Olympus E-Volt 500

[ks12066]

Does anyone have the Olympus E-volt 500 camera? Do you like it. It is an entry level DSLR.

 

[ukcatfan]

It is an entry level model. I do not have it, but I know a little about it. What are you looking to get out of it? Are you open to other brands?

Kevin

 

[pyrxtc]

I have it. I love it. It helps to know what you are doing but it is easy to learn. I use it as a proffesional photographer.

 

[donaldduck1967]

I have it and love it. It is an entry level camera with a lot of options. If you don't need the camera right now I would wait until pma 2007. Rumor has it Olympus will be introducing the E510 with live view and in camera IS. If you don't want to wait I would recommend it. IMO it has the best colors and out of camera jpg's i've seen on many.

 

[sanfran22]

i have it as well, i use it for baseball photography and it's awesome......

 

[Groucho]

Olympus seems to have pretty much given up the DSLR market, at least in the US. Their recent DSLR, the E400, isn't even sold here at all.

If the Olympus were the only DSLR there is, it's be great. As it stands, it can do great work - but I don't think it's a very good choice if you're buying your first DSLR; the competition simply offers more compelling products.

First problem: the "4/3rds system". This gives you a 2x crop ratio which means a lot of zoom but not much wide. It also gives you a smaller sensor - 17.3mm x 13mm, versus the 23.5mm x 15.7mm Sony sensors found in Sony, Pentax, and Nikon cameras, or the 22.2mm x 14.8mm sensor in the Canon Rebel line.

Second: that lower sensor means more noise than comparable DSLRs.

Third: The viewfinder is very small and dim which is bad all-around but especially for manual focus.

Fourth: No IS. Nothing in the body like the Pentax and Sony, and I think there's exactly one lens that has IS in it. Someone who follows Olympus more closely probably has more information.

Fifth: You'll probably have the least selection of lenses compared to the main competiton (Canon/Nikon/Pentax/Sony). You may also find that the one lens you want is more expensive than you'd like.

Finally, like I said - Olympus seems to just not really be even trying in the USA any more. They are probably the smallest DSLR manufacturer (outside of perhaps Fuji and Panasonic, who are selling much more expensive ones) and with them not putting much effort behind their product doesn't bode well for their future.

All that being said, certainly the Olympus DSLRs can take fantastic quality photographs and are not bad cameras. The problem is that the competition just plain offers more.

 

[donaldduck1967]

Olympus seems to have pretty much given up the DSLR market, at least in the US. Their recent DSLR, the E400, isn't even sold here at all.

If the Olympus were the only DSLR there is, it's be great. As it stands, it can do great work - but I don't think it's a very good choice if you're buying your first DSLR; the competition simply offers more compelling products.

First problem: the "4/3rds system". This gives you a 2x crop ratio which means a lot of zoom but not much wide. It also gives you a smaller sensor - 17.3mm x 13mm, versus the 23.5mm x 15.7mm Sony sensors found in Sony, Pentax, and Nikon cameras, or the 22.2mm x 14.8mm sensor in the Canon Rebel line.

Second: that lower sensor means more noise than comparable DSLRs.

Third: The viewfinder is very small and dim which is bad all-around but especially for manual focus.

Fourth: No IS. Nothing in the body like the Pentax and Sony, and I think there's exactly one lens that has IS in it. Someone who follows Olympus more closely probably has more information.

Fifth: You'll probably have the least selection of lenses compared to the main competiton (Canon/Nikon/Pentax/Sony). You may also find that the one lens you want is more expensive than you'd like.

Finally, like I said - Olympus seems to just not really be even trying in the USA any more. They are probably the smallest DSLR manufacturer (outside of perhaps Fuji and Panasonic, who are selling much more expensive ones) and with them not putting much effort behind their product doesn't bode well for their future.

All that being said, certainly the Olympus DSLRs can take fantastic quality photographs and are not bad cameras. The problem is that the competition just plain offers more.

I certainly respect you opinion Groucho and don't want to start any wars here but I must disagree with what you said.

Olympus has far from given up the DSLR market in the U.S. . Olympus was the first to introduce dust removal and so far it is the best out there. They were also the first to offer live view on a dslr. They wouldn't have done that if they were not here to stay. As for the E400 it is no sold in the U.S. but there are plenty of people that own one that do live in the U.S.

1 - the 2x factor is hardly noticable considering all DSLR's have a crop factor of at least 1.5 or 1.6. I've held a Rebel XT, and Nikon d80 and there is hardly a difference.

2 - All reviews i've read and opinions of users of both an E-500 and XT have said up to ISO 400 the noise levels are about the same. ISO 800 is slightly worse on OLY but still usable. ISO 1600 has more noise but thats what noise ninja and other pgms are for.

