Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Page 14 of 183 FirstFirst ... 412131415162464114 ... LastLast
Results 131 to 140 of 1825
  1. #131
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    670
    Thanks Sarah.

    The E-520 is a great camera. It is the Olympus body that got me to stop worrying about 4/3 sensors, noise, DR, etc. and just enjoy the Oly colours and the high quality JPEGs out of the camera.

    I have to say, however, that IMO, the images are too small to get a proper sense of the noise level. Any image reduced to that size will not reveal much noise unless it's *really* noisy.

    Nikon: D300, D700, Nikkor: 24-70, 70-200, 70-300/VR, 24/2.8, 35/2, 50/1.4G, 60/2.8G, 180/2.8,
    Sigma: 10-20, 50-150/2.8, 50/2.8, Tamron: 17-50/2.8, 28-75/2.8, Tokina: 12-24, Zeiss: 25/2.8
    Olympus: E-520, E-3, 7-14, 9-18, 11-22, 12-60, 14-35/2, 14-54, 35-100/2, 50-200, 25/2.8, 35/3.5, 50/2
    Panasonic: G1, Leica: 14-50, 14-150, 25/1.4
    Sony: A700, A900, 24-85, 35-70, 70-210/4, 20/2.8, 24/2.8, 50/2.8, T 90 macro, Zeiss: 24-70/2.8, 135/1.8
    P&S: Canon S90, Panasonic: LX3


  2. #132
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    4,146
    E-dwag-

    Thanks very much for the very experienced input on the E-520 body. What do you feel about the E-510 camera body??

    Sarah Joyce

  3. #133
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Livin in a redneck paradise
    Posts
    1,874
    Hi speaklightly! I guess now we have crowd?

    I like the first picture. I've worked in the west coast construction industry a bit, and he looks exactly like a cable lineman, or some sort of electrician. It is funny how the different trades develop their characteristic looks, just by looking at him I can tell he could never be a carpenter, laborer, equipment operator, mechanic, or painter. I guess you really captured his essence!

  4. #134
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    670
    Quote Originally Posted by speaklightly View Post
    E-dwag-

    Thanks very much for the very experienced input on the E-520 body. What do you feel about the E-510 camera body??

    Sarah Joyce
    It's... disappointing. It's not that different from the E-520, but somehow it manages to disappoint while the E-520 manages to impress. Most of it is down to the in-camera processing with JPEG files, and the rest of it due to the sensor, the metering, and AWB.

    Olympus chose to use ridiculously steep tone curves (high contrast) in processing images in-camera. With the sensor's DR already limited, they recklessly apply a tone curve that simultaneously crushes the shadows to black and clips the highlights to white. You have to set the camera to Muted Picture Mode, -2 contrast, -2 sharpness, and +1 saturation to get any DR out of its JPEGs IMO*. Add to that the propensity of the meter to overexpose in certain conditions and not do enough to protect the highlights, and you get a slightly frustrating experience (with JPEGs and DR, anyways).

    The Noise Filter was also a generation behind. You could reduce the noise enough to get a moderately clean picture, but with reduced detail. Or, you could turn it off and get your detail back, but at the expense of increased noise. You couldn't win with JPEGs. If you wanted good noise/detail trade-off, you'd have to shoot RAW and process on the PC with a NR program like Noise Ninja, Neat Image, or Noiseware.

    * - the settings I recommend for the E-520 are Muted picture mode, -2 Contrast, +1 Sharpness, and +1 Saturation (in conjunction with the Noise Filter set to Low, Auto ISO set to 800, and Auto Gradation for "regular" shooting). You may have to bump up the vibrance / saturation and clarity (midtone contrast) in post-processing a bit, but at least this way you have the option. You can always increase the saturation and contrast in PP, but you can never get clipped highlights / crushed shadows and clipped / out of gamut colours back, especially once it's saved to JPEG in-camera.

    -------------

    BTW Sarah, haven't I seen you before on the Nikon forums? Have you added Olympus to your kit or switched away from Nikon?
    Last edited by e_dawg; 12-12-2008 at 05:41 AM.

