Olympus E-410 or Rebel XT

[Abstract]

I tried out some cameras over the weekend. The Rebel XTi kind of cramped my hand, I think it was a little big. Maybe I would adjust? The Nikon D40 felt better. I am still undecided of what to do. The E-410 is probaly the best feeling. What will I do in the future though? Are the 4/3 system good enough to keep going with? Does Olympus have good enough cameras I could upgrade and be happy in the future?

Now I definitely don't get your dilemna.

You said you have small hands, the XTi feels weird in your hands because it was too big, and Nikon's D40 felt right. However, the E-420 felt the best.


Sorry, but even if you got more into photography, and you wanted to buy a better camera later, ALL the camera options become larger in size. You have no choice but to get a larger camera when you upgrade!

The Nikon D80 is slightly bigger than the D40, and the Olympus E-510 is bigger than the E-420.

Personally, if I were you, I'd probably just get the E-420. However, if you still want to pull your hair out by having another choice, then also consider the Nikon D40X.

 

[Mitthrawnuruodo]

Can you tell me the difference in IQ between the Zuiko 14-42mm Kit Lens and the 14-54mm. I know the 14-54mm is higher grade, but I am just wondering how much better it is than the kit lens. I have just ordered the E-420 body kit only with a view to getting a high-quality lens for all-purpose use.

The 14-54 is better, in most ways. No doubt about it. But, it is quite a bit heavier than the 14-42 (which is "impossibly" small and light), and it is first and foremost in "low-ish" light you will see the biggest difference, when you can use that extra speed (ƒ2.8-3.5 vs 3.5-5.6).

I would (and did) stick to the 14-42 kit lens for a while, get to know the camera, shoot a bit and not upgrade the lens until you feel the limitations of the kit lens., which is a really capable little lens.

Also, what is the IQ comparison between the Zuiko 14-54mm and new 12-60mm (fastest AF lens in the world?)? I heard the 12-60mm is more heavier and bigger, so I am concerned with using that lens with a E-420 which is very light (since the E-420 does not have IS). Any recommendations would be much appreciated.

The 12-60 is a bit heavier than the 14-54, but not that much (575g vs 435g, vs 190g(!) for the 14-42), and I don't see a problem mounting it on a 400-series.

Now, as I said above I couldn't justify getting the new 12-60 over the 14-54 because of price (the 12-60 was more than twice the price of the 14-54). Part of my reasoning was that although the 12-60 has been touted as the "fastest AF in the world" that is only valid when used with the E-3. You'll see a AF speedup compared to the kit lens, but the full potential of the new pro lenses will only be unleashed with the E-3 (according to the rep from Oly Norway).

If you quite often find yourself in situations where you could need those extra couple of mm with wide angle that the 12-60 offers (which I've yet to experience, but, hey, I've not had the 14-54 that long), you may also consider if you shouldn't go all the way and get the 7-14mm ƒ4 (in combo with the 14-54 or even the 14-42). The 7-14, although a bit pricey, is a fantastic lens. I've just tried it in store, but that was amazing. I took a couple of images on 7mm and the floorboards on the pics were still straight(!), I almost didn't believe my own eyes.

My point is, to repeat that, use the kit lens at first, and upgrade it when you feel it's limitations, and at that point you'll probably know if you need the 7-14, 12-60/14-54 and/or maybe even a pro telephoto zoom?

Enjoy the 420, it's supposedly a very handy little camera (and with lots of goodies I miss on my E-400 </bitter>).

 

[tony-in-japan]

Just discovered the Zuiko 50mm F2.0 Macro

My point is, to repeat that, use the kit lens at first, and upgrade it when you feel it's limitations, and at that point you'll probably know if you need the 7-14, 12-60/14-54 and/or maybe even a pro telephoto zoom?

Enjoy the 420, it's supposedly a very handy little camera (and with lots of goodies I miss on my E-400 </bitter>).

Hey Mitthrawnuruodo,

thanks for taking the time to advise me on Zuiko lenses -- much appreciated!

I’m too late to get the kit lens as I have already ordered the body plus pancake lens. I pretty much know if I got the kit lens I would sell it in the very near future for a higher grade lens (can’t be bothered doing an eBay auction), so I might as well get the lenses which I am going to use for the next few years now.

Another lens which has caught my attention is the Zuiko 50mm F2.0 Macro prime lens. This looks amazing -- initially I ignored it as I thought it was just for macro shooting but I realise it is also good for portrait shots (want to take beautiful shots of my daughter). It is also small and light(ish) which would be ideal with the E-420.

I found this link which shows some amazing shots (check out the bubble shot):
http://www.flickr.com/groups/zuikodigital/discuss/72057594065810835/

The idea to have just a prime lens collection really appeals to me as images seem to be consistently crisp (and I don’t mind using my legs as a zoom!).

Any experience with using this Zuiko 50mm F2.0 Macro lens?

 

[Mitthrawnuruodo]

Any experience with using this Zuiko 50mm F2.0 Macro lens?

Sorry, no... I have held it in my hand, though, and it feels light but solid. And the reviews and word of mouth have both been fantastic.

It is high on my wish list...

I really would have needed it today, when the first of the countless Dandelion that will eventually infest our sorry excuse of a garden appeared ():



The 14-54 does an OK job at 54mm ƒ8 1/320 and 1/400, but I still think the 50mm macro would be better for these shots...

...oh, and I'd give much for live view on these kinds of shots, when the alternative is more or less getting down on your stomach...

 

[apearlman]

Old tech works better than ever

Is the Rebel XT too outdated to buy? I can't afford the XTi. It just seems like very old tech. Would it perform as well as the Oly?

I bought my Rebel XT 2.5 years ago when it was "new tech" and took wonderful photos. Today it takes even BETTER ones, because I'm a much better photographer than I was back then.

Old tech is a problem only if you need/want the new features.

-Andrew

 

[aaronw1986]

I think I've actually decided on the Nikon D40. It fits the best in my hands, and I eliminated the Olympus.

 

[Westside guy]

I think I've actually decided on the Nikon D40. It fits the best in my hands, and I eliminated the Olympus.

D40 is another nice camera - I bet you'll have lots of fun with it.

 

[aaronw1986]

D40 is another nice camera - I bet you'll have lots of fun with it.

Thanks, I sure hope so. I got the amazon deal with the 55-200 VR lens in addition to the standard kit. I'm still slightly concerned with only having 6 megapixels, but this should suffice to see if I really get into it.

 

[connaught60]

6MP Good in Many WAys

Hi, Aaronw1986. I was considering Nikon D40/x previously, and I actually preferred the 6 megapixel D40 to the D40x. I found the Nikon too big compared to my nice and small old film SLR, so will probably be getting an E-420. The only advantage to the 10 MP is for enlargements. But the 6 MP will have much less noise, and a much greater dynamic range than the 10 MP cameras, because each pixel (actually photosite) is almost twice as large.
So, you will get beautiful, beautiful images from the 6 PM versus the 10 MP. You are buying the artist's camera w/ better colours, tones, dynamic range (eg. when you have both bright sky and dark shadows, the shadows won't be as dark or the sky won't be so over-exposed), and much less noise. That's why the D40 only starts at ISO 200, because the noise is so much less that you don't need ISO 100. I also heard that the dynamic range was the best at ISO 200 for most cameras.
They went with 6 MP for a reason! They only came out with the 10 MP to satisfy all the consumers that buy based on the idea that more MP is better. Notice they still kept the D40 around for sale and didn't discontinue it. Many people must have preferred it, even disregarding the cheaper price.
So, enjoy those 6MP of high quality, extra large photosites!

 

[Westside guy]

Thanks, I sure hope so. I got the amazon deal with the 55-200 VR lens in addition to the standard kit. I'm still slightly concerned with only having 6 megapixels, but this should suffice to see if I really get into it.

I'm not convinced that most of us - myself included - really understand what 6 megapixels of resolution (or 8, or 10, or ...) actually means. We think in terms of chopping a picture into that many pieces; but really (as I've said before) that's only valid if the sensor's photosite size is the true limiting factor on a given picture's resolution. There are many other factors that affect what the true resolution of an image is - diffraction, camera shake, lens resolution, vibration due to the shutter, etc.

FWIW while I'm no great shakes as a photographer, I am still happily shooting with a 6 megapixel D70. I do plan to upgrade at some point (might even be to the D300), but that decision will be less about sensor resolution and more about other features - getting a better viewfinder, lower noise in high ISO photos, and so on.