File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
Hey /p/

I'm planning on buying a new camera soon and I narrowed it down to these 2: An Olympus E510 + Olympus 14-42 mm F/4.0-5.6 ED + 40-150mm F/4.0-5.6
And a Canon EOS 400D + Canon EF-S 18-55 mm F/3.5-5.6 II

They cost around the same: Olympus is 660 euro but I can get 100 euros back if I buy it before the end of this month and the canon is 555 euros.

They both seem awesome so I was leaning a bit more to the olympus but then I went to a museum and they had a gallery of the best nature shots of 2007 and most of the photos where taken with a Canon or a Nikon so I kinda wonder why there weren't any shots with an Olympus..

I'm planning on using my camera for black and white street photography, industrial designs and nature shots.


Tl;dr I cannot decide between an Canon 400D or an Olympus E510
>> anonymous
buy a nikon
>> Anonyfag of Borneo !bHymOqU5YY
Can you afford the IS version of the EF-S 18-55mm?
>> Anonymous
Canon if you want to LOL UPGRADE later
Olympus if you don't
>> Anonymous
As you don't seem to be into sports photography, I suggest you get the e-510. It has worse noise at high ISO and slightly inferior AF, but is otherwise superior to the 400D in all ways. I can't really understand the lolupgrade argument either; if you get 400d+kit, and would later like to upgrade to eg. a 40d, you'll still want to buy new lenses. As of such, you might as well be starting from scratch, selling off your old gear. And also consider the optics you're getting: The oly dual kit lenses are both optically excellent; the 400d kit isn't.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>118436
Er. The 40D can use the same lenses as the 400D...
>> thefamilyman !!rTVzm2BgTOa
>>118445
i think what he ment was that if your going to upgrade to a 40D, you may as well upgrade from the kit lens as well...
What he's getting at is the kit lens on the oly is pretty decent, and from what i've seen and played i agree. relative to the 400D kit lens.
>> Anonymous
>>118445
>EF-S 18-55mm

Would you really put that thing on a 40d?
>> Anonymous
>>118436
"lolupgrade" means getting better lenses for 400D, then upgrading the body, gradually getting better lenses again, etc. until you get to 5D/1D with L-class lenses. A surprising amount of first-time 350D/400D buyers are considering doing this in the future, but very few actually do.

With Olympus, you can also get better lenses and bodies later, but the choice is more limited and their only professional camera is a rather niche product.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>118448
>>118449
If I hadn't already gotten an 18-55 IS? Yes.

Though I agree with Anonyfag of Borneo. It's worth adding an extra $70 onto the price and getting the 400D + 18-55 IS rather than 18-55 II.
>> Anonymous
Olympus has image ratio of 4:3. Thats all you need to know to avoid it.
>> Anonymous
>>118456
>Hasselblad H3D has image ratio of 4:3. Thats all you need to know to avoid it.
>> Anonymous
>>118457
True, im going for leica.
>> Anonymous
>>118452
Even though he can get a better camera, better lenses, and a wider reach for less money?

>>118450
I don't really see how the e3's any more of a niche product than the 40d or d300. It costs about the same and has about the same features. They all have great bodies,though the OlyKon's slightly better in regards to seals and sturdiness (and in return cost slightly more).
>> Anonymous
>>118463wider

wider and olympus, lol
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>118468
y halo thar
>> Anonymous
>>118463
>Even though he can get a better camera, better lenses, and a wider reach for less money?
To OP: Consider the availability of Olympus lenses and accessories. In some places this stuff is hard to get or overpriced (even though cameras are being sold for cheap)

>I don't really see how the e3's any more of a niche product than the 40d or d300.
It offers superior ruggedness at some expense of image quality. So it's really worth the money only if you shoot in harsh conditions, and how many pros and amateurs actually do that? Oh, and there's a swivel screen, which again will be a deciding factor for a small minority of photographers.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>118472
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>118474
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/Olympus-E3.shtml
I've heard the E3's ergonomics are ass, too.
>> thefamilyman !!rTVzm2BgTOa
Nikon has a huge range available for me, but the catch is i cannot afford almost any of them. Does that mean Nikon is better because it has a huge line up that i can never afford?

