Join for FREE
It only takes a minute!
Zeiss - Always on the lookout for something special – Shop now

Welcome to BirdForum.
BirdForum is the net's largest birding community, dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE! You are most welcome to register for an account, which allows you to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Olympus E-620

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 5 votes, 5.00 average.
Old Friday 15th January 2010, 18:19   #1
Imace
Registered User
 
Imace's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Buckinghamshire
Posts: 212
Olympus E-620

Hi All, Happy new year to you all.
I am thinking about getting an E-620. Has anyone any dealings with the E-620 they can share with me good or bad
Thanks
Ian
Imace is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 16th January 2010, 00:54   #2
iveljay
Registered User

 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Wiltshire, England
Posts: 872
Ian,
Are you an existing Olympus slr user?
This has quite a bearing on how the question is answered .

J
iveljay is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 16th January 2010, 08:58   #3
Imace
Registered User
 
Imace's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Buckinghamshire
Posts: 212
Hi J
No I am at present between SLR's. I am experimenting with digiscoping but i am fed up with carting loads of kit around. Thats why i gave up on the Canon/Nikon DSLR's. I was impressed with the weight and compact of the Olympus E series.

Ian
Imace is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 16th January 2010, 09:29   #4
SteveClifton
Registered User

 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: N Yorks
Posts: 2,527
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imace View Post
Hi All, Happy new year to you all.
I am thinking about getting an E-620. Has anyone any dealings with the E-620 they can share with me good or bad
Thanks
Ian
Hi Ian, I've no personal experience of the camera, but it gets good reviews if you can get used to the small size. See here:

http://forum.fourthirdsphoto.com/showthread.php?t=46137

As with all things to do with DSLRs though, think carefully about the lens you want to use with it. I read your other post & think the Olympus 70-300 zoom will suit your needs quite well if you can accept its shortcomings (not the fastest focusser, nor is it fast in terms of max aperture), but optical quality is good. I know Ron (NoSpringChicken) will agree with this lens choice and might advise better about the body too-he uses an E-30.

Steve
SteveClifton is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 16th January 2010, 10:15   #5
Imace
Registered User
 
Imace's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Buckinghamshire
Posts: 212
Hi Steve,
Thanks for the link, very useful info on the site. The reason i am looking at the Olympus E Series is I can't hold heavy items to long in my hands. I sold my Canon and Nikon stuff as they were to heavy. Tried the Panasonic FZ18 excellent camera but limited. I have been impressed with the 4/3 system and the weight and quality of the olympus is good.

Ian
Imace is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 16th January 2010, 10:51   #6
Cristian Mihai
Cristian Mihai
 
Cristian Mihai's Avatar

 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Bucharest
Posts: 16,576
Hi Imace,

I think that the combo E-620 + Zuiko Digital 70-300mm it's what you need.
I use E-520 + ZD 70-300 and E-520 + ZD 50-200 SWD + EC-14. It think that E-620 is a good camera (I've never used one, but I've read some good reviews).
Cristian Mihai is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 16th January 2010, 11:14   #7
NoSpringChicken
Registered User
 
NoSpringChicken's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: East Norfolk
Posts: 26,097
Hi Ian. My ears were burning so I thought I would post a reply to your question. I have no experience of the E-620 but, as Steve said, I have an E-30 and also an E-510. From the reviews I have read it appears that the E-620 and E-30 are broadly similar but with different body sizes and a few more features on the E-30. The IQ from both is meant to be pretty much the same and the E-620 has a slightly higher spec LCD.

Your reasons for looking at the Olympus range echo my own. I wanted a light, compact system which I can carry easily when I am walking about. I am not interested in sitting in a hide all day with a big lens on a tripod. The in-body stabilization works well and all my shots are taken hand held. How successful they are is a matter of opinion but you can see them in my Gallery. Last week I ordered the 50-200 lens, which is faster and slightly sharper than the 70-300. However, when I tried it on my camera it was much heavier than my existing lens and I found that my arms were beginning to ache after a little while playing with it indoors. I decided that it didn't really suit my requirements, so I returned it for a refund. The 50-200 is lighter than the Canon and Nikon 400 lenses which are commonly used so I can empathize with your experience with them.

The E-620 and 70-300 lens is an excellent combination for the money (even better for the next two weeks with a cash back on the lens from Olympus). It is capable of very good results with a bit of care and under the correct conditions. I use the EC-14 teleconverter in the summer, when the light is better (it reduces the aperture by one stop). It degrades the image very little but it is essential to avoid movement at that focal length. As with any system, though, there is no substitute for getting close to the bird for best results. As Steve says, Olympus is not the ideal choice if there is any prospect in the future that you will want a longer lens. In your case that doesn't sound likely, so I would suggest trying them out if you can find somewhere with them in stock. They really are very good.

