Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Olympus dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 11, 2007, 10:37 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Mount Shasta, California
Posts: 1,525
Default

The two lens kit is a great bargain I am considering instead of the Pentax K100D for which you simply cannot buy the additional lens range I need at this time. To get an F2 range zoom for the E500 seems unbelievably expensive. Am I missing something? I have found the older manual focus lenses, but that does not work for me. When you factor in the 2X factor, you need a really short lens to get inside a room coverage.
pboerger is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Mar 11, 2007, 11:52 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 822
Default

An F2 zoom is something that doesn't even exist for Canon, Nikon, or Pentax.

Try looking at the f2.8-3.5 zooms, the 11-22, 14-54, and 50-200. Comparable lenses form Nikon, Canon, Pentax will generally be f3.5-4.5 or f4. The tradeoff is the E-500 isn't as good at higher ISO, so you might need the faster glass. Also, depth of field at f2.8 will be the same as f3.5 on Canon or about f3.7 on Nikon or Pentax.

On the whole, if you are interested in doing alot of shooting in low light without flash, the E-500 is still not the best choice. But if you are doing most of your shooting at ISO 400 and below, the overall quality of the Zuiko zooms is a strong point. And the Sigma 30mm f1.4 is a good choice for those occaisions when you really need a fast prime that will focus quickly in low light. But overall, the offerings for fast prime lenses are more limited than for Canon, Nikon, or Pentax (but still better than the D40/D40x).

On the ultra wide end, if the 11-22 isn't wide enough, and the 7-14 is too pricey, then there isn't much choice beyond that right now. There is apparently an 8-16 consumer grade lens in the works, but that will be at least a year away. Those two that are available do seem to be very highly recommended though, if one suits your needs.

kenbalbari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 11, 2007, 11:53 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 6,522
Default

pboerger wrote:
Quote:
The two lens kit is a great bargain I am considering instead of the Pentax K100D for which you simply cannot buy the additional lens range I need at this time. To get an F2 range zoom for the E500 seems unbelievably expensive. Am I missing something?
Nope, you're not missing anything. Those f2 zooms (35-100 f2, $2,400 and the 14-35 f2, price ???- not available yet) are not practical unless you either do this for a living or have enough money thatprice does not matter.

The sensible set for many is the f2.8-3.5 combination, the 14-54 and 50-200, which is an equivalent of 28-400mm in 35mm terms,but willstill set you back around $1,300, total. Another good set is th 11-22 f2.8-3.5 and the 50-200. That's 22-400mm with a small gap that's not really an issue and will cost around $200 or so more than the 14-54/50-200 combination. I have the 14-54 and 50-200 and they are fantastic. I also splurged last year on the 7-14 f4 so now I have a 35mmequivalentof 14-400mm covered. There's also an 8mm fisheye that's fantastic and is much cheaper than the 7-14 Zuiko.

There are several combinations other than these. Go here and take a look:

http://www.wrotniak.net/photo/oly-e/lenses.html
Greg Chappell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 12, 2007, 3:13 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Mount Shasta, California
Posts: 1,525
Default

I'll be damed! Honest answers. Then E500 kit is not as inexpensive as it seems. Thanks.
pboerger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 12, 2007, 3:14 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,066
Default

just to add
cheap fast lenses are pretty much useless anyway
because theyre so soft wide open
some primes are an exception, but there wouldnt be many of those either

Riley
Rriley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 12, 2007, 9:03 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
HarjTT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,535
Default

The F2 zooms are pricey - but they are Pro grade glass and thats going to cost some serious $$$ no matter which brand you buy. If you wait and get say the E510 and say the 50-200f2.8-3.5 or 12-60 f2.8-4 IS will give you that extra stop or possibly two so you could in effect have an 50-200 f2 - 2.8.

Here's a shot taken with my E1 and 14-54ZD on Friday, at ISO 400 F5.6 @ 1/2s handheld at 44mm (88mm equiv. 35mm). My third attempt at the shot, the first was a landscape.



You might also want to take a look at the 50mm (equivalent to 100mm) f2 macro - its basically like having 2-3 lenses (1) a macro lens; (2) a portrait lens and (3) a low-light lens. here's a review of the 50mmF2:

http://www.wrotniak.net/photo/oly-e/zd-50m.html

Cheers

HarjTT

:? :O








HarjTT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 12, 2007, 9:38 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,066
Default

I agree with that Greg, I just posted this elsewhere

But to add for the case for 4/3; if I can equip myself with the highest quality lenses, and the fastest AF, covering a range from 24mm to 400mm (35mm EFL) with just 2 lenses, would I feel justly compensated? I think my answer is yes.

Riley
Rriley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 12, 2007, 10:45 AM   #8
Junior Member
 
Newsphotog80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 22
Default

Another item to consider is that the Olympus Zuiko Digital lens was designed totaly for the 4/3 system as so the clarity of the images are going to be that much better.
Besides, The high end Glass and Coatings on the Pro lenses are putting Canon to shame in sharpness.
If you think about it, both Nikon and Canon are trying to use conventional lens design into a digital format. Yes both Nikon and Canon have high end digital lenses, but the price of these lenses are exactly on par with the Olympus Glass.
You end up gaining with the Olympus system in the end.
Tom
Newsphotog80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 12, 2007, 12:17 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
Mikefellh's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Toronto, ON, Canada
Posts: 1,707
Default

pboerger wrote:
Quote:
I'll be damed! Honest answers. Then E500 kit is not as inexpensive as it seems. Thanks.
Photography's never been a cheap hobby, if you want good equipment...and you always want something else.

I do use the standard kit lenses most of the time (14-45mm & 40-150mm), but having tried the high grade and super high grade glass I do know what I'm missing and for the costs I am willing to forgo it. I admit I'm eagerly awaiting the standard ultra-wide lens (8-16mm?) promised in 2008. Here's the latest lens map from Olympus of current and upcoming (not including Sigma and Leica 4/3 lenses):

http://www.olympus-esystem.com/dea/p...zuiko_lens_eng


Mikefellh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 12, 2007, 1:47 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 198
Default

I like how the Olympus lens chart distorts the span between 40 and 50mm to make the zoom ranges of all their mid-range zooms look wider.
DougJGreen is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


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 Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 9:03 AM.