3 - Yes the veiw finder is small but they have an eyepiece magnifier for it that helps a lot.

4 - No IS yet. Wait til PMA. Panasonic is making 4/3 len's with IS.

5 - Yes the lens selection is not as big as others right now. I don't really see a need for 3,4 or 5 lens to be available for the same focal length. But they have len's for every focal length you will need. Yes they are slightly more expensive then the competition but they are worth the money. Sigma and Panasonic are making 4/3 lens as well.

Lastly lets look at the competitions camera over the last 2 yrs non pro bodys.

Canon has 2 models - xt and xti
Nikon has 4 models - d80,d70sd50,d40
Oly has 3 models - e-300 , e-500, e-330 (the e-400 can be purchased online for delivery in the U.S. and i'm not sure of the stats but i'm sure alot of camera's are purchased online). Olympus is still very much in the dslr market in the U.s.

Lets see what PMA 2007 brings in 2 weeks.

 

[Groucho]

I certainly respect you opinion Groucho and don't want to start any wars here but I must disagree with what you said.

Hey, you're entitled.

1 - the 2x factor is hardly noticable considering all DSLR's have a crop factor of at least 1.5 or 1.6. I've held a Rebel XT, and Nikon d80 and there is hardly a difference.

The difference will be in the usability of the lenses to take wide-angle photos, not the feel of the camera.

2 - All reviews i've read and opinions of users of both an E-500 and XT have said up to ISO 400 the noise levels are about the same. ISO 800 is slightly worse on OLY but still usable. ISO 1600 has more noise but thats what noise ninja and other pgms are for.

Well, the goal is to NOT have to use Noise Ninja, etc, as they kill detail and give a "plastic" look to everything.

Regardless, I stand by my original statement. If it were the only camera out there, it's be fantastic, and no one should be unhappy with theirs - but IMHO, I can't see why someone would choose an Olympus instead of a Pentax, Sony, Nikon, or Canon when buying their first DSLR. It really lacks any advantages (unless you count Live LCD, which I don't think it something most SLR users want and it has a terrible price to pay on the viewfinder) and has several disadvantages over the others.

 

[Quicklabs]

I'm very happy with mine! I mostly take pictures of my dogs, so I'm not a pro by any means. I think there's a lot I'm still discovering in terms of the features.

 

[handicap18]

2 - All reviews i've read and opinions of users of both an E-500 and XT have said up to ISO 400 the noise levels are about the same. ISO 800 is slightly worse on OLY but still usable. ISO 1600 has more noise but thats what noise ninja and other pgms are for.

This is a very poor arguement to making. If you need noise ninja or other noise programs then your spending far to much time in post processing and it is a sign of a poor feature for the camera. IMO if you can't use ISO1600 and get more than respectable images that "might" need some noise help then don't bother. I use a Nikon D50 and have yet to find the need to use any noise reduction programs. The sensor size on the Olympus is small, still bigger than PnS camera's but not by much, thus giving it slightly better performance in the high ISO department.

5 - Yes the lens selection is not as big as others right now. I don't really see a need for 3,4 or 5 lens to be available for the same focal length. But they have len's for every focal length you will need. Yes they are slightly more expensive then the competition but they are worth the money. Sigma and Panasonic are making 4/3 lens as well.

Not everyone has 3, 4 or 5 lenses, but they do have the option. A 17-55mm f/2.8 is going to be a VERY sharp lens and more versatile than an 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5. Its also going to be more expensive. If you add the prime lenses in that range, the aperture is even wider, as wide as f/1.4 and still sharper than the 17-55. Its not always about the focal lengths available, its more about the aperture openings available in the range. Part of the beauty of dSLR's is the option of changing lenses and having lenses available in just about every focal length AND aperture width. Its like having a home theater with a great 42"+ HDTV, but using the speakers on the TV that are the size of a small cookie. You need to have the full speaker system to take full advantage of the technological features.

I have 3 lenses that cover the 90mm length. 1 with the 18-135mm which is my walk-around lens. 1 with the 70-300mm telephoto lens that also has VR and 1 with a 90mm f/2.8 Macro prime lens. With the macro I can focus as close as about 3 inches, plus it has the f/2.8 aperture where the other 2 lenses only open as wide as around f/5.6 and f/4.5. The other 2 lenses also only focus as close as about 12-18 inches.

Lastly lets look at the competitions camera over the last 2 yrs non pro bodys.

Canon has 2 models - xt and xti
Nikon has 4 models - d80,d70sd50,d40
Oly has 3 models - e-300 , e-500, e-330 (the e-400 can be purchased online for delivery in the U.S. and i'm not sure of the stats but i'm sure alot of camera's are purchased online). Olympus is still very much in the dslr market in the U.s.

