Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums >

LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 19, 2006, 6:38 PM   #1
dissembled's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 48


dissembled is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Mar 19, 2006, 8:39 PM   #2
Senior Member
RiceHigh's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 344

It's just ONE USER opinion afterall IMHO.

RiceHigh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 19, 2006, 9:59 PM   #3
dissembled's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 48

Yes..but photographic tests don't lie.

Higher ISO speeds equates to considerably less detailed photos because of Oly's native noise reduction system that can't be switched off. It seems that noise reduction is done by smudging the image.

At ISO 1600, one can obviously see that the Rebel and the E300(!) retains considerable more detail.


The review aside...
I've noticed that Oly's lens lineup (according to the website) doesn't include one w. a min aperture of less than f2? If there is, can anyone show me please?

(f1.8 is good enough but f1.4 is preferable.)

I may just buy another DSLR along w. Zigview for waist-lv shooting.
& I was really excited about this camera too.

dissembled is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 20, 2006, 12:28 AM   #4
Senior Member
Greg Chappell's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 6,589

Photographic tests can be misleading, though.

As one on the DPReview site mentioned, Phil's a lab rat. He would never rank a camera based on actualimages it takes- and I'm not talking closeupimages of crayons or the face of a piece of currency, watchor bottle of wine. I've seen plenty of realimages (images normal people take)online shot with an E-330 from people who actually use cameras to take picturesthat are as good as any camera could have taken.Phil goes to the sub-atomic level in many of his tests as those who tend to do this type stuff do. If I had listened to his review of the E-1I'd have never been happy with the images from my E-1 because I'd always think they were, somehow, lacking.

If someone likes a camera, they can make it look very good. If they don't, they'll nitpick it to death. Phil falls closer to the later than the former, andthat's been painfully obvious since he first posted his preview with the negative comments about the live view implementation- the resultingreview was pretty much what I would have expected from him. One last thing I noticed in Phil's conclusion, he noted one MINUS in his conclusion that the kit lens didn't have a distance scale on it. REALLY! Last time I looked, very few kit lenses do have distance scales, like the sorry 18-55 kit lens Canon sells with their Digital Rebel series, and this is the first time Phil has mentioned that as a negative in any CAMERA review.

Greg Chappell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 20, 2006, 2:45 AM   #5
setsan's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 37

Another CON

Not instant startup (1.6 sec) even longer in its out-of-the-box configuration

yes, but is the time the antidust system takes to do the job :G

Taking the riview "cum grano salis"
setsan is offline   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 2:35 PM.