Finally, I know 'Amadoux' recently purchased an E-620, so it is possible you might get a post from her to give her opinion.

I hope this helps a bit.

Ron

Last edited by NoSpringChicken : Saturday 16th January 2010 at 15:54.
NoSpringChicken is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2010 2011 2012 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Saturday 16th January 2010, 13:57   #8
Imace
Registered User
 
Imace's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Buckinghamshire
Posts: 212
Hi Ron,
Thanks for the feedback, I have been reviewing all morning and have decided on an Oly. Which one i don't know.. I have been to Curry's and they have a E-600 ( An E-620 with some bits removed, not important ones.) for 399 inc lens. I think it is only for the DRG Group PC World, Currys and Dixons. Which has thrown the cat among the pigeons as i was trying to decide between the E520 or the E620. Anyway the reviews are very good for the E600 as well as the others. The reason i added the E520 is when you read the reviews of the e620 they harp on about the E520. When you check prices used and new you can get a better bundle with the E520.

Thanks again
Ian
Imace is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 16th January 2010, 15:50   #9
NoSpringChicken
Registered User
 
NoSpringChicken's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: East Norfolk
Posts: 26,097
HiIan,
It seems you have been doing a bit of research and you have probably already discovered Wrotniak's site. He is the Four Thirds guru and this site is full of well researched information, which I have found to be very reliable. Here is a link:
http://www.wrotniak.net/photo/43/index.html

Ron
NoSpringChicken is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2010 2011 2012 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Saturday 16th January 2010, 21:00   #10
ammadoux
Registered doux
 
ammadoux's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Jeddah - Saudi Arabia
Posts: 72,534
Hi all.

i have tried the E 520 for a short period of time then i got the E 620, defiantly the E 620 is far much better, regarding the focusing, but both are less than my older E 300, which if it was not for the low 8 MP i would not have change it.

there are two things

1- i do not like the position of the ev compensation dial, it was in a perfect position in the E 300 as you can change it easily if you are looking through the viewfinder. the E 300 did not have an active screen.

2- the motor drive speed in the E 620 in not as reliable as was in the E300, of course the E300 is a semi professional model while the E 620 is an amuter one but i thought as the technology progress i would not get this problem.

other than that the E 620 is a marvelous light weight with superb capabilities, frankly i am not a top photographer but what i am getting form it is quite satisfactory for me.

and It make a perfects duo with the 70-300 mm which may seem to be difficult to Handel at the beginning but when you get to know it you will love it. the Zuiko 45-150 mm lens is a master piece very very accurate in AF, but not a good choice for bid photography.

if you are really into birds photography and got 1000 USD to spare, i would strongly suggest the Sigma 50-500mm.

hope that helps, have fun.
__________________
dulce doux
i love BF
flickr blog
birds of Saudi Arabia
ammadoux is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Sunday 17th January 2010, 14:46   #11
Imace
Registered User
 
Imace's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Buckinghamshire
Posts: 212
Thanks Ammadoux for your advice. By the sounds of it i should be looking for the E300, I am not one to be impressed with megapixels some of my best pictures have come from a 3mg pixel camera. If the only reason you changed from the E300 to the E620 is the size of its pixel then i will be on the look out for the aged E300 as well.
Many thanks again
IAn
Imace is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 17th January 2010, 15:09   #12
ammadoux
Registered doux
 
ammadoux's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Jeddah - Saudi Arabia
Posts: 72,534
LOL Ian do be careful with the E 300 as it has to have an upgraded software to make it compatible with the newer lenses like the ED 45-150mm and 70-300mm. otherwise if it was like mine, which does not, then i use to unmount the lens turn on the camera then mounted again, for me it was ok, i am only having a good time with my photography, but if you really want quick action it will be not a good thing.

other than that the E 300 is a real marvel.
__________________
dulce doux
i love BF
flickr blog
birds of Saudi Arabia
ammadoux is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Sunday 17th January 2010, 15:20   #13
ammadoux
Registered doux
 
ammadoux's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Jeddah - Saudi Arabia
Posts: 72,534
BTW, forgot to say the life time of the batter for the E300 is much better than the E 620, usually at my countries electronics are sold with lower quality than the ones sold on Europe i am aware of that. but i have got both form the same dealer here in Jeddah, they are 6 year apart, i don't know weather this has any significance but the quality of his servises have gone lower than before.