Its nice that Canon has a huge range available also, but can OP ever afford most of them?

My advice is chose what ever camera feels comfortable to you, dont go into pixel peeping, its just waste of valuable shooting time. I still use and love my D70 to bits without any plans of upgrading even tho i'm sure the oly can outperform it.
>> Anonymous
>>118476
I swear those guys are sometimes worse than Rockwell. They admit that they weren't aware of some of A700's functions when they said its ergonomics were ass, and a paragraph later they make THE SAME mistake with the E-3.
>> Anonymous
>>118476
>I've heard the E3's ergonomics are ass, too.
You heard wrong.
>> Anonymous
>>118472

Sure.

Costs 3 times as much as comparable lenses. Thanks.
>> Anonymous
>>118481
Better than all of them, too. But still, motherfucking 1500 bucks!
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>118482
>> Anonymous
>>118492
Not as wide, not as sharp, not as fast, not as weatherproof.
>> Macheath !8b4g0BkNZg
>>118476
That article you link to says otherwise.
>> Vincent !!8LCSE0Zp1mL
>>118495
You forgot to mention 3 times cheaper.
If we want to have a wide angle unlimited funds showdown, just Add in any FX or Full Frame Canon or Nikon Body, and throw on a Sigma 12-24.
>> Anonymous
>>118478

Canon has more affordable mid range stuff than Nikon. Nikon tends to have the top end pro quality and the dirt cheap crap at the other end but with less in between. Canon fills that range out better.
>> Anonymous
>>118521
>You forgot to mention 3 times cheaper.
Are you dense? Read a couple posts above.

And for your unlimited funds showdown, I pick everyone's new favorite 14-24 Nikkor.
>> Si
>>118526

Absolute bollocks.

Nikkors have plenty of 'mid range' lenses. But what are you defining as mid range? anything that's not pro but not dirt cheap crap? So it's a price point definition?

18-70mm
24-85mm 2.8-4
24-120mm VR
The controversial 18-200 VR
70-300 VR

those just off the top of my head.
>> Anonymous
Pentax and Sony have IS built into the camera itself. Does anyone know why this would be a bad idea? If it's a good idea then why does nobody else do it yet? IS on lenses (Especially those with long focal lengths) are a must unless you have a very steady hand.
>> Anonymous
>>118581
The advantage of sensor-shift stabilization is that it works for every lens you fit on the camera.

The advantage of lens-shift is that it works better and lets them sell you expensive new lenses.

The ideal system would have sensor-shift (for older lenses) and lens-shift lenses available. But good luck on that happening.
>> Anonymous
>>118583

That already has happened. I saw someone use that to do a head-to-head test of in-body and lens stabilisation.
>> Anonymous
>>118584
I hope you have a link to that. Anyhow based on this I was thinking about getting a Pentax K100D and a Tamron 18-250mm just because I hate swapping lenses when out and about (OK for indoors and if you know what the situaiton is going to be like). Gives me a lot of options and the image quality I have seen in reviews is pretty good. Granted the wide angle end has a lot of distortion and the macro is only to 45cm but you have to compromise somewhere on such a lens.

Anyhow a link to said comparison would be great.
>> Anonymous
>>118584
Was it this one anon?

http://www.popphoto.com/cameras/4615/image-stabilization-special-stop-the-shake-lab-report-page2.htm
l
>> Anonymous
>>118584
I said "the ideal system."

Four-thirds doesn't count. (Viewfinders too crappy to manually focus, not enough prime selection, an aspect ratio most people don't prefer.) Which is a shame, because Olympus and company made a really great shove to actually use digital to make a better camera. They just messed up along the way.