-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
E300 (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter affe22
- Start date
jebir
Yoda Eagle
Olympus DSLR
Hi,
I don't have the E300 but I have an Olympus E1 which I find very good for wildlife/bird photography. The E1 is currently at a very favourable price in many stores. My experience, from a wildlife/bird photography point of view, you will be quite limited if you go for an non-interchangeable lens camera like the Panasonic.
Cheers, Jens.
affe22 said:
Hi,
I don't have the E300 but I have an Olympus E1 which I find very good for wildlife/bird photography. The E1 is currently at a very favourable price in many stores. My experience, from a wildlife/bird photography point of view, you will be quite limited if you go for an non-interchangeable lens camera like the Panasonic.
Cheers, Jens.
OdonataMan
Well-known member
Olympus E-300
Hi,
The E-300's a great camera I have been using one for around six months, after selling my FZ-20 on ebay. Both are good camera's, however it all boils down to what you are going to use the camera for.
For decent wildlife photography, forget a digital compact, you really need to start with a DSLR.
For decent bird photography you really do need to be looking at long lenses with wide apertures. Even shooting something the size of a swan using a 400mm zoom lens at a distance of 25 - 30 mtrs will make it look like a golf ball on the horizon.
Maybe that's slightly over the top, but really will need big lenses to get good results (unless your stalking tactics are superb), however remember all is not lost, as the APS-C (Canon EOS & Nikon) sensor size with give you an additional x1.6 to the focal length of the lens by 35mm standards (Olympus x2).
The FZ-20 just isn't going to give you the focal range required (the results are also a little too soft at the telephoto zoom end of the range), you'll only end up dispointed, wishing you had purchased a DSLR in the first place - I did !!
As for the E-300 its a great camera, but you really need to spend decent money on lenses with ED glass to get the best from it - At this point the whole E-system becomes very, very expensive, hindered by a lack of third party manufacturers etc etc.
If I was to start from scratch, I'd consider going down the Canon route with either the 300 or 350D or Nikon, with the D50 or D70. If you chose either of the two I've just mentioned the whole world opens up to you with regards to cheaper optics, Sigma with EX lenses, Canons own lenses are great etc etc.
Many of which can be picked up for the right price on a well known internet auction site, just make sure that when you purchase your lens, they are no more than a couple of years old. Double check with the seller that they'll work with your digital SLR - Some older Sigma lenses won't work unless they have been re-chipped for use with the newer digital camera's (this is so expensive it not worth doing, if in doubt walk away).
Hope this helps.
Regards
Mark
Hi,
The E-300's a great camera I have been using one for around six months, after selling my FZ-20 on ebay. Both are good camera's, however it all boils down to what you are going to use the camera for.
For decent wildlife photography, forget a digital compact, you really need to start with a DSLR.
For decent bird photography you really do need to be looking at long lenses with wide apertures. Even shooting something the size of a swan using a 400mm zoom lens at a distance of 25 - 30 mtrs will make it look like a golf ball on the horizon.
Maybe that's slightly over the top, but really will need big lenses to get good results (unless your stalking tactics are superb), however remember all is not lost, as the APS-C (Canon EOS & Nikon) sensor size with give you an additional x1.6 to the focal length of the lens by 35mm standards (Olympus x2).
The FZ-20 just isn't going to give you the focal range required (the results are also a little too soft at the telephoto zoom end of the range), you'll only end up dispointed, wishing you had purchased a DSLR in the first place - I did !!
As for the E-300 its a great camera, but you really need to spend decent money on lenses with ED glass to get the best from it - At this point the whole E-system becomes very, very expensive, hindered by a lack of third party manufacturers etc etc.
If I was to start from scratch, I'd consider going down the Canon route with either the 300 or 350D or Nikon, with the D50 or D70. If you chose either of the two I've just mentioned the whole world opens up to you with regards to cheaper optics, Sigma with EX lenses, Canons own lenses are great etc etc.
Many of which can be picked up for the right price on a well known internet auction site, just make sure that when you purchase your lens, they are no more than a couple of years old. Double check with the seller that they'll work with your digital SLR - Some older Sigma lenses won't work unless they have been re-chipped for use with the newer digital camera's (this is so expensive it not worth doing, if in doubt walk away).
Hope this helps.
Regards
Mark
Last edited:
RAH
Well-known member
maporter68 said:
An FZ-20 with an Olympus TCON-17 teleconverter gets you a 35mm equivalent of over 700mm. While I agree with you that DSLRs are better, exacty what lenses are you thinking about for the DSLRs that you mentioned that would get you substantially more than 700 (counting the 1.5 or 1.6 factor, of course)? Even a 500mm lens isn't going to get you much more, and a 600mm lens cost thousands. I'm not arguing against DSLRs, but for magnification, they don't do much better than a camera like the FZ-20.
Yes, you can add a teleconverter, but DSLR teleconverters greatly reduce the amount of light you get (by a factor of 2 with a 2x converter).
greypoint
Well-known member
Having a 'dead' D70 [temporarily I hope!], I took my FZ20 on my sunday walk. This gave me the opportunity to compare using it and the results in comparison the DSLR I normally take. Given the choice for birding a DSLR is simply easier to use and get good results. The FZ20 is a great camera for certain things - for some things better than a DSLR - flying birds are harder to capture. The other problem I encountered in the somewhat glaring sun, was a good deal of purple fringing. Stabilisation is great for low light shooting of static subjects but not as much for moving subjects - Panasonic cameras tend to perform best at low ISO ratings. It really comes down to where and what you shoot.
Brian Matsumoto
Member
affe22 said:
The E300 is a very nice camera and with its interchangeable lenses, it should be ideal for nature shoots. I would recommend getting the Olympus 50-200 mm f2.8-3.5 lens. This would give you the optical equivalent, in terms of angle of view for a 35 mm camera, of a 100-400 mm lens. Although it is pricy (near a thousand dollars, US), it has a fast aperture and a compact size. It is smaller than my 80-200 mm f2.8 Nikkor. If you get an achromatic closeup lens, you can do some long distance macro photography. With the Teleconverter you can increase your magnification by 1.4X. A wonderfully sharp lens and considering the capabilties you get, as well as its compact size, it is reasonably priced.
Brian
Similar threads
