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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Aug 21, 2008, 2:38 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
Tullio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,370
Default

Greg Chappell wrote:
Quote:
A lot of the issues regarding soft(er) images than the E520can probably be rectified,at least in somepart,by turning down (or off) the noise filter. I believe a lot of the testing done at DPReview is with the camera set to default settings, which probably includes a"Standard" noise reduction filter setting. It's pretty obvious in looking at the noise filter setting option imagesdisplayed in the review atDPReview that a lot of sharpness can be retained by setting the noise filter to low or off.

The same setting adjustments used on the E510 to combat overly contrasty images...which can lead to a lot of highlight clipping,should probably also be used with the E520, like setting the contrast down to -2 or -1.

According to DPR, NF on the E520 does not have the same "negative" effect that it did on the E510. In fact, they show a comparison between the two settings (NF on and NF off) and there's hardly any difference at all. To be fair, they did point out the NF effect on the E510 review and if I'm not mistaken, they turned NF off for the review rather than using the "default" setting. With that being the case, the E520 apparently is producing softer images, whether NF is turned ON or OFF. I guess I'll have to wait and see.
Tullio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 21, 2008, 4:45 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
tkurkowski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Maryland, USA
Posts: 3,625
Default

Greg Chappell wrote:
Quote:
like setting the contrast down to -2 or -1.
Amen! Based on my years of film experience I just don't expect a DSLR to capture the full luminance range of a normal image, without turning the contrast down. Maybe the $5K FF DSLRs do OK but I'm not in that price league...

Ted
tkurkowski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 21, 2008, 4:57 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 6,483
Default

zig-123 wrote:
Quote:



Ah Geeez Greg,

You had to go and get a 12-60mm didn't ya! Just when I thought I was done buying lenses for a while.

Bob asks the question; what's it going to take and get Ken to buy a 12-60mm? With all due respect to Ken and Bob, I don't care!!!!!!!!!!!!!

As soon as you go posting some your stellar images using the 12-60SWD. I know what's gonna happen. I'm goin' off to get me one. Yikes!

Seriously though, congratulations on getting the 12-60SWD. Every reviewI've readabout it is very positive.I'll be looking forward to seeinga sampling of your work.

Zig



Ha!

Actually...I had originally ear-marked these funds as part of what I was going to invest in re-buying the 7-14, but I got to thinking about what I had upcoming and there's a wedding in late September (and another on December 13)I'm doing where I'd really like having the 24mm option in my "standard" zoom, and having wanted to try one of the SWD models, just decided to sink those fundsinto this lens....what this means now is, I'll be selling my 14-54 f2.8-3.5...no need to keep both.

I'll be able tomove the net proceeds from that wedding back into the "7-14 fund"...which I do still plan on buying.
Greg Chappell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 21, 2008, 9:39 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
Scouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Camano Island, WA.
Posts: 2,328
Default

pgmCoder wrote:
Quote:
...I have nothing to offer constructively to this thread BUT I read it and noticed this from GChappell where he said, " BTW....I just picked up one of the 12-60 f2.8-4 SWD Zuikos....this is one sweet lens."


Zig, what will it take to get one in the hands of the Scouse, maybe just more GC samplings?
__________
boBBrennan


It's not going to work this time you guys.....:-)



BUT! If I got rid of the 2 kit lenses (14-45 + 40-150) I'd be really better off with the
12-60 and 70-300......Mmmmmmmmm

Naw! Real Estate hasn't been that good this year.

I have been waiting for reviews of the 520. As I've said before, I love my E500 but would love some of those features. Especially if the sensor gives results like I'm used to with the 500.

I'll wait (I'll bloody have to..:?) at least until next spring. Give the market price a chance to settle and see how people feel about their results by then.

Anxious to see your results Tullio with the camera (Oh, and don't forget how slow the E series are on startup...DPR) and Greg with the lens.




Scouse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 21, 2008, 10:05 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
Tullio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,370
Default

I should be posting something by the end of next week. Since I had the E510 and the E520 is about the same in terms of camera settings,I should be up and shooting as soon as I take the camera out of the box.
Tullio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 22, 2008, 2:20 AM   #16
OCD
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 101
Default

Quote:
That's one way to do it...take the good reviews and ignore the bad (or not-so-good) ones. I never make camera buying decisions basedsolely on DPR but I don't just ignore them eitherfor I do think their reviews have value

Like Greg says, the testing proceedure of DPR is suspect at best, and it may simply be the case that Olympus are guilty of having the camera defaults set to 'idiot' rather than 'experienced'. But it is obviously a truly dreadful camera and can onlymanage a'Highly Recommended' from the DPR team, and that based on dubious testing techniques........so send it back :lol:



Steve
OCD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 22, 2008, 2:39 AM   #17
Senior Member
 
dlpin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 143
Default

the problem I have with most reviews is that they make a bigger deal out of things than they need to, for better or for worse.