    Nikon: D300, D700, Nikkor: 24-70, 70-200, 70-300/VR, 24/2.8, 35/2, 50/1.4G, 60/2.8G, 180/2.8,
    Sigma: 10-20, 50-150/2.8, 50/2.8, Tamron: 17-50/2.8, 28-75/2.8, Tokina: 12-24, Zeiss: 25/2.8
    Olympus: E-520, E-3, 7-14, 9-18, 11-22, 12-60, 14-35/2, 14-54, 35-100/2, 50-200, 25/2.8, 35/3.5, 50/2
    Panasonic: G1, Leica: 14-50, 14-150, 25/1.4
    Sony: A700, A900, 24-85, 35-70, 70-210/4, 20/2.8, 24/2.8, 50/2.8, T 90 macro, Zeiss: 24-70/2.8, 135/1.8
    P&S: Canon S90, Panasonic: LX3


  5. #135
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    670
    Here's another one from Potsdamer Platz in Berlin, Germany, July 2008.



    E-520 + 11-22

    Nikon: D300, D700, Nikkor: 24-70, 70-200, 70-300/VR, 24/2.8, 35/2, 50/1.4G, 60/2.8G, 180/2.8,
    Sigma: 10-20, 50-150/2.8, 50/2.8, Tamron: 17-50/2.8, 28-75/2.8, Tokina: 12-24, Zeiss: 25/2.8
    Olympus: E-520, E-3, 7-14, 9-18, 11-22, 12-60, 14-35/2, 14-54, 35-100/2, 50-200, 25/2.8, 35/3.5, 50/2
    Panasonic: G1, Leica: 14-50, 14-150, 25/1.4
    Sony: A700, A900, 24-85, 35-70, 70-210/4, 20/2.8, 24/2.8, 50/2.8, T 90 macro, Zeiss: 24-70/2.8, 135/1.8
    P&S: Canon S90, Panasonic: LX3


  6. #136
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    670
    Raven, love the "water fountains" shot btw. Nice B&W post-processing. Wonder if it might look better had the verticals been straight as opposed to the "wide-angle shooting upwards at an angle converging verticals" look? I do that all the time too, as I don't have a tilt-shift lens or bother with correcting for this in post-processing. But I sometimes wonder: "would this have been better if my verticals did not converge?"

    KG: nice grab of the birdie... not easy to do when they dart around quickly.
    Last edited by e_dawg; 12-12-2008 at 05:52 AM.

    Nikon: D300, D700, Nikkor: 24-70, 70-200, 70-300/VR, 24/2.8, 35/2, 50/1.4G, 60/2.8G, 180/2.8,
    Sigma: 10-20, 50-150/2.8, 50/2.8, Tamron: 17-50/2.8, 28-75/2.8, Tokina: 12-24, Zeiss: 25/2.8
    Olympus: E-520, E-3, 7-14, 9-18, 11-22, 12-60, 14-35/2, 14-54, 35-100/2, 50-200, 25/2.8, 35/3.5, 50/2
    Panasonic: G1, Leica: 14-50, 14-150, 25/1.4
    Sony: A700, A900, 24-85, 35-70, 70-210/4, 20/2.8, 24/2.8, 50/2.8, T 90 macro, Zeiss: 24-70/2.8, 135/1.8
    P&S: Canon S90, Panasonic: LX3


  7. #137
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    4,146
    e dawg-

    As a digital camera instructor, I have experience with Nikon and Olympus DSLR cameras. Because I do a good deal of my instructing on cruise ships, I am not as active on the forums as I could be if I was at home all the time. Generally speaking, I am away 8 to 9 months of the year instructing on cruise ships.

    For example, we are at home for a month currently, and then we join the ship again on January 14th for the annual world cruise.

    I asked about the E-510 versus the E-520, as I found an E-510 body at a very low price on E-Bay. Just in my short experience with the E-520, it does seem to be "tweeked" a bit better to give it more DR.

    Just for fun I pulled out the E-300 yesterday and snapped a few photos of my husband. The IQ is good thanks to the use of flash, but you can easily see how far Olympus has come between the E-300 and the E-520.

