Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > What Camera Should I Buy?

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Feb 20, 2008, 2:07 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
Tullio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,370
Default

If you compare the E510 with the E3, yes, the E3 is an upgrade but canOly justify doubling the price for the features it offers over the E510? I doubt. There were many reaons that led me to sell the Nikon D40. Limited DR to begin with. No AF in camera, meaning only a handful of lenses were available at the time and they were costly. No IS, no self-cleaning sensor, etc, etc, etc. The D40x is a better camera but it still has the AF limitation and no IS, the two big draw bakcs. The D200 (available at the time) was much more expensive and I did not want to go with the D80 because I found it to be too big. The Sony A350 looks very promissing and if I did not have the exposure to the Oly system I have today, I'd prbably go for it over the E510. Today, I feel good about the Oly and as I mentioned, I'm investing on lenses so I think I'll stick with it for the time being. Between the E3, A700 and D300, I'd probably go with the D300 or A700.
Tullio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2008, 10:22 PM   #12
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 29
Default

Supposably the new Sony A350 is supposed to make everything easier for you, but making it easier might not make better quality. I can't help but still remain stuck between the E-510 and the Sony A350. I was also checking out the new Pentax K20D, it also is pretty similar to the new Sony A350 with features and megapixels.
http://*******************/digicamguid...230600-0590820
Pdotcantu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2008, 10:23 PM   #13
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 29
Default

Also, the Olympus E-510 doesn't have a flash sync of 250 but if I buy one of the lenses that go on top of it, do those come with settings of adjustment that would probably contain a sync of 250?
Pdotcantu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2008, 11:06 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
Tullio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,370
Default

I had the Pentax K100 and although it was a good camera, I think the Sony A350 or the Oly E510 are better choices than the K200. I believe you meant an external flash, not a lens that go on top, correct? To be honest, I don't do flash photography that often so I don't have the need for external flashes. I know it's a tough decision to make having to choose between the A530 and E510. I'd not take # of MP into very serious consideration for I think 10 MP is plenty enough. This has become a marketing issue more than anything. The higher the MP, the more memory you need since the files are larger but unless you make large prints out of your photos, you really don't need more than 10-12 MP tops. Since your local camera store does not carry the models you are interested in, I suggest you buy both from Amazon (make sure the cameras are sold by Amazon and not by a different store).They offer a 30 day return policy with no restocking fees (you only pay for shipping to sendit back). That way, youhave 30 days to test them. You also need tomake sure you have the appropriate memory card (CF/xD for the E510 and MS for the Sony).
Tullio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 21, 2008, 12:13 AM   #15
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 29
Default

Yeah if you look at the PENTAX K20D
http://*******************/digicamguid...230600-0590820
It seems to have really good specs, just as the Sony A350. Yeah I meant to say External Flash that goes on top. I hope I can get one that has a 250 flash sync if not better. Once again the only thing I really worry about is Sony's lenses, I really like Olympus' lenses and their quality. I hope that the A350 will live up to it's hype. I also think that Olympus has great optics built into their lenses. Also the Sony A350 only has 2.5 shots/per sec. Does that refer to it's continuous shooting? I believe the A300 had 3 shots/per sec. Does Sony have as many lenses as Olympus? The Pentax K20D has an ISO over 6000 which seems good but if you ask me the pictures at that high level are just going to add noise.

I think I've come down to the Sony A350 and the Olympus E-510. Is it safe to single out Nikon and Canon?
Pdotcantu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 21, 2008, 10:43 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
Tullio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,370
Default

Carl Zeiss makes excellent lenses (many areeven better than Zuiko). They are in serious business, such as professional medical equipments, etc.). I think if you take into account all the Carl Zeiss + Minolta + Sigma + Tamron lenses available for the Sony system,the choices are much much greater than for the Oly system. In actuality, the Oly ZD system if very limited when compared to Canon, Nikon and even Sony systems.As I mentioned before, the greatest downsidefor Oly is the 4/3 system. Not that it is a bad system, on the contrary. I think thesystem works well and helps keep the lens sizes much more compact. The thing is, all legacy lenses become full manual lenses because of the required adapter. If Olympus ever make an adapter that will allow the camera to AF andAE, then we have a winner. As is, Sony, Canon, Nikon, they all have a great advantage over Oly when it comes to legacy lenses because most of them will work on the new digital models w/o problems. The other problem with Oly lenses is its cost. They are way too expensive and the cheaper alternatives in most cases are simply bad alternatives (i.e. Sigma 55-200mm)/
Tullio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 21, 2008, 11:01 PM   #17
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 29
Default

I really can't make up my mind over these different models. I also read that supposably the A700 is better and carries more features than the new Sony A350. Although the Sony A350 and the Olympus E-510 don't have a flash sync of 250, if I buy an external flash to go onto one of these camera will they provide me with that flash sync of 250?

I also read that the E-3 has a shutter speed of 8000 and the E-510 has shutter speed of 4000 just as the Sony A350? should that be concern?
Pdotcantu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 21, 2008, 11:32 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
Tullio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,370
Default

I can't really help you with the flash business because I don't usually do flash photography.

The A700 is not comparable to the E510 or the A350. It's Sony's top of the line and as such, most likely it will have many features that both the E510 and the A350 don't have. But, it's also much much more expensive. It's somewhat comparable to the Oly E3. As for the shutter speed, I find 1/4000 to be fast enough to freeze just about any motion. Keep in mind that the fastest the speed, the more light you need and/or higher ISO. Sometimes we need to look at some of these features and ask ourselves "will I benefit from it? How???". I work for a Software company and I can tell you that a lot of these so-called upgrades are nothing but marketing tools. People think more MP is better? Let's give them more MP. The thing is, in most cases, unless they increase the sensor size as well, more MP will do more harm than good. My suggestion? Take some of the upgrades with a grain of salt.

You should start by figuring out your budget. How much are you willing to pay for a system? Say you have $1500 to spend. You can either stretch it a bit and buy the A700 or the E3 or get either the E510 or the A350 and spend the rest of the moneyon lenses. If you have the money, I'd consider the A700 or the Nikon D300. If you don't, then go with the A350. You have more optionsin terms of lenses and the A350 hasall the features the E510 has (e.g. IS, sensor cleaning, Live view, etc, etc, etc.) plus a much better handle of DR (less highlight clipping).
Tullio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 2008, 3:42 AM   #19
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

From your initial post, it seems to me that a primary concern of yours is size and weight. If that is so, then the Olympus is the better choice.

And just to correct a misconception, the Sony dSLRs come from a long line of Minolta SLRs and dSLRs. Sony isn't an upstart in this field. Minolta has been an innovator for decades and has some significant accomplishments and some significant lenses, some are even the best in their class. Sony just picked up the ball and is running with it, bringing to bear the marketing savvy it is known for.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 2008, 1:51 PM   #20
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 29
Default

I agree with Tullio, and find out what exactly my budget is going to be. I was just checking out some sample pics of the Sony A700. Can anyone agree that Olympus takes better pictures than Sony in terms of color or skin tone?
Pdotcantu 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 8:12 AM.