Going Backwards (1 Viewer)

There is a thread on the dpreview forums started by a current E-30, and former E-510, owner who has become disillusioned with his E-30 and is considering going back to the E-510. He thinks that the AA filter is too strong on the E-30 and it is preventing sharp photos from being captured. He has been joined by several other posters, all proclaiming the outstanding imaging capabilities of the E-510, which they feel are superior to those of the E-30.

This has added weight to nagging doubts which I have had for some time, that the results I am getting at the moment are not as good as I was getting with my E-510. My photos seem to lack sharpness and crispness and appear to be rather grainy. I have just had a look at some of my photos from about 15 months ago and they look much better than anything I am producing now. This could be due to the 12MP sensor compared to the 10MP version on the E-510 or it could be due to the fact that I shot in RAW before but only shoot JPEGs now. It could also be that I have never got to grips with the complexity of the E-30.

Fortunately, I still own the E-510 so I think I will take it out again this weekend to see how I get on. The E-30 is a much nicer camera to use and is considerably more advanced but that is pointless if the image quality is inferior. Of course I could try shooting RAW with the E-30 to see if that helps. It is a bit galling to spend £700 on a new body only to go backwards with the results which I get.

Ron

with my very limited experience and knowledge in digital photography and digital Olympus camera,, i am the last one to talk, but my own experience the E 300 is better than the E 620 and much much much better than the E 520.

even the motor drive performance is way better in the E 300.

ammadoux said:

with my very limited experience and knowledge in digital photography and digital Olympus camera,, i am the last one to talk, but my own experience the E 300 is better than the E 620 and much much much better than the E 520.

even the motor drive performance is way better in the E 300.

Click to expand...

Motor drive?

Just for fun: there is a contradiction between Ron and Dulce assertions - E-620 use the same sensor as in E-30, so, if E-520 is better than E-30, I would expect to be also better than E-620...

Ron,
I would try first to compare raw images taken at the same time and secondly jpg images taken at the same time. If you have used RAW with one and jpg with the others, then you are really comparing apples with pears, because you are comparing what happened in the PC for one with what happened in the camera for the other.

Niels

Thanks Niels. I think you are right. I never bothered to shoot raw with the E-30 as all the reviews say how good the jpeg engine is and it definitely doesn't blow the highlights as much as the E-510.

I am thinking of trying an experiment by setting up both cameras side by side, each with a 14-42 lens (I have two) and photographing the same subject at the same time, with both cameras set to raw. In the meantime I tried a few shots last night with the E-30 set to raw. I think these House Sparrows are quite encouraging, so I will experiment further at the weekend.

The only problem is that I need a good, preferably free or cheap, raw converter for my Apple iMac at home, as I don't like the Olympus one which came with the camera. Any suggestions?

Ron

pshute said:

Motor drive?

Click to expand...

pshute :C you know what i mean, guess you had a big laugh :'D but 20 years of flim photography is no easy to forget and 2 years in digital, i just did not get all the new terminology .

Christian, i said E 300 is better than both E 520 and E 620, but E 620 is far better than E 520. but that is just me, i see you get some fabulous images with your E 520.

I have really never bothered with raw (most of my digital photos have been with a P&S). A new photoshop elements should contain a raw converter; updating whatever editing program you are using probably would do the same. ACDSee Pro3 has a raw converter, but I have not used it enough to know if it is good.

Niels