Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 20
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Livin in a redneck paradise
    Posts
    1,866

    A620 Looks like my new camera

    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

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,087
    You meant E-620, right?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Livin in a redneck paradise
    Posts
    1,866
    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!

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    2,267
    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...

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Derbyshire, UK
    Posts
    2,449
    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.
    Around every picture there's a corner & round every corner there's a picture
    - the fun's in finding them

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Livin in a redneck paradise
    Posts
    1,866
    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...

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by raven15 View Post
    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.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    God's Country - Australia
    Posts
    10,406
    no video. thats a big call from oly.
    D800e l V1 l AW1 l 16-35 l 35 l 50 l 85 l 105 l EM1 l EP5 l 7.5 l 12-40 l 14 l 17 l 25 l 45 l 60 l 75
    flickr

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Livin in a redneck paradise
    Posts
    1,866
    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.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Livin in a redneck paradise
    Posts
    1,866
    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.

Posting Permissions

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