Of course, this is much more a way of justifying their own existence more than anything else. They need a reason to write 10 pages on the difference between the e-510 and the canon 450 and such, so they blow things out of proportion. Additionally, in an effort to look "objective" they come up with numbers for their subjective inclinations that are generally inconsistent.

Now, with that said, they are not entirely useless, especially looking at the sample pictures. But the fact remains, that differences are quite small within tiers (entry level, prosumer, pro) and quite significant between them.
dlpin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 22, 2008, 7:45 AM   #18
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

dlpin wrote:
Quote:
the problem I have with most reviews is that they make a bigger deal out of things than they need to, for better or for worse.
Actually I take the opposite view. Regardless of camp - Oly, Nikon, Canon, Pentax - if a review comes along and doesn't praise the camera as the greatest thing ever people in that camp complain that there is bias. Which, of course, there is to the extent that human beings are performing tests or writing reviews. So they will always be affected by the bias they have. In the Canon camp for instance, people whined for a year that DPR didn't do a review of the 1dMkIII. They lamented the terrible bias Phil must have against Canon - blah, blah, blah. The reality is if any one of those people were going to buy a professional camera based upon a DPR review they have more money than sense :G

Much more frustrating to me are the magazine reviews of gear. The only negative comment they ever seem to have might be about cost. Otherwise every lens or body reviewed is great. Not surprising since those gear manufacturers and the add revenue from them are the major source of revenue for the magazines.

All in all - EVERY piece of gear produced has pros and cons. If a reviewer is incapable of finding the cons then they're not doing a good job. As a consumer, the idea is to get input from multiple sources so you can identify trends vs. personal bias. But I would caution you to ignore any review that has only positive things to say about any piece of gear.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 22, 2008, 9:24 AM   #19
PJM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 26
Default

I have yet to have a client pay me to shoot a test target or a paper clip.
PJM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 22, 2008, 11:52 AM   #20
Senior Member
 
dlpin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 143
Default

JohnG wrote:
Quote:
dlpin wrote:
Quote:
the problem I have with most reviews is that they make a bigger deal out of things than they need to, for better or for worse.
Actually I take the opposite view. Regardless of camp - Oly, Nikon, Canon, Pentax - if a review comes along and doesn't praise the camera as the greatest thing ever people in that camp complain that there is bias. Which, of course, there is to the extent that human beings are performing tests or writing reviews. So they will always be affected by the bias they have. In the Canon camp for instance, people whined for a year that DPR didn't do a review of the 1dMkIII. They lamented the terrible bias Phil must have against Canon - blah, blah, blah. The reality is if any one of those people were going to buy a professional camera based upon a DPR review they have more money than sense :G

Much more frustrating to me are the magazine reviews of gear. The only negative comment they ever seem to have might be about cost. Otherwise every lens or body reviewed is great. Not surprising since those gear manufacturers and the add revenue from them are the major source of revenue for the magazines.

All in all - EVERY piece of gear produced has pros and cons. If a reviewer is incapable of finding the cons then they're not doing a good job. As a consumer, the idea is to get input from multiple sources so you can identify trends vs. personal bias. But I would caution you to ignore any review that has only positive things to say about any piece of gear.
Well, that view is not incompatible with what I said. Making a bigger deal out of things than they need to also applies to the positive things they often find. Personally, I have no particular love for olympus: I bought it because it was the best deal for the money at the time.

But try, for a second, to put your knowledge of cameras aside. Then go and read the reviews of last year's entry level models and this years. First thing you'll notice is that, well, every camera is highly recommended. But the second you will notice is that what particular features they choose to praise or criticize is almost random. In the canon 450 review they will say the e-520 has better ergonomics, but then on the e-520 review they will give it the same score. Then they will say, in the same a-350 review, that the a-350 gives you more bang for your buck, but then you read the a-350 review and they give it just a recommended rating. And they will say the a-350 is better built than its rivals, but give it the same "build quality" score, slam it for soft jpegs and the need to shoot raw (just as they said it would be needed on the canon, but there they didnt make as big a deal out of it). If you knew nothing about cameras, youd think these are vastly different models, that brands have hugely unique bodies and that cameras are wildly different from year to year.


dlpin 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 12:06 PM.