    Further Edit: I won the auction on E-Bay and got an E-510 body for $(US) 304.00. When I receive the E-510 body, I will return the E-520 body as I am still within the return period. So yes, I saved some money, but based on e dawg's comments, I am going to have to live with the lesser qualities of the E-510 body. Darn it!

    Sarah Joyce
    Attached Images Attached Images  
    Last edited by speaklightly; 12-12-2008 at 09:16 AM. Reason: to add an update

  8. #138
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    670
    Quote Originally Posted by speaklightly View Post
    As a digital camera instructor, I have experience with Nikon and Olympus DSLR cameras. Because I do a good deal of my instructing on cruise ships, I am not as active on the forums as I could be if I was at home all the time. Generally speaking, I am away 8 to 9 months of the year instructing on cruise ships.

    For example, we are at home for a month currently, and then we join the ship again on January 14th for the annual world cruise.
    Hmm... that sounds like fun! Know any ships looking for an instructor?

    Further Edit: I won the auction on E-Bay and got an E-510 body for $(US) 304.00. When I receive the E-510 body, I will return the E-520 body as I am still within the return period. So yes, I saved some money, but based on e dawg's comments, I am going to have to live with the lesser qualities of the E-510 body. Darn it!
    Well the E-510 is okay if you use the "right" settings as I suggested earlier. And if you shoot RAW and are willing to do some post-processing for those shots that have high DR or low-light shots at high ISO, you will be taking the weak link (the in-camera processing) out of the equation and will have just as good images as you would get from the E-520. The difference then becomes the amount of PP work required. And if you're willing to put in a bit of time, you can automate your RAW conversion and processing workflow enough that it is only a minor inconvenience.

    However, you don't need to return the E-520 and stay with the E-510 if you don't want to. Why not re-eBay the E-510 and just keep the E-520? I know you'll lose a few bucks and it's a bit of work to do that, but these days, I feel that the less time I have to spend in PP, the better, and that it's worth it to pay for things that enable that type of photographic lifestyle / workflow.

    Just my 2 cents...

    Nikon: D300, D700, Nikkor: 24-70, 70-200, 70-300/VR, 24/2.8, 35/2, 50/1.4G, 60/2.8G, 180/2.8,
    Sigma: 10-20, 50-150/2.8, 50/2.8, Tamron: 17-50/2.8, 28-75/2.8, Tokina: 12-24, Zeiss: 25/2.8
    Olympus: E-520, E-3, 7-14, 9-18, 11-22, 12-60, 14-35/2, 14-54, 35-100/2, 50-200, 25/2.8, 35/3.5, 50/2
    Panasonic: G1, Leica: 14-50, 14-150, 25/1.4
    Sony: A700, A900, 24-85, 35-70, 70-210/4, 20/2.8, 24/2.8, 50/2.8, T 90 macro, Zeiss: 24-70/2.8, 135/1.8
    P&S: Canon S90, Panasonic: LX3


  9. #139
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Derbyshire, UK
    Posts
    2,505
    e_dawg now I'm depressed as I don't really want to shoot RAW all the time and I can't afford to change my camera. Mind you if I get rubbish pictures I can always blame the camera now Seriously as an E510 owner I'd be curious to see images to show the differences. There has been a lot posted especially on dpr about the differences between the two cameras, most people agree with you but some actually say the 510 is better. Sarah if I was in your situation I'd probably stick with the newer camera and re ebay the 510 as e_dawg suggested. Mind you, you could always do some back to back comparisons while you have both.
    Around every picture there's a corner & round every corner there's a picture
    - the fun's in finding them

  10. #140
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    4,146
    e dawg-

    Thanks a lot for your input about just e-baying the E-510. I just might do that. But getting into RAW is something that I promised myself that I should do to be a really effective digital camera instructor. So that would be a good challenge to pit myself against during the upcoming 6 month long contract. Do you like the RAW processor that is packaged with the Olympus cameras? I believe that it is a stripped down version of Silkypix? So the E-510 could have a use that way too. So there are several alternatives available.

    I will apply your suggested settings and use RAW when I receive the E-510 camera and give it a try. Before making a decision. So perhaps we have found a silver lining in that e-bay mishap. I appreaciate your input a lot.

    Sarah Joyce

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •