Anybody use the E-510? (1 Viewer)

RAH · Apr 8, 2008

I've been thinking of going the same route myself. Keep us posted on how you like it. I see you didn't get the 40-150mm lens (comes with the 2-lens kit). I'm thinking it might be worth getting for the additional $75-$100. Anyway, the 70-300 certainly looks like the lens to get for birding.

Also, I've been thinking that Olympus might be coming out with a replacement pretty soon. I know this is always the worry, but the E-510 has been out for quite awhile, and they did just announce a replacement for the E-410 (the E-420). It seems to address some of the less-desirable aspects of the E-510, especially with AF in Live View mode - the E-420 focuses on a half-press, unlike the E-510.

Obviously you figured it wasn't worth waiting. Any info, thoughts?

NoSpringChicken · Apr 8, 2008

RAH said:
I've been thinking of going the same route myself. Keep us posted on how you like it. I see you didn't get the 40-150mm lens (comes with the 2-lens kit). I'm thinking it might be worth getting for the additional $75-$100. Anyway, the 70-300 certainly looks like the lens to get for birding.

Also, I've been thinking that Olympus might be coming out with a replacement pretty soon. I know this is always the worry, but the E-510 has been out for quite awhile, and they did just announce a replacement for the E-410 (the E-420). It seems to address some of the less-desirable aspects of the E-510, especially with AF in Live View mode - the E-420 focuses on a half-press, unlike the E-510.

Obviously you figured it wasn't worth waiting. Any info, thoughts?

I, too, have heard that there is a new model coming out some time later this year. The trouble is that there is never a good time to buy technology. There is always a newer, improved model waiting in the wings but it is a case of balancing the reduced cost of the 'old' model with the full price of the newcomer.

The price of the E-510 has fallen quite a bit lately and I was able to buy my kit for a reasonable price. The 2 lens kit is probably worth it if you can afford the small extra cost but I was working on a strict budget and the two zoom lenses nearly overlap in the middle.

I have still only worked my way through the basics of the hand book but I attach a couple of photos which I took before leaving for work this morning. The settings are probably not ideal and I have obviously got a lot to learn. The daffodils were approximately 4 metres away and the Blackbird was on my neighbour's roof. Both were taken with the 70-300 lens on full zoom.

Ron

SteveClifton · Apr 8, 2008

Like you Ron, I've also become very interested in one of the Olympus SLR cameras recently, as I think it's very unlikely that I'll consider buying any seriously 'big glass' in the near future (so think I'll steer clear of the traditional Canon/Nikon route). I would like the greater flexibility and image quality of an SLR over a compact for general shooting, but also would like to dabble in bird photography and butterflies and dradonflies.

Your shot of daffodils certainly shows the potential for 'distant close-ups' of insects, and your blackbird shows promise for bird photography too. The compact size of the Olympus bodies also makes them very appealing with respect to portability when carrying lots of other birding gear. All the reports I've heard about Olympus gear is that it's second to none, especially their lenses, though they seem to have been out of the running in the 'serious SLR' field for some years. I cut my teeth on the old OM-1, so it's nice to see them apparently getting back on form again, and even introducing some affordable longer lenses into their line-up.

I would be extremely interested in how you get on with your new camera, especially the 70-300 zoom, and to see if you think the built in IS is worth having. I'd also be interested in the possibility of using it for digiscoping, though not sure where to begin! Perhaps the soon-to-be introduced 28mm pancake lens will be good for this?

Ahh...so many questions....

Do keep us all posted with your findings, and enjoy the new camera

Steve

greypoint · Apr 8, 2008

I used various Olympus DSLRs before swapping to Canon last autumn [faster Af and greater lens range was the main reason]. There's a lot to be said for the compact size and build quality of Olympus models and the kit lenses are certainly better than most. If it's of any interest i've got a selection of shots taken with models including the E-510 - most taken with the 50-200mm f2.8/3.5, some with the 40-150 or 14-54
http://www.flickr.com/photos/greypoint/sets/72157603343839254/

SteveClifton · Apr 8, 2008

I used various Olympus DSLRs before swapping to Canon last autumn [faster Af and greater lens range was the main reason]. There's a lot to be said for the compact size and build quality of Olympus models and the kit lenses are certainly better than most. If it's of any interest i've got a selection of shots taken with models including the E-510 - most taken with the 50-200mm f2.8/3.5, some with the 40-150 or 14-54
http://www.flickr.com/photos/greypoi...7603343839254/

Some cracking shots there, thanks for sharing. I've found it quite hard to find many examples of wildlife shots taken with any of the Olympus cameras, so nice to see yours. Would you say it was worth getting the E-510 (over one of the E-400 models) because of the built in IS? or would tripod mounting get around this? I almost always have a tripod with me anyway.

