Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums >

LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 30, 2006, 8:47 AM   #11
randypamjohnson's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 32


Like you...my decision also came down to the D-50 or the E-500. I decided upon the E-500 because of the gorgeous LCD (I am old and seemingly going blind) and the large font...and great menu system....as well as ergonomics and weight.

That said...I am sure I would have been happy with the D-50 as well.

My experience...as well as looking at many pics taken with the E-500 at ISO 800 and below...and with no post processing...led me to conclude that the "noise" problem at higher ISO's was not nearly as severe as some would have led me to believe. At ISO 1600 there is "some" noise...but that can be easily dealt with in post processing.

My decision also came down to the fact that given the overall higher quality of the kit lens with the E-500...I just felt that overall...it was a better way to go....for me. You mileage may vary! haha

Well..thats my 2 cents worth...enjoy making your decision! It can be brutal huh?

randypamjohnson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 30, 2006, 1:12 PM   #12
Senior Member
Brent Gair's Avatar
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 185

I would agree that these are both good cameras so it isn't a question of one being obvioulsy better than the other. I picked the E-500 because I liked it...not because the others were inferior.

Regarding the White Balance: one plus for the E-500 is that the WB is extremely easy to adjust (never checked WB on the D50 soI can't compare)). But the E-500 has that direct access WB button so you can press that and turn the control dial to change the WB in about 2 seconds. And you can save a custom WB setting if you're not happy with the choices. That's really handy because, just after I got my camera, we got three days of rain so I was indoors and shot about 150 pictures under fluorescent and incandescent lights. Didn't like the first two pics with the AUTO WB so I adjusted it and haven't had a problem since.

I also think the high ISO issue might be greatly exaggerrated for most photographers. I would guess that there are some folks who do a significant amount of photography at 800 or 1600 ISO. But that certainly doesn't apply to me and suspect it's a minor concern for the vast majority of people. I've taken about 300 pictures so far...most of them under overcast or artificial indoor lights and I haven't really set the camera over ISO 200. In fact, most of the shooting has been done at 160. This is not to say people shouldn't be aware of issues of shooting at high ISO. But, again, it's a question of whether the numbers have any practical meaning.

If you only buy 3 or 4 lenses, does it make aPRACTICAL difference if one system offers 25 lenses and another 50? Do you do enough shooting at very high ISO numbers such that it become an issue?

A camera choice should be weighted to those issues that affect the way actually do their photography.
Brent Gair is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 31, 2006, 10:56 AM   #13
Junior Member
Gern Blanston's Avatar
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 15

Many, many thanks. You've given me a lot to think about. Comparing shots side by side is a great feature that I didn't know the Oly had. Maybe I'll just get both (kidding).

I like that the Nikon zoom goes to 450 mm vs the Olympus 300 mm. I'm just going to have to take a lot of photos and compare.
Gern Blanston 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 6:17 PM.