Olympus E-3 or Nikon D300

[cfd954]

I am in the process of looking at getting a new DSLR and have narrowed my choices down to either the Olympus E-3 with 12-60 lens or Nikon D300 with 18-200 VR lens. Both systems seem to have quite a bit in common feature wise so I am quite torn between the two.

I am just looking for some input from owners of Nikon and Olympus and your experience with the brand and durability of lenses and bodies. Thanks for the help.

 

[Renysmom]

I personally shoot Olympus and have for years but truthfully if both cameras have the features you want then take the time to go into the stores and hold and play with both and see which one "feels" best in your hands and is easier for you to operate.

 

[ukcatfan]

I personally feel that they are very different systems. The Oly is on the 4/3 system so it will have the 2x crop factor. That limits your ability to go wide and makes your DOF naturally larger. That is likely a downside at this level of camera, but it could depend on your shooting style. If you prefer a larger DOF and shoot mostly at the tele end then you might prefer the Oly. There will probably better high ISO noise on the Nikon as well b/c it has the larger sensor. They have started controlling the noise with software on the new Oly models, but that is typically at the expense of sharpness.

Kevin

 

[hth001]

have been using an Olympus e-500 for about a year and a half and love it. very happy with the 4/3 system. take a lot of sports (indoor and out) and lots of WDW pics and very happy with the quality.

 

[donaldduck1967]

I've had an E-500 for 2 yrs and while I am happy with it and it's quite capable of taking awsome pictures I am currently looking at Nikon for a few reasons.

1 - Low light auto focus on the E-500 is slow and sometimes can not focus. I don't know if thats been improved on the E3 or not.

II - Lens selection. While the lens' Olympus has are amazing lens', they just don't have as wide a selection and tend to be a little more pricey.like Canon and Nikon. Sigma and Panasonic are making 4/3rd's now so i'm sure the selection will increase. As I did, you will soon realize that you want more lens' for various reasons.

C - The view finder is smaller on Olympus cameras. The E3's view finder is a little bigger but for me I find it to be a little to small on the E-500.

Don't let the 2x factor influence your decision. You are not limited to going wide. They have an 11-22 and a 7-14 both of which get rave reviews. People will say that the 14 -45 is really 28 -90 in 35mm terms and that's not wide enough, but the other camera makers kit lens' are usually 18-55 which is 27- 82.5 so you will not notice the 1mm difference.

The good thing about the E3 is that not only is the camera weather sealed but currently they also make weather sealed lens'. The best thing you could do is read what users of both are saying and goto a store and hold both of them. Look at the featrues, can you change things like ISO,White balance, AF points, metering by pressing a single button and not having to go thru menus are hold down one button while turning another. Whichever you decide lets us know and good luck.

 

[Geoff_M]

I've owned the D300 for about a week now, and here's some things I'll offer...
1) The Nikon pro community is nuts about the D300. It's one camera that seems to have met, or exceeded, the pre-launch marketing hype. I'd personally agree with that statement from what little shooting I've done so far with mine. I've even read of at least one shooter that's canceled their D3 order to buy another D300 as their second body. This camera along has all but antiquated the $5K D2x!

Even die-hard Canon guys, like The Luminous Landscape's Michael Reichmann, are standing up and taking notice:

Regular readers know that I shoot with Canon 35mm digital equipment. (I also use Hasselblad / Phase One and Leica). But for some 30 years prior to switching to Canon in the late 90's I shot with Nikon (F, F2 and F4). I switched platforms in the just-pre-digital days because there were certain lenses from Canon (T/S and IS) that simply didn't exist from Nikon at the time.

I had few regrets at the switch through the first 7 years of this decade and the move to digital because it's my opinion that with its full frame sensors and superior high ISO noise capabilities Canon had a clear edge. Many other pros apparently thought so as well, and as a consequence Nikon lost some marketshare in this segment.

But with the introduction of the D300 and D3 a few months ago (the D300 started shipping last week, and the D3 will as well within days) I now believe that Nikon is back in the game – big time!

For this reason I have purchased a Nikon D300 and several lenses and will start shooting with it on a regular basis. Link

2) AF system... The D300 shares the same AF system as it's D3 big-brother. The 51 point system, which seemed like overkill when announced, it pretty darn slick.
3) LCD Monitor... OK, so it doesn't flip out, but it's the most "beautiful" display on the market. Now you REALLY CAN check fine-focus on the back of the camera!
4) Digital flash system... Nikon's seems to have really nailed down the tricky art of digital TTL flash systems and most people recognize them as the leader.

I'm not one of these people that has to try and talk others into buying what they own in order to validate their own personal purchases. If you weigh all of this and decide that the Oly is right for you... then go for it.