The other thing with the Olympus four-thirds system, is that I'm having difficulty understanding how 200mm can be equivalent to a 400mm lens with other systems. Can you do much wildlife photography with a 200mm? or would something longer be necessary?

Steve

greypoint · Apr 8, 2008

I think the e-510 is probably the best buy at present as the IS can't help but be useful at times and the price difference is'nt that huge. I have'nt used an e-410 but the e-400 was the same size and they're really quite tiny compared with most DSLRs and some people find the lack of a handgrip makes them harder to hold so it's best to have a good handle of both before buying. I used the 50-200 most of the time as it's such a good lens [and the 70-300 was'nt out at the time]. Because of the 2x crop factor it's not vastly different from using a 300mm on a nikon with 1.5x. Much as I like the idea of longer lenses, unless you can afford the best, i've found for my strictly fun/amateur use that a slightly shorter quality lens and a bit of cropping meets my needs better than a huge, slow, budget 500mm. I would think an e-510 with a 70-300mm would be a perfect lightweight combo [pop the 14-42 into your bag for wider stuff - a really good cheap lens - no lens changing worries with an anti dust system that actually works!]

paulthomas · Apr 8, 2008

SteveClifton said:
The other thing with the Olympus four-thirds system, is that I'm having difficulty understanding how 200mm can be equivalent to a 400mm lens with other systems. Can you do much wildlife photography with a 200mm? or would something longer be necessary?

A 200mm lens on 4/3rds give the same angle of view as a 400mm lens on a 35mm camera. It's just simple geometry really. Generally you can't have a long enough lens for wildlife photography. I use the 50-200mm + 1.4x TC as a walkabout lens. In combination with the IS of the E-510 I can hand-hold it down to 1/60th second. Mainly though I use the 300/f2.8 in combination with either the 1.4x or 2x TC. The thing to remember is that for photography you need to get close to the subject. With a lens like the 70-300, you'll need to be 12-14ft from a sparrow-sized bird to get it a decent size in the image without cropping. Wildlife photography is 90% field-craft. If you can only get within 100ft of it, even the longest lens in the world won't help.

greypoint · Apr 9, 2008

Ah - now the 300mmf2.8 that looks like a fantastic lens from the results I've seen. A bit pricey though. I have to agree over the frame filling ability of a long lens - a lot of people are disappointed going to a longer lens when they find the image is bigger but not that much bigger!

NoSpringChicken · Apr 9, 2008

greypoint said:
I have to agree over the frame filling ability of a long lens - a lot of people are disappointed going to a longer lens when they find the image is bigger but not that much bigger!

From my very brief experience with the camera and lens I can see it won't replace my digiscoping gear for photographing waders etc. However, I hope that I should be able to take photographs which are not possible by digiscoping, such as flight shots and photos of small birds flitting about in trees. We shall see!

I get the impression that the 70-300 is a bit slow and needs good light to work at its best, giving fast shutter speeds. However, for its price it seems a very good lens and is not too big or heavy.

Ron

RAH · Apr 9, 2008

SteveClifton said:
Would you say it was worth getting the E-510 (over one of the E-400 models) because of the built in IS? or would tripod mounting get around this? I almost always have a tripod with me anyway.

I'd say that IS is worth the extra money. I used to think the same thing myself - that I usually use a tripod anyway with my Olympus super-zoom. But since getting my Canon S5IS, I find that I can often get away using a monopod, which I never could with the non-IS Olympus camera, especially with a TCON-17 teleconverter. So, the IS expands your options.

SteveClifton · Apr 9, 2008

Thanks to everyone who's answered my queries so far. Everything is becoming a little clearer now, so once my imminent house move is out of the way, I'll see how much is left over for new toys!

I initially had plans to buy a Panasonic FZ18, but have been a little disappointed with some of the pictures I've seen from it. I'm really looking for something that will give more professional quality results (though making allowances for my present lack of skill!). Hopefully one of the Olympus SLR cameras is the answer.