from all that i am not saying that the E 620 is bad, on the contrary it is another marvel from Olympus, but i wish i took the E 30 as i am use to the professional level cameras, ever since the days of the OM series. but i have chosen the E 620 for its compact size, i have somehow small hands.
__________________
dulce doux
i love BF
flickr blog
birds of Saudi Arabia
ammadoux is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Sunday 17th January 2010, 15:45   #14
Cristian Mihai
Cristian Mihai
 
Cristian Mihai's Avatar

 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Bucharest
Posts: 16,576
Hi Dulce,

What about the IQ with E-620 at high ISO?
I'm asking about this because, from my point of view, with E-520 the highest usable ISO is 400. If I will decide to upgrade, I want a camera with a good IQ at ISO 800...
Cristian Mihai is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 17th January 2010, 16:08   #15
iveljay
Registered User

 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Wiltshire, England
Posts: 872
Hi,

I seem to either own or have used most Olympus slrs over the years so can give a fair comparison.

The E-620 is light and appears to have every feature that you could think of, plus a few more. For my hands the slightly larger E-510/520 is a better fit and also takes the larger Olympus slr battery. In practice battery life has never been a problem for me with Olympus and in the case with the 620 you may still be able to buy one with a free battery grip that allows the use of two batteries.

The E-300 was one of my favourites - but I was in the minority. It is far heavier (better built?) but belongs to an earlier generation of cameras with less impressive sensor/processor technology.

The lightest of the Olympus slrs are the E-420/450 series but they do not have the image stabilisation that comes in very useful. (Neither does the E-300 - far too old.)

Another benefit of the 620 is its multiple angle lcd that also allows 'a live view' for those occasions when looking through a viewfinder is less convenient e.g. macro shots.

In terms of reliability I have only had one problem with a newish Olympus and that was back in 1970!

The E-620 is a useful back-up to the E-3 which I tend to use more as it is water resistant and is better balanced with the heavier Oly lenses.

In truth I think that the 620 would have been a better camera with fewer features, the mytical E-600 does not really appear much better.

As for actual in-use experiences the JPEGS are brilliant if you can't be bothered with RAW, the wireless flash is great especially for remorely triggering macro flash units, and (especially with the battery grip) long heavy lenses are useable (greatly assisted by the image stabilisation).

In summary it does the job - it would be better if they had not included the kitchen sink (finding the highest quality JPEG settings is a challenge - but won't effect most folks) - it isn't quite the right shape for my hands (but that is just me). The E-3 does more for me (but at that price so it should) and the E_P1 is more fun. The Olympus Master 2 software is great for organising all your shots and RAW development but a second programme for working on the images would be my recommendation.

Regrettably I would say forget the E-300 option though if you are passing through N. Wiltshire in the near future send a message and if I'm around have a play with an E-620 (and an E-300) - its really the only way to really see if you like a camera.

J
iveljay is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 17th January 2010, 16:18   #16
Cristian Mihai
Cristian Mihai
 
Cristian Mihai's Avatar

 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Bucharest
Posts: 16,576
Hi iveljay,

I would like to ask you to liken E-620 with E-520. As I wrote above, I want to know about the IQ at high ISO...
Cristian Mihai is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 17th January 2010, 16:18   #17
Imace
Registered User
 
Imace's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Buckinghamshire
Posts: 212
Thanks for the advice J. I may take you up on that ofer if i haven't made up my mind before 11th May when i will be going to Minehead for a few days.

Ian
Imace is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 17th January 2010, 16:41   #18
ammadoux
Registered doux
 
ammadoux's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Jeddah - Saudi Arabia
Posts: 72,534
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cristian Mihai View Post
Hi Dulce,

What about the IQ with E-620 at high ISO?
I'm asking about this because, from my point of view, with E-520 the highest usable ISO is 400. If I will decide to upgrade, I want a camera with a good IQ at ISO 800...
Hi Christan, at larger ISO the image quality certainly go lower, so i don't go higher than 400. i have uploaded some shots.

the first and the second ones is at ISO 800 at around 7:00 am one and half hour after sunrise.

the third is at ISO 500 at 9:00 am.

the fourth one is at ISO 400 taken at around 12:00 pm.