 

[Gdad]

I just got my D300 out of the box a couple hours ago. No real testing yet but my initial impression is this is one solid camera. The 3D focus tracking just messing around in my kitchen absolutely blew me away. And as Geoff stated- the LCD display is stunning.

 

[ukcatfan]

Don't let the 2x factor influence your decision. You are not limited to going wide. They have an 11-22 and a 7-14 both of which get rave reviews. People will say that the 14 -45 is really 28 -90 in 35mm terms and that's not wide enough, but the other camera makers kit lens' are usually 18-55 which is 27- 82.5 so you will not notice the 1mm difference.

It depends on how wide you want to go. I was more talking about something like a 10mm lens that would be a 15mm on a Nikon, but 20mm on an Oly. That is a limiting factor if you want to go really wide.

Kevin

 

[cfd954]

The one thing that is making me shy away from deciding to get the D300 is the quality of the nikon lens. From what I have been seeing online the 18-200 has some very mixed reviews and the build/optical quality does not seem to be as good as an olympus lens. Can anyone who has the 18-200 shed some light on this. Thanks.

 

[Geoff_M]

I don't have that particular lens, but I'd encourage you to not base your decision around one lens. Nikon's glass has an excellent reputation.

 

[Gdad]

You can take the 18-200vr for what it is- Sharp w/ VR- Slow at f5.6- Wide 11x range but distorted / soft at the extremes- Consumer grade product. The 18-200vr is a good lens for its intended purpose. Nikon makes some truly legendary glass in many configurations. Maybe you should look at the new 24-70/2.8- maybe a closer match to the Oly 12-60.

 

[Code]

I've had an Olympus E-510 since July and really love it. I wish I could upgrade to the E-3/12-60 but can't justify the cost for what is just a really enthusiastic hobby right now.

I know much more about the E-3 than the D300.. I've only handled the D300 briefly. My random thoughts (trying not to be too slanted to Oly because the D300 truly rocks, but Oly is what I know about), in no particular order:

-The D300 screen is gorgeous.
-The fully articulating E-3 screen is a perfect match to live view.
-The AF speed of the 12-60 on the E-3 is unbelievably fast.
-Both have sophisticated focus systems, though I'm sure with 51 vs 11 points the D300 has the advantage here in intense shooting situations. I really like how the active points are selected on the E-3, and the 3D tracking on the D300 sounds very cool for sports shooting and the like.
-The D300 has Nikon's new dust reduction system which may be just as good (not sure), but I know first hand that dust is a non-issue with Olympus. I'm not careful at all when I change lenses on my 510 and the only thing I've had to use the blower I bought for is to get dust off the focus screen and mirror.
-The E-3 viewfinder is large and bright, a real leap forward from any previous 4/3 offering. Both have 100% VF coverage, which is nice.
-You'll definitely have more prime lenses to choose from with Nikon. On the flip side, the primes that are available for 4/3 benefit from the in-body IS. I've really liked having my 30mm f/1.4 be stabilized.
-Physics dictates that a larger sensor will have lower noise given similar sensor technology.. no way around that, but the difference isn't so large now as it used to be. Here's a link from someone that shot the same swimming event at 1600 ISO on both the E-3 and D300:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1022&thread=25765206
-All Oly lenses above the "standard" grade ones are weather sealed, which complements the weather sealed E-3.
-If you get the D300, do it justice and get a better lens than the 18-200.

 

[Gdad]

Went down to the pier this morning to test out the new camera- and I must say- the D300's new focusing system ROCKS!

These are just basic jpg's right out of the camera with no pp- deary & rainy morning so forgive the colors. But I was really impressed how the 3D focusing locked on to the bird in flight- especially against the busy background- and never lets go. You can watch the auto-focus point zip around the 51 points in the viewfinder while it tracks. Pelican was moving pretty fast in a stiff wind- about a 3 second series taken at 300mm.

 

[Master Mason]

The one thing that is making me shy away from deciding to get the D300 is the quality of the nikon lens. From what I have been seeing online the 18-200 has some very mixed reviews and the build/optical quality does not seem to be as good as an olympus lens. Can anyone who has the 18-200 shed some light on this. Thanks.

Why would you buy a camera like the d300 and put the 18-200 on it, while it is a nice lens, it isn't designed to make use of the high end capablities of that camera body.

It would be like buying a new high end computer and only putting 56K of ram in it, you would still have a nice computer, but it will not perform as it should.

Please note, I am not knocking the lens, I understand it is wonderful for what it is designed to be and is better than anything that is comprable in the canon world, but it isn't designed for the benifit of a high end camera.