Olympus E-Volt or Nikon D-50?

[NLAlston]

As some of you know, I was very seriously looking into the Canon EOS 5D. That was when a vocationalorganization was considering affording me that unit behind my disability. But a required physical, through that organization, offered an opinion that photography might not be a good choice for me - due to the bending to get certain shots, and such. So that took care of that - but it won't stop me from moving ahead with this burning desire of mine. I cannot afford that Canon EOS 5D, but I now have a few dollars by which to get myself a DSLR - and the choice will be between the Olympus E-Volt, and the Nikon D-50. What kind of shots would I be mostly interested in? Portraits and some weddings, landscapes & Nature shots.

It was some time ago that I had my hands on the D-50, and I don't remember much about it (other than the fact of it feeling good in my hands). The E-Volt, on the other hand, was just handled today (which also felt good in my hands), and I really did love the size of it's 2.5" screen. I am going to make another trip out (hopefully this evening) to check into the features of the D-50, but I would like to get some 'user opinions' into which of these cameras might be the better option for me. I would deeply appreciate all opinions.

Advanced Thanks.

[vsrinu30]

I had similar questions recently when i was trying to buy my DSLR. There are only 4 major starting range DSLR's which i have found. XT, D50, KM5D, E-500. I strongly considered the KM5D because of its anti-shake. But now the company has been sold to Sony.

Though i like Olympus camera's I dropped E-500 because of the smaller CCD size when compared to its competitors which is going to result in more digital noise in the pictures at higher ISO's.

I dropped XT because personally to me images looked bit soft, felt very small in hands, camera buttons bit confusing.

At lastI have ended up with Nikon D50 because i have liked the quality of the images as they looked sharp, I have liked the egnormics, and most important thing is that the Noise levels are lowat higher ISO's when compared toany other camera's like Nikon D70, XT, E-500, KM5D, Nikon D200.

[mtclimber]

Because I owned a number of Nikkor lenses, and because I wanted to save some money, I ordered a Nikon refurbished D-50 for $399. It arrived today. Naturally I was elated and I began charging the battery immediately.

Here ismy second image with the new D-50.The D-50 handles very well, unlike the Canon 350D/XT, whose grip seemed really pinched to me. I had the opportunity to use an Olympus E-500 for a full 14 days it did not feel as good in hand, as the Nikon D-50,nor was I able to produce colors like thosethat appear in this image.

MT

[NLAlston]

Thanks Vsrinu30.

I did go out, just a short while ago, and handled the D-50 at Circuit City. I have to say that it did fell better in my hands (which are large) than the Evolt 500. I was a little concerned, however, about losing two megapixels if I did indeed select this camera over the Olympus. I know that it is $100 less than the Evolt 500, but the latter (I am also told) comes with a better set of lens.

I did take my CF card into the store, and shot a few photos for viewing on my computer. I didn't have the type of card that the Nikon uses, so I wasn't able to A/B what quality difference might be between the two cameras. I wish that I did have a storage card for the D-50 also, because it would have helped me to determine how much of a difference there might be between 8 & 6 megapixel outputs. The 'dust buster' feature was also a swayer toward the Evolt 500 - as well as the larger LCD.

Oh well...decisions, decisions :?.

[NLAlston]

Mtclimber,

That (IMO) is a really nice photo. I mean.....what an absolutely beautiful shot. Now this is what I'm talking about; this is the kind of stuff that I am (mainly) interested in shooting - and I am quite impressed.

Answer me these two questions, though: (1) This camera (D-50) does not feature anything like Oly's 'Automatic Lens Cleaner', and I wondered how much would a user of the D-50 (or any DSLR not having the above mentioned feature) expect to have to shell out for lens cleaning? And (2),would a2-megapixel difference - between cameras - be enough to warrant spending an additional $100-$200 for the greater endowed unit? Though it wouldn't be that often, there would be times when I would desire poster-sized blowups, from certain shots, for the purpose of framing for sale.

Let me know, please.

Blessings,

Nathan

[me2]

Welcome. I'm a refurbished D50 owner too.

"Answer me these two questions, though: (1) This camera (D-50) does not feature anything like Oly's 'Automatic Lens Cleaner', and I wondered how much would a user of the D-50 (or any DSLR not having the above mentioned feature) expect to have to shell out for lens cleaning?"

I don't expect to spend much. The lens cleaner is nice on the Oly, but I think I can do it manually.

"And (2), would a 2-megapixel difference - between cameras - be enough to warrant spending an additional $100-$200 for the greater endowed unit? Though it wouldn't be that often, there would be times when I would desire poster-sized blowups, from certain shots, for the purpose of framing for sale."

Noise levels and processing artifacts are more important than the pixel difference between 6 and 8 MP. It would be nice to have 8MP on the D50, but 6MP should be good for anything up to 20x30. The E500 is a nice camera but has a few flaws in my mind, like the viewfinder, lens selection, etc. My purchase decision was between the E500 and D50 and I am very happy with the D50.

[rey]

1) Regarding the dust issue, a dust blower cost me $12. I haven't had the need to use it though.

I'm not sure if you can disable the dust cleaner on the E500. From what I understand it kicks in whenever you turn on the camera, and it takes 2 seconds, so it's always a 2 second start up time. While the D50 has an almost instantaneous start-up time.


2) Regarding the 2MP difference:

The E-500 has a highest resolution of 3264 x 2448 pixel, while the D50 has a highest resolution of 3008 x 2000 pixels, so that translate into 8.8% larger horizontal and 22.4% larger vertical. Note that the E-500 has a 4/3 dimension, that's why the difference is not even.

That 22.4% sounds big but...

I guess assuming each pixels produces the same quality of image, if you were to print a 3 ft by 2 ft image on a D50, you can push that up to 3ft 3 inches by 2ft 5 inches with the E-500 and not lose quality. That's not really a big difference. (Assuming I did my math right)

Most people who bought the D50 and D70s wouldn't consider the 2MP difference enough of a difference.


The E500 and D50 are pretty much even, your skill as a photographer will probably limit it more than anything. For me, I considered all entry level DSLRs but came down to E500, Rebel XT or D50, and then went for the D50. I got mine brand new with 18-55 lens and 70-300 lens and a bag for $680. When my skill is good enough for me to move up, I know there's a 10MP D200 on my path. I don't know how a 10MP on a small 4/3 Oly sensor would perform.

Good Luck.


Oh yeah, check this out:
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/mpmyth.htm

[NLAlston]

Thanks everyone. You have all provided some very useful information, and I appreciate it - immensely. Now, maybe I should know the answer to this next question of mine (but I don't): Rey made mention of a '4/3' factor - on the Evolt 500 - and I wondered what this was in reference to.



Blessings,

Nathan

[mtclimber]

Nathan-

I do all the imager/IR cover platecleaning myself as I also have a D-70. I use the Copperhill System and it is no problem at all, when you consider how many times you will use the kit, it is quite inexpensive. Also purchase a good blower brush as has already been mentioned.

MT

[rey]

Rey made mention of a '4/3' factor - on the Evolt 500 - and I wondered what this was in reference to.

Four Thirds is just the dimension of the Oly sensor. If you look at the width-to-height ratio of the sensor size it's 4:3, traditional cameras have a ratio of 3:2. I just pointed that out since the increase of sensor size for the Oly does not evenly increase height and width relative to a 3:2 sensor.