Should I continue investing in Olympus?

[bughy]

Hello.
I have an Olympus E410 with 14-42mm 3.5-5.6 and 40-150mm 4.0-5.6 lens. I'm thinking in buying the Zuiko 14-54mm F2.8 - F3.5 II lens, which costs ~600$ here, in Romania, and later invest in a new Olympus camera (like E620 - ~600$) to fit the lenses i got (probably I'll sell the remaining 14-42mm with the camera to gain some money when getting a newer model).

But, I'm thinking.. does Olympus has a future? Or should I switch to Canon or Nikon? For example:
Nikon D90 with 18-55mm VR + Nikon 55-200VR is ~$1050
and with Nikon AF-S 18-105mm F/3.5-5.6G ED VR is ~$1200.

Canon 550D kit Tamron 18-200mm is ~$1200
Or Canon EOS 600D kit EF-S 18-55mm IS II, slightly more..


What do you advice me? Stick with Olympus? Or switch? I'm no pro, I'm just an enthusiast who likes to learn, that reads and watches tons of tutorials,books, reviews, articles about photography.

[inkista]

One big drawback of staying with four-thirds is that Olympus has stated they're no longer going to develop lenses for the mount. They're concentrating on micro four-thirds instead. So, as long as the lens lineup has what you need, I'd say there's no problem staying with the system. But if you think this presages the beginning of the end of Olympus making four-thirds SLRs, then maybe it is time to switch.

However, while there's Canon and Nikon, depending on what you like to shoot and how you like to shoot, you could also move to micro four-thirds and take all your lenses with you.

[bughy]

while there's Canon and Nikon, depending on what you like to shoot and how you like to shoot

There are differences in the subject of shooting between those two giants?

[inkista]

Actually, what I was talking about was what would fit using micro four-thirds, vs. using Nikon or Canon.

Micro four-thirds is, because of its newness, a more limited system in terms of lens choices and third-party accessories than a Nikon or Canon SLR system. But depending on what and how you shoot, it could cover everything you need.

In terms of Canon vs. Nikon for style and subject, not really. But there are different "niche" areas. Nikon makes a crop-body fisheye lens, Canon doesn't. Nikon makes a fast normal-on-a-crop lens designed for crop. Canon doesn't. Canon has ultrasonic focus motors in supertelephoto lenses for under $2000. Nikon doesn't. Canon makes a full-frame camera capable of HD video. Nikon doesn't (yet. Any day now). Canon has a 17mm tilt-shift. Nikon doesn't. Canon makes a 5x macro lens. Nikon doesn't. Nikon puts optical slave modes into its higher-end speedlights. Canon doesn't. There are tradeoffs and differences between the two systems, including the feel and operational UI of the cameras.

Whether or not one is better fit for you is generally going to come down to what and how you personally shoot. This isn't so much about finding the "better" system as it is finding the one that's the best fit for you. That could still be Olympus.

[bughy]

Oh.. You know a lot! You should write a blog if you don't already. Thanks for the info, really appreciate it.

[LeeR]

Check out the Four Thirds Photo site. You will find that all is not lost even though Olympus is abandoning their professional line for EVIL.

Inkista - As an Olympus shooter, I thank you for a very reasoned and unbiased assesment/discussion.

[inkista]

Hey, no worries. I shot with an OM-10 for 20+ years and my 5D2 loves the Zuiko I put on it.