Lets see what PMA 2007 brings in 2 weeks.

Nikon's pro dSLR is the D2X and D2Xs, the D200 is a semi-pro that many amertures use. Also you can still get a D70. Don't forget about Canon's 20D and 30D. Canon has another whole series above these 2 that are considered their "pro" bodies.


Of course this doesn't mean that you can't take great pics with an Olympus. You certainly can. I for one never even consider Olympus when thinking about dSLR's.

 

[donaldduck1967]

This is a very poor arguement to making. If you need noise ninja or other noise programs then your spending far to much time in post processing and it is a sign of a poor feature for the camera. IMO if you can't use ISO1600 and get more than respectable images that "might" need some noise help then don't bother. I use a Nikon D50 and have yet to find the need to use any noise reduction programs. The sensor size on the Olympus is small, still bigger than PnS camera's but not by much, thus giving it slightly better performance in the high ISO department.

I don't do any post processing to enahnce my photo's, there's no need to. All I said was up to ISO 400 it's comparable to other cameras. ISO 800 is slightly worse and 1600 has more nosie. IMO most amateur's probably won't have a need to go above ISO 400. But if they did OLY's isnt all that different from the others.

Not everyone has 3, 4 or 5 lenses, but they do have the option. A 17-55mm f/2.8 is going to be a VERY sharp lens and more versatile than an 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5. Its also going to be more expensive. If you add the prime lenses in that range, the aperture is even wider, as wide as f/1.4 and still sharper than the 17-55. Its not always about the focal lengths available, its more about the aperture openings available in the range. Part of the beauty of dSLR's is the option of changing lenses and having lenses available in just about every focal length AND aperture width. Its like having a home theater with a great 42"+ HDTV, but using the speakers on the TV that are the size of a small cookie. You need to have the full speaker system to take full advantage of the technological features.

I have 3 lenses that cover the 90mm length. 1 with the 18-135mm which is my walk-around lens. 1 with the 70-300mm telephoto lens that also has VR and 1 with a 90mm f/2.8 Macro prime lens. With the macro I can focus as close as about 3 inches, plus it has the f/2.8 aperture where the other 2 lenses only open as wide as around f/5.6 and f/4.5. The other 2 lenses also only focus as close as about 12-18 inches.

True. I obviously didn't take the f/x factor into cosndieration.

Nikon's pro dSLR is the D2X and D2Xs, the D200 is a semi-pro that many amertures use. Also you can still get a D70. Don't forget about Canon's 20D and 30D. Canon has another whole series above these 2 that are considered their "pro" bodies.

Non pro within the last 2 yrs. The d70 came out in 2004. I didn't include the D200 because like you said it's semi-pro. Canon 20D came out in 2004 as well. The 30D I just didn't notice on Canon's site.

My point here was OLY is putting just as much effort in the DSLR market as the others. Their 1st Amateur DSLR was the E-300 in 2005 and since then they have 3 DSLR's. Right up their with the others.

Of course this doesn't mean that you can't take great pics with an Olympus. You certainly can. I for one never even consider Olympus when thinking about dSLR's.

All I was pointing out was that OLY has just as many offerings as the others do and can do the same thing as them.

 

[DueyDooDah]

All personal feelings aside, you may want to look at the reviews. I found a couple of the Cons in this review hard to swallow, specifically USB 1.1 and ISO performance. Although the potential loss of data when opening the CF door seems serious, I don't usually open that door unless I shut down the camera anyway, so it's not as important to me.

 

[ukcatfan]

IMO most amateur's probably won't have a need to go above ISO 400. But if they did OLY's isnt all that different from the others.

I am scratching my head on this one. The high ISO is one of the main reasons people go above a p&s to a DSLR. There are many other reasons also, but this is one of the big ones.

Kevin

 

[Groucho]

Most everyone should have the option to go over ISO 400. In the recent Spectromagic thread (or was it a fireworks one?), I posted before-and-after Noiseware cleanup ISO 1600 images from my $367-with-lens Pentax (same sensor as all 6mp Pentaxes and Nikons.) There's virtually no difference as the original image is so clean. To not have a usable ISO 1600 is taking away a huge amount of the value of a DSLR, IMHO.

Again, it all comes down to that the Olympus, like any DSLR, is a decent camera - but Pentax, Nikon, Canon, and even Sony just plain offer you more, and usually for the same or less money.

Supposedly Olympus will announce new DSLRs in a week or two. Maybe they'll have something innovative. For their sake, they better hope so...

We haven't heard back from the original poster yet. I'd be curious to hear more from them, ie, what has made them consider it.