Originally Posted by kentuckyranger
Well, you wanted a professional photographer who uses Olympus, you got one.
I've shot with Olympus cameras and glass since 1978 so I have a very good understanding of what Olympus is all about.
I could spend most of this reply to tell you why for the last 31 Years I never changed to Nikon, Canon or any other manufacturer, but that's not going to help you here.
I do agree with you that if I had to chose another camera, it would be Canon.
Nikon is more of a consumer camera, even the high end dSLR's are in my mind, the full monty of bells and whistles to attract the rich kids, let the flaming begin... ;O)
One other thing.
If you're going to be shooting professionally and you're not shooting in RAW format, please stop reading this post and go somewhere else...
OK, that aside here we go.
First, a little lesson in 4:3.
While the other big names are going for full frame CCD's and uber large pixel counts, Olympus took a step back and asked themselves, do we really want to stay with the old school, or do we want to design a camera from the ground up.
First, the problem with full frame.
In the old days, everyone focused on getting everything they could out of their lenses, Olympus included.
They designed their cameras to take full advantage of the focal plane so you got pretty much 100% of the image the lens projected onto the film.
The drawback to this has to do with optics and distortion.
While everyone else is sticking to the old ways and most are making cameras with 35mm CCD's, Olympus took the stand that this is a new frontier and we need to rethink how we're going to do this.
That's where the 4:3 standard was born.
Why make people pay huge amounts of money for a full format lens and CCD that in the end, professionals will have to crop anyway because there's just no getting around the distortion factor at the edge of the lens.
Instead, we'll eliminate that factor all together.
Now don't ever think Olympus makes cheap glass, on the contrary.
Zuiko lenses have been the cutting edge standard in the medical industry for a very, very long time and are the benchmark that others strive to emulate.
Another big issue with camera manufacturers is the pixel war.
In all the years I've been producing images I would have never given digital imaging a second look until manufacturers got above the 3mp boundary.
The first digital camera I ever owned was a Canon Powershot and it had 3.2mp.
I wasn't about to spend huge amounts of money on a dSLR until the technology proved itself worthy.
That didn't happen until the 8mp barrier was broken.
As far as I'm concerned and I have the prints to back me up, anything between 8~10mp is perfect for pro shooting, unless you want to make huge prints or you work for an ad agency where your work will end up on a Billboard.
Of course if you do that kind of work you have to spend the money on large format landscape cameras with 24+mp costing $20k or more (Lens not included).
Allot of manufacturers of dSLR cameras are compatible with their older lenses and yes, you have to manually focus them.
After all, auto focus wasn't around back then and pro shooters had to take the time to focus like everyone else.
I read so many blogs and article where photographers want the split circle focus screen for their dSLR but I say, WHY?
As far as using old glass on a new dSLR, I have a bunch of old lenses that I take out and play with and the focusing isn't that bad, if you remember the old days.
It takes time to get it right and allot of the younger photographers don't have that memory.
I remember when I used to shoot weddings with my Oly OM-1, Gaawd what a fiasco that was.
Then when I got my OM-2s I thought I was in heaven, Aperture priority was a Godsend.
Now all I had to concentrate on was focusing, the camera took care of the rest.
The Olympus E system has the fastest auto focus I've ever seen and that means less missed shots, especially events like birthdays and weddings.
Professional photographers in this area live by word of mouth so if you miss the really cool, huggy, grab a hanky aunt flow because this shot is so beautiful kind of images, you're sunk.
Another big drawback to dSLR cameras is dust getting on the CCD.
Olympus, thinking outside the film camera box, took this into consideration as well and came up with the award winning wave cleaning system.
Every time you turn the camera on it sends a hyper sonic wave through the CCD, knocking off any dust or dirt that might have accumulated.
Many manufacturers are just now catching up to that big issue because they where so focused on big CCD's and mega pixels, they lost sight of the fact that DUH, Film isn't running through our cameras anymore and the CCD might need to be kept clean...
If you really want to spend smart money the I'd go for the E-3, I did.
After spending about 4 hours at the camera store looking at what everyone had to offer, it's the one I chose for many reasons.
Canon is a wonderful camera line but a bit pricey.
Nikon in my mind, is living off its name and that's a shame because they really used to be a big contender but I digress, I don;t want to turn your thread into an argument over who has the longer lens... ;O)
The Olympus E system is a really tough camera and the E-3 even boasts water and dust resistance and I can attest to the fact that it is very much so water and dust resistant.
This is great for weddings and birthdays because sometimes kids and adults get carried away with their beverages, as well as wedding cake.
The E system is also tough, as well as Olympus Zuiko lenses, another area where weddings can get a little physical, especially the reception...
Some have brought up the fact that it's not the camera but the photographer.
I agree that if you stink as a photographer it doesn't matter what camera you buy.
But if you're good at your craft, shouldn't you have the best tools for your trade?
It's true that I can take a point and shoot camera, well, for that matter the camera in my iPhone, and take some really cool compositions, but the quality just isn't there.
I could show up to a wedding with my iPhone and get some really cool angles but at the end of the day most would be crap in my mind because the clarity, sharpness, DOF, focus etc just wouldn't be there.
Now for the big ending, if you're still reading.
The answer to why you don't hear more out of professional photographers who use Olympus is this, satisfaction and the comfort of owning the best and not having to prove it to anyone.
Olympus doesn't need someone like Ahston Krutcher to make all the upper middle class feel special for owning that kind of camera.
Olympus relies on it's customer base, the true professional who is happy with the product and is too busy perfecting their art to be bogged down arguing Pixels and CCD size.
I'm probably the only Olympus pro user who will take this much time explaining this because we're just happy with what we have.
Why? because it works, as you'll quickly find out if you decide to go with Olympus equipment.
If you have any questions feel free to PM me.
|