough when megapixels were low. Now there are a lot more, they're probably out-resolved by the cameras.

[raven15]

Just to clear a few things up, I'm sure y'all meant the other Z glass manufacturer, Zuiko.

Those are the reasons I went Oly :D. My E-410 + pancake fits in one pocket, the 9-18mm fits in the other, or I can carry the camera on it's nice black leather strap and add the 40-150mm to the pocket! For wedding professional use I might get a Canon 5D though.

[raven15]

Actually, the reverse is nearly true, the better glass has mostly been around for a while. Three of the entry level lenses (out of 9 ever) came out within the last 18 months, vs. only two of the top two tiers of lenses excluding remakes. And the 14-42mm and 40-150mm bottom tier lenses are also relatively new.

As far as I know every current Olympus lens out-resolves any 4/3 sensor to date at the center, except perhaps the 25mm pancake wide open and the 18-180mm. Usually the corners are pretty good too. You can read through the recent dpreview testing of the 9-18mm lens here:
http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/olympus_9-18_4-5p6_o20/page3.asp

[jekostas]

I'm frustrated with the Sony/MinO system, so I know I wouldn't be happy with Oly as a primary camera, but the E-4xx with a pancake lens to keep in my pocket instead of a compact sure seems like a nice idea. That and the f/2 zooms, wowza.

I'm wondering how this follows, actually. Annoyed with Sony/MinO = not happy with Olympus?

Also, yes, Zuiko, not Zeiss (like Zeiss actually MAKES anything these days...)

[jekostas]

Yes - I see what you mean - there really isn't a good portrait lens there. The choices are 25 f2.8, 35 f3.5, 50 f2.0. Of those, the 35 is what I'd call the ideal portrait length of that lot. I guess you have to use 50, which I feel is a little long.

I notice they brought in an ultra premium line of lenses. That tells me that the lowest consumer grade was good enough when megapixels were low. Now there are a lot more, they're probably out-resolved by the cameras.

Yeah, that is a problem. Thankfully, the simplicity and sturdiness of the 4/3s mount means some varied, and frankly surprising, older manual focus lenses can be used.

Apparently, older Konica Hexanon lenses will fit on the mounts almost directly with something like a 10-minute modification. Something like the Hexanon AR 40mm f1.7 would fit the bill nicely, at least until Olympus designs some more primes, and they're dirt-cheap.

http://blog.lewander.com/2007/07/konica-hexonon-lens-on-fourthirds-mount.html

[Rooz]

I'm wondering how this follows, actually. Annoyed with Sony/MinO = not happy with Olympus?

i think jason is referring to the lack of availability of accesories/ lens' etc where he's from compared to the big 2.

[leandrod]

that Zeiss glass is very tempting

¿Do you mean Zuiko? Unfortunately ðere is no Four Þirds Zeiß glaß.

[leandrod]

I notice they brought in an ultra premium line of lenses. That tells me that the lowest consumer grade was good enough when megapixels were low. Now there are a lot more, they're probably out-resolved by the cameras.

Not at all, ðat line was always ðere. It is juſt ðe profeßional lens line, but with conſtant maximum aperture all over the zoom range.

[Norm in Fujino]

I guess you have to use 50, which I feel is a little long.

To each his own, but I personally like the 50 macro for portraits.

http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c197/Peregrinor/misc/P8173768cw2.jpg


I notice they brought in an ultra premium line of lenses. That tells me that the lowest consumer grade was good enough when megapixels were low. Now there are a lot more, they're probably out-resolved by the cameras.

They weren't "brought in"; Olympus had the "ultra premium" (Super High Grade) line of lenses from the very beginning of the 4/3 system (with the E-1 camera), and I've read that all their ZD lenses have been designed to handle the resolution of somewhere around 20MP in a 4/3 sensor. One of the advantages of designing your system from the ground up.