Hope that helps.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	CC2a.jpg
Views:	236
Size:	52.5 KB
ID:	238405  Click image for larger version

Name:	CC16a.jpg
Views:	200
Size:	96.6 KB
ID:	238406  Click image for larger version

Name:	mw55a.jpg
Views:	208
Size:	101.8 KB
ID:	238407  Click image for larger version

Name:	mw42a.jpg
Views:	193
Size:	66.5 KB
ID:	238408  
__________________
dulce doux
i love BF
flickr blog
birds of Saudi Arabia
ammadoux is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Sunday 17th January 2010, 18:22   #19
NoSpringChicken
Registered User
 
NoSpringChicken's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: East Norfolk
Posts: 26,097
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cristian Mihai View Post
What about the IQ with E-620 at high ISO?
I'm asking about this because, from my point of view, with E-520 the highest usable ISO is 400. If I will decide to upgrade, I want a camera with a good IQ at ISO 800...
I don't know about the E-620 but, on the assumption that it is similar to the E-30, I would say that it is definitely better than the E-510/520 but not massively so. I can use ISO 800 with reasonable success but wouldn't normally go beyond that. It still lags way behind the latest Canon and Nikon cameras which can use some ridiculously high ISO settings with excellent results.

I am not sure I would upgrade to the current Olympus cameras just for better high ISO performance but would probably wait to see what the next generation is like.

Ron
NoSpringChicken is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2010 2011 2012 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Sunday 17th January 2010, 20:03   #20
Cristian Mihai
Cristian Mihai
 
Cristian Mihai's Avatar

 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Bucharest
Posts: 16,576
Thankx for your input Ron. ISO 800 is all I need. If the IQ with E-30/E-620 at ISO 800 is similar with the IQ with E-520 at ISO 400, this would be OK for me.
Cristian Mihai is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 18th January 2010, 00:10   #21
SteveClifton
Registered User

 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: N Yorks
Posts: 2,527
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoSpringChicken View Post
I don't know about the E-620 but, on the assumption that it is similar to the E-30, I would say that it is definitely better than the E-510/520 but not massively so. I can use ISO 800 with reasonable success but wouldn't normally go beyond that. It still lags way behind the latest Canon and Nikon cameras which can use some ridiculously high ISO settings with excellent results.

I am not sure I would upgrade to the current Olympus cameras just for better high ISO performance but would probably wait to see what the next generation is like.

Ron
Hi Ron, I also used to get some very useable images at ISO 800 with my Olympus camera (in my case, as you know, an E-510), and after some recent comparisons I'm not wholly convinced that the competition from Canon and Nikon is streets ahead just yet on this particular issue. I do believe however that Nikon currently have more of an edge than Canon, but there are other variables too that perhaps have more of a bearing on overall final image quality than pure ‘ISO performance’.
Attached are two shots, both taken at ISO 800. The Goldcrest is with my Olympus, and the Grouse is with a Canon 40D. Both have been cropped about the same amount, and a little sharpening has been applied to both in roughly equal measure.

Neither image is perfect, but personally I don't think there is that much to choose between them in terms of noise. They both show some, but it isn't too overpowering IMHO. I have taken better images with the Canon than this; this one was a bit soft out of the camera, and would need even more sharpening to bring it up to the level of the Goldcrest, which was a bit sharper to begin with. Of course, further sharpening would add even more noise to the image in order to make it more 'useable' in terms of sharpness.

The point I'm making here, is that nailing the exposure and focus in the beginning can mean that less pp is necessary in the end, which of course means less image degradation, and that this in itself probably has a greater effect on the final image quality than subtle differences in ISO performance between one camera & another.

For what it’s worth, I do believe that Canon currently does have a slight edge at ISO 400-800 over Olympus, and that Nikon perhaps have a similar slight edge over Canon (though I personally have no experience with Nikon), but these advantages are not so marked as some 'experts' would have us all believe.
In summary, if later Olympus cameras like the E-30 and E-600/620 are even closer to Canon than my E-510, then it’s probably of more benefit at the moment to hone your technique than worry about the ‘deficiencies’ of your camera system of choice.

To confuse matters further, from what I've seen so far the new Canon 7D is less than perfect at similar ISOs to the above, though it is distinctly better at higher settings.

Steve
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Goldcrests, 1-11-08 090.jpg
Views:	217
Size:	102.7 KB
ID:	238557  Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_9498-2.jpg
Views:	214
Size:	103.7 KB
ID:	238558  

Last edited by SteveClifton : Monday 18th January 2010 at 00:21.
SteveClifton is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 18th January 2010, 09:53   #22
NoSpringChicken
Registered User
 
NoSpringChicken's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: East Norfolk
Posts: 26,097
Interesting to hear your experiences with Olympus and Canon, Steve. It's refreshing not hear Olympus getting slated because of the 'small and noisy sensor'. I agree that the real secret to low noise is getting the exposure spot on in the first place. The less post processing an image requires, the better the final results will be. Under exposure in particular seems to be really bad news for noise.