Does anyone know how to work out how the Oly 70-300 compares to the built in zoom of the Panasonic in terms of how much 'reach' it gives?

Steve

NoSpringChicken · Apr 9, 2008

I walked down to the local habour this lunchtime to try a few 'real world' shots. I was surprised how shallow the depth of field is at maximum zoom on full aperture with the 70-300. You obviously have to be careful where you place the focusing target (presumably you aim for the eyes if possible.) The chip in the Starling photo was only a few inches away from the bird.

Overall, I'm pretty happy so far but there is obviously loads I have to learn. No flight shots yet!

Ron

paulthomas · Apr 9, 2008

SteveClifton said:
Does anyone know how to work out how the Oly 70-300 compares to the built in zoom of the Panasonic in terms of how much 'reach' it gives?

According to the info at DPReview the FZ-18 lens equates to 504mm in 35mm terms so the 70-300 would give you slightly more reach but I doubt you'd notice the difference in real-life use.

greypoint · Apr 9, 2008

If you're anything like me the big difference would be using the optical viewfinder of the Olympus against the EVF of the Panasonic - so much easier to use the optical type for things that move quickly like small birds.

RAH · Apr 11, 2008

greypoint said:
If you're anything like me the big difference would be using the optical viewfinder of the Olympus against the EVF of the Panasonic - so much easier to use the optical type for things that move quickly like small birds.

Yes, all EVFs are slow refresh-wise. However, I have seen some reviews that say that the Olympus DSLR viewfinder has "tunnel-vision" - i.e. the 4:3 sensor gives a poor view in the optical viewfinder. Even back in the film days, SLR viewfinders could be poor for judging focus, especially with long lenses. Have you had a chance to try out the viewfinder of the E-510 or similar Olympus DSLR cameras? I'd be interested to know just how good/bad they are.

NoSpringChicken · Apr 11, 2008

RAH said:
Have you had a chance to try out the viewfinder of the E-510 or similar Olympus DSLR cameras? I'd be interested to know just how good/bad they are.

The viewfinder is quite small but it is bright and sharp enough. I haven't tried manual focus yet but I think it would be rather difficult. My eyes are not very good these days, however.

Three more shots taken this lunchtime. I'm finding my way round the camera a bit more now and really enjoying it. The gull at the back in the last photo has definitely got its feet off the ground. Does that constitute a BIF shot?

Ron

RAH · Apr 11, 2008

NoSpringChicken said:
The gull in the back of the last photo has definitely got its feet off the ground. Does that constitute a BIF shot?

Ron

Yes, but only if they cast no shadow on the ground. So, you're all set with that shot!

Very sharp sample pictures, by the way. Camera is looking good!

iveljay · Apr 27, 2008

Bought a 510 body - excellent - seems to be better at handling noise than predecessors.
IS works superbly - all my lenses are now IS without replacing at great expense!!
Great for grab shots never really worked reliably in the past - miss fewer shots.
Just don't try using the built in flash with any pro zoom it is a lot lower than the E-500 - not a great loss.
Switched on the LCD to see how it measured up as a viewfinder, switched it off again. Not as usable as the E-10/20 equivalent lcd.

Overall great!!!

mickg · May 9, 2008

Had the e510 & 70-300 for a couple of weeks & am very pleased.
It's my 1st dslr so cannot compare against other makes but would certainly recommend it. Lens seems quite sharp for the money and IS helps as I only shoot handheld.

Here's a few bird shot. Hope to get better ones as I get to know the gear.
Cheers. Mick.

NoSpringChicken · May 9, 2008

mickg said:
Had the e510 & 70-300 for a couple of weeks & am very pleased.
It's my 1st dslr so cannot compare against other makes but would certainly recommend it. Lens seems quite sharp for the money and IS helps as I only shoot handheld.

Here's a few bird shot. Hope to get better ones as I get to know the gear.
Cheers. Mick.

It looks as if you are getting on well with it, Mick. I think the E-510 and 70-300 is an excellent combination for the money and makes a great walk around outfit. It has its limitations on reach but the IS makes it practical to use handheld, which saves on the weight and inconvenience of a tripod

Ron

Anybody use the E-510? (1 Viewer)

Well-known member

Well-known member

Attachments

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Attachments

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Attachments

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Attachments

Well-known member

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread