[shoplink 17163]
[/shoplink]
According to the very reputable german website Fotomagazin.de the [shoplink 17163]Olympus E-5[/shoplink] is the third best DSLR camera ever tested! It’s only behind the much more expensive Canon EOS 1D Mark IV
Reminder: The Olympus E-5 is finally in Stock at Amazon (Click here)
86 Responses
i think they rather tested the 12-60… the other cameras were tested with their crappy kit-zooms
That’s probably right. 🙂
I didn’t know Canon and Nikon bodies in the 3-7 thousand dollar price range came with crappy kit lenses. Guess you learn something new every day. 🙂
Ha, ha. Nicely done alien. Nicely done.
Too bad I don’t read Deutsche, but I really wanna know what’s the criteria they are using to judge whether a camera is good or bad, and how E-5 superior to others. Weatherproof/rigid body? Relatively light weight? SWD superb AF focusing speed? Where is Nikon D7000 and Pentax K-5?
All the way down in the ranking… I am not convinced by a chart and mere numbers either…
They rate E-5 as about equal with D3S in image quality, and D3S below 1D Mk IV. It seems pretty clear that they don’t take high iso performance and dynamic range into account. Probably not resolution either. I expect E-5 to be a pretty nice camera, but I’d wait for a real review before buying.
I wouldn’t be surprised if the E-5 has a wonderful optical resolution (details seen on a picture, not pixel count). Most sensor resolutions are completely destroyed by AA filters, and Olympus said they worked specifically on that for the E-5. So the E-5 with a very optimized AA filter could be equivalent to a 16 with a thicker AA (provided the optics are not limiting, but Zuiko’s shouldn’t be a problem). Also, keep in mind that 12 to 16 MP is only a 14% increase in linear resolution …
Deciphered from a mixture of Google Translate and Yahoo! Babelfish, I think it gives more or less: image quality (50%), speed (20%), features (20%) and ergonomics (10%).
Yeeeeaahhh….
The Olympus E-5 is about equal to a FF Nikon D3s, and better than a 1D MkIII..
Time to sell the Porsche so I can get one of those newfangled Ford Fiesta’s!!!
You analogy would be better suited to selling a Nissan Maxima to drive an Altima.
To bring it in line with your Porche/Fiesta comparison, you’d have to replace the E-5 with an E-420 and the Canon 1D MkIII with a Hasselblad H3D.
Oh wait, the Hassy doesn’t have good high-ISO performance, so it must be an overpriced piece of garbage, right?
The Hassy a Porsche? LOL! An expensive pick-up truck at best, because all it gives you is more cargo capacity (that’s it, pixels). Canon’s and Nikon’s top of the line are the Porsches and Ferraris of photography giving you top performance, speeds and handling. They even match or exceed the Hassys in DR (the D3x for example) and shallower DOF (most Medium Format DSLRs have ‘cropped’ sensors anyway and lenses are really slow, unable to match a f/1.2 85mm lens on a 35mm DSLR). Shotting speeds from 5 fps (D3X) to 10 or 11 fps (D3S, 1D MKIV), a wider selection of lenses (from T/S to super telephotos to extreme wide angle lenses including dozens of fast stabilized zooms) and don’t get me started about noise! yeah, a Porsche.
“According to the very reputable german website Fotomagazin.de”
ehm… im from germany and this magazin is as reputable as BILDZEITUNG in my opinion.
And for uninitiated, Bild Zeitund @ http://bild.de/ is a tabloid, generally specializing on sensationalism.
Further discussion on the topic (in German): http://www.fotocommunity.de/forum/read.php?f=1&i=649833&t=649833
Lenses used for the test, from a person who actually has bought the magazine:
Oly: 50mm Makro (Zuiko)
Canon: EF 50mm Makro F2.5
Nikon: AF-S 60mm Makro F2.8
And tested were the OOC JPEG, not RAWs. Other readers also chime in saying that the fM is tabloid of a sort.
I have read the original test in the “analog” magazine. As the sections for the individual camera bodies is quite short, there is not much evidence how the test result is supported, thus the results aren’t as well documented as with dpreview. So the results can be judged as any results from today’s magazines. However, as Olympus is not a major advertiser, I assume that the tests have a real backing. It is a good indication that the E-5 works as advertized, perhaps with disadvantages at high-ISO. If the results can be confirmed by other reviewers, I think the E-5 would be much more attractive than the Canon and Nikon first class models to many potential buyers.
The main problem is Olympus’ public relation desaster at Photokina so that today nobody knows where Olympus is heading to. They nearly finished off 4/3 and give no clue (i.e. at least some prototypes) where m4/3 is developing. If they don’t spend development in 4/3, the narrowish PEN concept would not be enough. I hope that Olympus will show pretty soon what they gonna offer in the future.
As a previous Oly E-510/E-30 owner (with 12-60mm SWD and some other 4/3 lenses), I would say 4/3 is wonderful at sunny day/outdoor. However, photo shooting isn’t just that, you pay your hard earn money and wanna have an all rounder, even sacrifice some IQ to trade off for low light/indoor environment performance, obviously Oly E-system won’t able to satisfy.
Compare to Nikon D3s/Canon EOS 1D MkIV, or even Nikon D700/D300s/Canon EOS 7D, there’s no way E-5 can beat the ISO performance and continuous AF shooting, not marginal, but huge difference. I’m wondering how sincere the magazine is.
Ironically, first person who told me that flash is a must for low light indoor was a Canon die hard.
olympus is not a major advertiser?
source for that claim?
when i look into shutterbug, amateur photographer, what digital camera, digital camera world etc. i come to a different conclusion.
I’m not sure how accurate this rating is, but I’m definitely glad they ranked it above the Canon 5D MK II and 7D – two grossly overpriced cameras.
I think the poster meant in the magazine in question.
you buy into a DSLR system.
CANON & NIKON have a way better overall systems then olympus.
i like olympus DSLR … but i would not buy one because the system behind canon and nikon is so much better.
i can fly all over the world and will find canon gear (im a canon shooter) to buy or rent.
Yes, everyone shoots Canon, we know…. And not all of us need hundreds of different lenses, especially considering many of the Olympus lenses are class leading. Face it, Oly lenses, for the most part, out resolve most of the Canon lenses. It can be frustrating that you cannot rent Olympus gear, except for at a handful of places, however, I carry back-up equipment, so if one piece fails, I have others without needing to go rent something in a pinch.
> i like olympus DSLR … but i would not buy one because the system behind canon and nikon is so much better.
I knew 43 disadvantages in advance. I decided on Oly after two weeks reading Canikon lens reviews, hoping to find some decent standard zoom. But then I gave up, and bought something where I do not have to pick one/two out of: slow AF, vignetting, loss of detail on edges, sell your home.
For a hobbyist, with proper marketing, 43 from Oly is a great system. But marketing as we all know well isn’t a /strong/ point of Oly.
Being German and this test still causing a he*ll of a stir over at our Canikon Fanboys, I’ll give you a few more details:
The test was: 60D vs D7000 vs E5
Rating:
D7000 = 80% (Very good)
60D = 80% (Very Good)
E-5 = 84% (Super)
Details:
DSLR: Image Quality(50%) – Speed(20%) – Features(20%) – Usability(10%) – Rating
Olympus E-5 81% 79% 94% 85% 84%
Nikon D700 81% 73% 86% 85% 81%
Canon EOS 60D 80% 74% 82% 85% 80%
File Format: JPG
Pro E5:
Speed
Features
Resolution(even with only 12MP more detail)
Noise at ISO 100
About as Good in Noise up to 1600
Lenses used:
Canon: EF 2,5/50mm Macro
Nikon: AF-S 2,8/60mm Macro
Olympus: ZD 2,0/50mm Macro.
Links (German)
http://www.dslr-forum.de/showthread.php?t=775116
http://www.fotocommunity.de/forum/read.php?f=1&i=649833&t=649833
B
F*@k the system!
>Canon 5D MK II and 7D – two grossly overpriced cameras.
an i thinbk the E5 is overprized.
The Olympus may be a few hundred dollars overpriced, but how in the world does the 7D justify its price? I mean the D7000 is $1200, so why would the 7D not be the same? And if you tell me that the 7D has excellent video, I’ll tell you to buy a GH1, GH2 for video, or a D7000 for both, and if you want to use Oly lenses, then obviously go with the E-5.
I just don’t see where the Canon 7D fits in anywhere.
My next purchase will be an Olympus E-5 and an 11-22mm wide angle lens. Then I might start looking at a GH1 or GH2 to make short web videos with. Although, the 720p on the E-5 may be sufficient for my needs, in which case I’ll just stick with that. And I’ve used both AVCHD and Motion JPEG – I actually prefer the Motion JEPG – because I never shoot more than 7 minutes of video at once and it loads much easier…
canon 7D is 1140 euros.. how much is that in $ today?
something like $200,000 USD haha. You can pick up a new 7D body now for ~$1,350 USD.
It seems that some people still think that the E-5 is not able to perform and also not do not have an open mind for thought.
and it seems that some wannabe nazis are zensoring comments here when it does not fit their ideas….
60D ~ 930,- / D700 ~ 1040,- / E-5 ~ 1700
the e-5 cost a lot more so it HAS to be good…. what a suprise.
Actually, I think 4/3rds has a better system if you look at the lenses. You need a few lenses to cover the whole range from 18mm – 600mm (35mm format) and with 2 extenders you can go all the way to 1200mm.
All these lenses are as good as it gets optically. Yes I know CaNikon have more primes and more lenses in the system and you can buy them anywhere in the world. But be honest and recognize the 4/3rds also has many strengsts and is a good system for many shooting situations.
With e5 Olympus released a fantastic camera (no matter what ranking in the test results)
I agree. The Olympus lenses are superior, as our the out of camera JPEGS, and to many of us, that is important.
If I’m publishing almost all my photos on the web only, and I want really high quality images, do I really need to pay for a 5D MK II or a D3? I don’t think so, as the Olympus DSLRs are sufficient, especially with the introduction of the new flagship pro E-5 model.
yeah 43 is the choice of the pros… lol.
those who say that Oly dont have a good system probably havent tried them. they just look at the number of lenses, mm’s, f-stops and think how can Oly compare to that.
but people dont realize that Oly has a very FUNCTIONAL system. you only need a few lenses that cover a pretty good range. F2.0 lenses that are usable, magnifiers that still keep the image sharp and detailed and just one one flash (FL-50R) that works good and all of them relatively affordable.
Congratulations to Olympus!
They did a very good job with the Olympus E-5! (stills, not video)
I will put this out here on the video. I am not experienced in video and make not claim to it. I filmed a sample and showed my video production friend. He was very impressed with the video quality and says that even at 720p, it is on par with any other footage from a dslr (minus maybe ff) that he has seen.
http://kjsdesign.smugmug.com/Video/test/
all manual focus, so I appologize for my focusing skills.
Dear KJS!
Thank you very much for your video-sample with the E-5. The video quality at 720p is indeed really impressive. But it would be outstanding in AVCHD (Full-HD-video 1920×1080 without “codec-driven” time limitation).
An Olympus E-5s-avchd would be a nice upgrade for 2011.
Best regards
Paulus
My pleasure Paulus,
I think for me it will be just fine. If I could ask for one thing, it would be the ability to zoom in for fine tuning the focus while recording, as nice of screen as it has, it’s tough to get it right! 🙂 I’m interested in what Oly has in store for the future.
for web… well im a pro and i don´t shoot for the web.
spoken like a true pro, nothing goes on the web, what is the web anyways?
Pros use capitalization and punctuation. (They also use the web quite often.)
I received my e-5 a few days ago. In all honesty, It’s an incredible camera. Enough that someone would switch systems? probably not, but definitely an investment for current 4/3 users. Its a massive step up from the e-5xx and anyone considering upgrading should. I am not disappointed that I paid the money one bit nor am I wishing that I considered any of the competition.
Canon makes a great camera, Nikon makes a great camera. Pick what works for you! Obviously if you are shooting sports where there isn’t sufficient light, Oly may not be your choice, but if you are shooting portraits, I don’t think there are better cameras at this price point.
Well said, I mostly shoot macros, portraits and landscapes – all non-moving objects for the most part, and the Olympus system is fine with me, plus the savings over the other systems is very important to me…. That said, I have shot some fast moving scenes before, and the Oly E-620 has done quite well. Cannot wait to get the E-5.
I have 50mm f2.0 macro, 25mm f1.4 Pana/Leica and will probably be adding the 11-22 mm very soon (although I’m considering the 12-60mm too). I don’t see the need to pay $200 more for the 12-60, when I’ll probably be mostly using the wide angle anyways. They both have equal f2.8-3.5 ranges.
I will probably add a telephoto down the road as well, more for fun that anything else….
Do you have any samples of the E-5 quality to share?
unfortunately, i’ve had very little time to experiment, and the lenses I have don’t really do it justice 🙁 early on, i purchased some sigma lenses, I can say though, the AF is really fast, even in low light compared to the 510.
I really cannot wait for raw support…
I just uploaded this… I will try to continue to add pictures to this album 🙂
http://kjsdesign.smugmug.com/Photography/OlympusE-5/14671108_jZKLC#1092126650_E6YWk
better work on your skills. or a better camera is wasted on you.
why don’t you make yourself useful and suggest something instead of telling me I’m bad.
Nice, I’ll take a look at this and wait for updates…
I just uploaded a few higher iso shots of a Zumba class, Fast paced, without much light… tough shooting! =) still getting the hang of this camera, I’m slow at adjusting the settings.
If there is something in particular that you’re curious about, I can try to do it, just let me know 🙂
@KLS – not really, I’m already convinced on this camera, just like to look at samples until I end up getting one!
Haha, ok, You will not be disappointed! I’m looking forward to using this camera to expand my skills =)
I have been shooting with my E-5 for a couple weeks now and i love it. I sold my 5Dll in order to get it and so far I am glad I did. Yes the canon shoots better video (so what) and yes the shallow dof was nice on occasion but for day to day shooting the olympus blows it away on color. The files on the canon were too big and I always had to fix the color in Lightroom.
It’s funny, but by leaving Canon and switching to Olympus, you’ve upgraded in so many ways…
Yeah, it’s a tabloid , not to be trusted, its got a Canon top and a Nikon second. Oh the irony!
make an lightroom preset you like for the 5D MK2 and that´s it… i don´t see a reason why color should be an issue for raw shooter.
and if you shoot JPG then quality is none of your concern anyway… 😀
@Jesus- Well is you were really the pro you say you are, wouldn’t use something more powerful than the completely overhyped MKII. At least a D3 or something better, you seem more like a semi-pro.
Actually, your right. If you shoot Olympus JPEG you should not be concerned with quality. It’ll be great out the box. No need to mess with RAW files to make your shots look good.
Alot of “RAW shooters” simply like to talk smack and spend hours in front of a computer. While RAW is good for certain critical shots, if your camera can deliver superb JPEGs your just wasting your time. Time that could be spend taking photos.
you can spend a few minutes/hours on your raw files, and then another Oly shooter has already submitted his pics to the client. do you think the client can tell the difference? sometimes being the quickest matters hehe
Lol, but those cameras are $5-6k, I would hardly consider that an insult to Oly, IMO that’s quite an achievement! 🙂
sorry,.. @ Paul
” there’s no way E-5 can beat the ISO performance and continuous AF shooting, not marginal, but huge difference. I’m wondering how sincere the magazine is.”
If HIGH ISO is everything you think IQ is, then yes all power to FF canikon. But then i supose you have no life.
What are canon and nikon missing that Olympus has to mark it 8-10 points higher in features?
IN body stabilisation
ss sensor cleaning
articulated lcd
….
Real weather resistance, including a complete range of lenses that share that same quality that are clearly advertised and sold as WR.
There are ALOT of these sealed lenses which makes for a tough SYSTEM, not a bullet point in a brochure.
@Clark – Well I do like Nikon, but in regards to Canon, they are like the Honda of photography, very popular and very reliable. They just have no class and the quality is just what is needed to keep the cameras from falling apart, nothing less, nothing more. So many people have Canon, so Olympus products are more rare as well.
Whatever the specific reasoning, I think most people here will agree with the results. The people who don’t clearly, should go someone else.
Can’t say anything about Nikon, as I like Nikon’s product somewhat except for the price. But I agree with your comment about Canon. It’s like Civic…, the camera for everyone. They can be good for certain purpose, but my purpose is IQ performance….
I’ve recently read a review on Canon’s 50mmL f1.2 review (yes, their venerable L-line lens). I don’t think I would like that lens. First of all, both of my lenses that cover 50mm focal length are sharper than that! I can only imagine Zuiko 50mm f2 is even better. Not only that, at f1.2 it is unusable…. It’s not sharp unless you stop it down to f2. So why not call it a f2.0 lens? Oh I get it, it’s for marketing purpose. :-p Not only that, its light spheres in the bokeh is not perfectly round! It’s sold for $1,360 on Amazon now…. Not exactly a Honda price tag. Oh well…. People who want to jump ship, hand your SHG lenses over to me. Canon loves you.
While I agree that 50mm is one of Canon’s weakest FLs, your comparison is not entirely valid. Yes the 50/1.8 II is cheap and nasty with a nasty 5-blade aperture producing fugly highlights. The 50/1.4 has nice(r) bokeh but is rather soft unless stopped down and of course the 50/1.2L is only sharp at the center when wide open and has a nasty bokeh transition area, not to mention being very big and expensive. However, it does sharpen up significantly when stopped down, so I don’t see the softness wide open as an issue – if you’re shooting ultra shallow DOF at f/1.2, you probably don’t care about border softness.
Oly doesn’t really have an analog at the equivalent focal length. Their 25/2.8 is over 1 stop slower than the 50/1.8. Panasonic’s 25/1.4 is *very* nice but is $900 and hard to find (worth the money though and yes, it’s sharp wide open).
If you’re seriously looking the Oly 50/2 macro, it’s more comparable to either of the Canon 100/2.8 macros, both of which have superior magnification (1:1 compared to 1:2) and focus a hell of a lot faster than the glacial movement of the Oly. The Zuiko is damn sharp, though, and as long as you’re not restricted by the slow AF, is still a fine lens. As to why anyone would care about AF on a macro lens, I need only say: portraits and insects. It’s even more critical on 4/3 because the 50/2 is the closest thing Oly has to a portrait prime, more’s the pity. Whereas a Canon user has the excellent value 85/1.8, the stellar 85/1.2L and can use either of the two 100/2.8s or the 70-200/2.8L in a pinch.
Your comparison is flawed because you compared an orange to an apple. 50mm on 4/3 != 50mm on FF.
Yes, 50mm on 4/3 is not the same as 50mm on FF. Though what I saw is a series of photos showing the behavior of aperture as it stops down. F2.0 is the first usable aperture of 50mm f1.2 L lens. I don’t mean it’s just softer at f1.2, but literally, unusable. Even Zuiko 50mm f2 is not as sharp as when it’s f2.8. It’s expected. However, on Canon, anything below f2.0 gets a major dip in quality as if it’s not from the same lens…. Maybe the person shot it can’t distinguish out of focus and softness? Maybe he used AF for testing…. AF is usually unreliable with large aperture.
Canon 50mm f1.4 is okay. Depends on which website you read, it might even come out ahead of 50mm f1.2 L. The bokeh, from what I saw, is not as good as f1.2, but fairly close (still shows strong angular light spheres), and with the price tag, I think one’s better off with 50mm f1.4. The image quality difference is not worth the extra $1,000.
Unfortunately, no exact equivalent lenses between two formats…. Canon 85mm is a bit longer than Zuiko 50mm, and that is in turn longer than Canon 50mm even on a Canon APS-C’s 1.6x crop. But even though the crop factors affect the final coverage, the design of the lens is similar with the same focal length grouping. Both 50mm glasses are more similar in design than let’s say, a 25mm lens. You can put the Canon 50mm f1.2 L on E-5 with an adapter, you know.
AF performance on Zuiko 50mm f2 is not very fast (though many articles say it does lock accurately). I can attest that. I used it briefly. It should be used as a MF lens because it hunts too much. Though I don’t have enough experience to tell you how accurate it is. It looks fine, but you need to pixel peep to test the fine focus accuracy.
I only compared them that way because the magazine mentioned in this thread compared 50mm f2 on an E-5 with 50mm f2.5 macro on Canon 1D, and Nikon’s equivalent. They’re not the same, but that’s how that magazine compared them, so I wrote the previous post as a response. But shouldn’t a flagship lens on a flagship FF gives better performance than a mid grade (Olympus’s High Grade, but it sits below Super High Grade) on a smaller sensor flagship camera? What does that tell you about the quality of the lenses?
A faster, more expensive lens isn’t always superior to a cheaper, less expensive lens, even one from the same stable. That’s because different design considerations and compromises have to go into designing a lens with a fast aperture.
I’m not defending the 50/1.2L, as it has known weaknesses (said softness in the corners). In fact, the older 50/1.1 was even worse! Rather than thinking of it as a flagship lens, it is better to think of it as a specialty lens – one that sacrifices certain IQ parameters for light gathering ability. Pros who buy one know what concessions they are making when they buy it, and most of them (I’d say 95%+) will probably have a second normal prime, say, a Zeiss Planar 50/1.4 or Sigma EX DG 50/1.4 that they will use instead as the occassion requires.
Just to reiterate, a lens that is more expensive isn’t always better in every way than its lesser relatives. As in life, everything is a compromise, and while faster lens = more glass = more expensive = lower volume = even more expensive, don’t expect it to necessarily be better/sharper/more contrasty etc. This has tripped up more than one enthusiast (and probably professional) over the years, myself included.
Correction: the old lens was the 50/1.0L, not 1.1.
Hi Voldenuit, sorry to place it here as reply button doesn’t show on your later response.
I hope you understand I’m not against you personally. It’s a correspondence I think…. Yes, more expensive is not necessarily better. And it sort of goes back to what I believe. It depends on what you need. While I love Olympus’s sharpness, for those whose top priority isn’t sharpness and detail may like other brands better.
I still don’t like Canon f1.2 L though. If it’s not meant to be the top quality lens from Canon, why does it gain the L designation? I don’t think Olympus would change the 50mm f2.0 to SHG just to jack up the price, if they don’t think it deserves the designation (which baffles me, because 50mm f2.0 fits into the criteria of SHG: prime, fixed f2.0, weather sealed, has focal distance meter and superior optical quality).
And I respect you’re behind your argument and corrected the info you previous wrote. It’s refreshing and honorable. 🙂
I am amazed at the number of people who get on a site that is clearly for 4/3 people and then want to bash 4/3rds cameras and state how superior theirs are. I personally have no interest in the other systems for one reason or another and I accordingly stay off their sites. No need to be there other than to push that I am a better photographer since I own better equipment. We all know what a bunch of hudu that is. For example there is alot more to a good camera than just it’s sensor size, thats like saying a lotus cant keep up with a corvette since the corvette has a bigger motor. That is simplifying things way too much. Have fun with your canons and nikons they are good cameras too. But don’t tell people they aren’t interested in quality if they shoot jpeg and you shoot raw, dumb elitism strikes again. It’s the final images, and that is all.
some are still in a state of shock that the E-5 doesnt turn out to be the underfeatured, overpriced camera that they expect it to be. how could the tech specs betray them?!
in the end we realized what the E-5 was about, making things work and making them better… not new gimmicks to put on tech specs.
+1
Some people like to make hyperbole and sweeping generalization. They attack on the magazine who did the review as being filled with sensationalism, yet, some people here like to argue with emotion. Constructive criticism is always welcome, but some like to boast their stuff and put down others. Not exactly constructive criticism, if you asked me.
When it comes to cameras, it depends on what you do and what you need. I know it sounds like a cliche but it’s true. Here is a good analogy. I’ve encountered a debate between Fuji Astia, Provia and Velvia (they’re films). People who likes Velvia says it gives very good color and contrasty and Astia is washed out. People who doesn’t like Velvia says it’s too saturated and too contrasty and says Astia provides the best dynamic range of all films. So what does this all mean? Go get the film you like!
Though it appears to me Astia is like Olympus. Fairly neutral color and can provide good contrast IF you shoot it in broad daylight (smaller 4/3 sensor loves light). Velvia 50 can only be shot around morning and dusk or you’ll get overblown highlight. Provia people must be thinking why I’m being dragged into this…. Why can’t people just get along! (sobs)
Anyways…, that means Olympus is a daylight camera. Don’t use your traditional photography shooting techniques, which says you must shoot things around early morning or dusk to get color and detail. That’s for 35mm or larger format. Olympus’s sensor is smaller, so it needs more light. I tested, my best photos have good amount of details when there is plenty of light. If you shoot it around early morning or dusk you’d suffer from smudgy detail and dull color. To get best result, shoot a scene with plenty of sun light (but not back lit!), but shoot it from a shaded area to dodge from stray lights.
So if you shoot photos in late afternoon like I do, Olympus probably is your camera. 🙂 It all comes down to needs.
@Brian, you must be shooting RAW right? It’s like your shoes, which is EVERYTHING people judge you by…. (leering at Brian’s shoes) Just kidding. :-p
Funny you brought up Lotus. I heard Lotus used Toyota Tercel engine. People who actually remember Tercel know it’s like Yaris of yesteryear, the lowest end of Toyota cars. But it’s a sport-tuned turbo engine of that engine, so the horsepower is totally different (it’s also used in Supra, Toyota’s Grand Turismo sports car). So that’s kinda like people’s reaction when they think how could E-5 use the E-PL1 sensor! Come on, folks. It’s a sport-tuned E-PL1 sensor! 😀
Well, I still think the sensor sucks. Don’t get me wrong, I love Olympus and their cameras (used an Ep1 and an E30, but the DR is awful to what we are seeing nowadays in other brands. I would really like to see something better there as both the E-5 and the light m43 are great companions for outdoor photography.
Yes, DR certainly could be improved. Though I’ve learned how to overcome DR issues now (most of the time). Meter the scene manually under extreme lighting situation can avoid most of the overblown highlight issue. Keep in mind a digital sensor behaves more like slides, and less like negatives and use Zone System for slide that negative method.
Use I usually use center average meter system, so if you use automatic metering, point to the white part and press and hold AEL, point back to the part of the scene you want to focus to get the proper exposure. Use custom white balance also help with exposure. When the scene is too warm, it tends to look like it’s underexposed.
at getdpi.com 4/3 thread somebody compared e5 to d700. e5 wins for non-pro.
Actually it’s the 1.8 Celica GT engine, but it’s not used in the Supra. That was a 3.0 Turbo 6cyl.
But I get your point. Same engine from a consumer “Sporty Car” can be used in an amazing sports car like a Lotus and yield excellent results.
Seems like people really wanted to see a failure in the E5, but it’s turning out to be totally the opposite.
*lol* to all the trolls and haters. they seem to popped out under their stone in the woods with such news… Why do you even bother and read here when you’re interested in Canon and Nikon? Does
Such results harm your majority-complex? stuff like this happens when people start complaining after
Reading only the specsheets (remember what happened after the E-5 announcement..?
In my opinion in this case Olympus did everything right with his approach to image quality.
The place Is definitely deserved (even if they received maybe 1 or 2 or even 3 percent ‘underdog’ bonus
In my opinion, it’s a sign in the right direction, that’s what matters. That might help to rethink Olympus where
The E-system is heading in the future.
It’s an open secret that the decreasing ‘pixel pitch’ will put canon and Nikon APS-C’s
to severe problems (Fullframe can still hide behind the big sensor for a couple of years more…) But APS-C just lacks the real ‘stunning’ lenses, and if you only adapt Fullframe lenses, you lose with the crop factor and the focal length geht
‘awkwardly’ long an unusable.. and because most of their lenses cannot even resolve 8mpx in practical
use, so what is a 18mpx sensor worth when 95% of the lenses are crap? The results of the 7D have proven that it’s not
worth too much.
In contrary to APS-C the Olympus lenses are design for this one particular sensor size, and the 2x crop factor already is
Taken in to account.. you get wonderful 7-14, 14-35, 12-60 lenses 35-100 those lenses don’t
Olympus has now the best 12 mpx in the industry at lower iso (of course with less Pixel count, but the detail the E-5 resolves at lower iso’s is just incredible.. it’s crystal clear) Maybe the New Foveon Camera of Sigma will show similar performance when paired with the very best lenses. Pair the E-5 it with SHG lenses, and you
have the quality which rival Leica S2 and Leica M9 in sharpness clarity and contrast (yes I’m serious..)
and if you don’t’ believe it, you maybe should start to get your hand on one of those lenses in a store..
but be careful, Once you touched SHG Lenses there is a strong ‘glue’ effect on them..
Olympus decided to stay with both feet on the ground and get the best out of 12 mpx, and it looks like the very best! and deserves a lot of respect for its approach imo. And even if they should move to 16 or 18 mp the lenses can still
Resolve those resolutions in practical use easily.
For those who think FotoMagazin is not serious, or ‘boulevard’, they should should
read the E-3 review from 3 years ago, they are far away from being Olympus friendly.
If the review doesn’t fit somebody’s bill, it’s the magazine which is crap, if somebody’s favourite
cam gets 99% IQ rating, it’s a good magazine, what’s happening it’s completely ‘human’.. human beings defend their purchases in order to justify their decisions.
I don’t say that Foto Magazin is the most serious scientific foto press out there, but they were
not really ‘Olympus-friendly’ over the last years (rather the contrary.. look at their E-3 review, and you will understand they were extremely ‘hard’ on the E-3, but who really cares, take those review as hint in a direction.
the excellent rating from FM for the E-5 is definitely a BIG thing.. but I think ALL reviews in general should be taken with a grain of salt, in all relativity all those percentages just mean, that oly made a ‘very fine cam’, and this alone might be reason enough to continue to invest in the best digital lens system on the market, and even attract some new buyers.
50% of the Foto Magazin rating is based on the pure image quality, so forget the
Specsheet thing, there are other brands which play the ‘tick all the boxes’ game
To the max, I think I don’t need to mention any of them by names
The cheap kitzoom argument doesn’t count either, as all cameras were tested with similarly sharp macro lenses, as mentioned before so lens lens argument doensn’t count here..
btw. In another german photomag, Colorfoto, The Nikon D7000 was ‘titled’ as A STEP BACK (testers found it worse
than the D90 in about every point..which is embarrassing IMO if it should be true, but I reserve, my verdict because
the mag could be canon-biased??..) stuff like that shows us that ken rockwell gets money from Nikon to write fullmouthed about Nikon stuff, and badmouth about the competition, according to rockwell the D7000 beats the D3.. hello world?..)
The E-5 was ‘titled’ in the same colorfoto issue as A STEP FORWARD (reviewed also significantly better than the new Nikon, easily entering the charts of the Top DSLR ever built. And more and more E-5 reviews just keep coming in…
interesting that the low iso of the E-5 @ iso 100 + 200 is almost the new reference. Colorfoto chart for example says that only the ‘Fullframe’ Sony Alphas are on par with it and only @ iso 100
interesting enough that Colorfoto states that the Autofocus is around 50% faster now than on the E-3, which wasn’t bad at all either…
a read a few Nikon forums claiming the same, that the D7000 has much more aggressive NR than D90. there’s also a number of reported cases of hot pixels mostly on video mode
@cl I think you may have missunderstood me. I shoot jpeg with Olympus as they are excellent and I don’t have to waste a lot of time processing. That’s important to me. With my Sigma dp2s I always shoot raw as that camera needs it, but it has it’s rewards too.
I have had angst about the new e5 but now have decided to buy it.
Yep, many people are saving money for an expensive camera body and because of that, they are putting low cost zoom on it. The E-5 with any of the HG lenses is a pretty good package. And if you are not on tight budget you can get SHG lens series or second-hand ones which are starting to be thief affordable now. One can says why to invest in dying system, but I think, that E-System are loaded with lot of features (except HD films) and in right hands it can produce great photos for a long time.
Interesting is that a photographer who are using D3 does appreciate and understand Olympus effort and adds that the E-System can be improved with introducing more fast ZD primes which would emphasize compactness of the camera system (for example ZD 50mm f1.2 or f1.4 SWD optimized for portrait work etc).
When I see that 135 format digital cameras just make me wonder, what Olympus could make with such a big sensor together with dedicated ZD lens on it? Something awesome I guess.
I see the bash Oly people are out in force today. Why is that? Is FOX News temporary off the air?