I have found that high ISO settings work better when there is reasonable light, in order to increase shutter speed, for example. They are less successful in gloomy conditions, where there is just not enough contrast and colour in the original subject matter. High ISO settings can't work miracles. I have found that with the 70-300 lens my base ISO setting is 400. I only use 200 or 100 when it is really bright or when the subject is very close or with no chance of movement. If I was using a tripod rather than shooting handheld all the time, I could probably use lower settings more frequently than I do.

Here are a couple of shots at ISO 800. The Sanderling was taken in bright sunlight but the high ISO allowed me to use a fast shutter speed to capture this speedy little bird dashing about. The Marsh Tit was taken under typical, winter light.

'Save for Web' has stripped out the exif data, so the settings are:

Sanderling - ISO 800, 1/8000 sec, f/5.6, 300mm
Marsh Tit - ISO 800, 1/250 sec, f/6.3, 300mm

Ron
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Sanderling-surprise-small.jpg
Views:	227
Size:	98.5 KB
ID:	238608  Click image for larger version

Name:	Marsh-Tit-small.jpg
Views:	215
Size:	99.8 KB
ID:	238611  
NoSpringChicken is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2010 2011 2012 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Monday 18th January 2010, 18:26   #23
SteveClifton
Registered User

 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: N Yorks
Posts: 2,527
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoSpringChicken View Post
Interesting to hear your experiences with Olympus and Canon, Steve. It's refreshing not hear Olympus getting slated because of the 'small and noisy sensor'. I agree that the real secret to low noise is getting the exposure spot on in the first place. The less post processing an image requires, the better the final results will be. Under exposure in particular seems to be really bad news for noise.

I have found that high ISO settings work better when there is reasonable light, in order to increase shutter speed, for example. They are less successful in gloomy conditions, where there is just not enough contrast and colour in the original subject matter. High ISO settings can't work miracles. I have found that with the 70-300 lens my base ISO setting is 400. I only use 200 or 100 when it is really bright or when the subject is very close or with no chance of movement. If I was using a tripod rather than shooting handheld all the time, I could probably use lower settings more frequently than I do.

Here are a couple of shots at ISO 800. The Sanderling was taken in bright sunlight but the high ISO allowed me to use a fast shutter speed to capture this speedy little bird dashing about. The Marsh Tit was taken under typical, winter light.

'Save for Web' has stripped out the exif data, so the settings are:

Sanderling - ISO 800, 1/8000 sec, f/5.6, 300mm
Marsh Tit - ISO 800, 1/250 sec, f/6.3, 300mm

Ron
Two very 'clean' images there Ron, and yes, I agree that there is a a direct correlation between light/shutter speed/noise.

I've even had some noisy shots at ISO 100/200 when using longer exposures, though obviously not with birds! I think this is to do with the sensor getting too hot during longer exposures, so obviously it's preferable to use higher ISOs to 'up' your shutter speeds when you can.

Steve
SteveClifton is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 18th January 2010, 18:57   #24
Cristian Mihai
Cristian Mihai
 
Cristian Mihai's Avatar

 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Bucharest
Posts: 16,576
Ron, IMHO the shutter speed was too high for the shot with the Sanderling. For good shots with birds taken with ZD 70-300 I would recommend shutter speeds around 1/600 - 1/1000 and apertures around f8. So, I would say that for the light available for your shot with the Sanderling, you didn't need ISO 800 and f5.6. My proposal would be ISO 400 and f6.3. I'm pretty sure that the shutter speed would be around 1/1000 in these conditions. Most of my pics with birds are taken at shutter speeds slower than 1/2000. I use faster shutter speeds only for BIF (IS off).

Last edited by Cristian Mihai : Monday 18th January 2010 at 19:00.
Cristian Mihai is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 18th January 2010, 19:25   #25
NoSpringChicken
Registered User
 
NoSpringChicken's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: East Norfolk
Posts: 26,097
Hi Cristian. I didn't intend using anything like that shutter speed but the bird was running up and down the beach, in and out of the shadow of a breakwater. The shutter speed was varying greatly according to which way I was facing in the directional sunshine. It just happened that it was a very fast shutter speed when I took this frame. I wouldn't usually shoot at 1/8000 sec!

Ron
NoSpringChicken is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2010 2011 2012 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Advertisement
Reply


Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
E-30 same price as E-620 - or cheaper! NoSpringChicken Olympus 13 Sunday 11th October 2009 15:48
The New Olympus E-620 Cristian Mihai Olympus 14 Tuesday 7th July 2009 08:56
Leica Adaptor II with Canon A 620? Steinschmaetzer Digiscoping Adapters 1 Monday 7th August 2006 12:17

{googleads}

Fatbirder's Top 1000 Birding Websites

Help support BirdForum

Page generated in 0.23195696 seconds with 36 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 10:49.