Don't be afraid

[jerome.oneil]

I've been reading posts on DPS and other forums where users of Olympus 4/3rd are afraid to invest in their systems. Whether it's the news about the scandal in the Olympus corporate or lack of production new E system cameras that is sending the scare.

There are plenty of E system cameras available on the used market, the E-620 can still be bought new as well as the E-5. I think one thing to remember is the quality of the glass, even with the standard lenses. I've been investing in my E system cameras E-520 & E-3 by adding lenses. I just bought a used 9-18mm, and recently bought the TC-14, and the 35mm macro for which I bought used. Along with the kit lenses I also have a 70-300mm, 50mm macro, and a few OM lenses.

There aren't enough Olympus users out there, don't make it even less by your fear in investing in your E system cameras.

This strictly my opinion and I'm open to others.

Thanks for reading,
Jerome

[xinman]

Jerome,

I appreciate your opinion and thoughts on the matter. However, my thoughts are not the same. I don't have a problem with used equipment, I have some myself. I currently have multiple problems with Olympus. I love my e-620 and will continue to use it for some time. I will seriously think twice before I invest more money in Olympus though. The glass may be superior quality but that still means that you are investing in a dead-end. The price of the e-5 is very high for a hobbyist which is what I felt was the biggest user of Olympus DSLRs. The scandal does have some to do with my thoughts, although my opinion was pretty well formed prior to that news. At some point the used market will dry up. In order to purchase lenses or a new body you will need to switch brands. I purchased my e-620 a little over two years ago and it still runs great and hopefully will continue to for quite some time. When I purchased the e-620 I carefully weighed out the options and features in my budget. Olympus won, since then the company has really let me down. I don't regret my choice since my camera is such a great camera to me, however, I will make sure that the next time I need to make a large purchase like that I stick with a brand that is a little more concrete in making cameras I will want to use and can afford. I feel like Olympus has let a lot of it's users down over the past few years. I will keep an eye out on the used market for good glass at a reasonable price but once my camera goes I will start looking at Canon again. In my opinion Olympus needs to stop worrying about making the newest technology and make a solid camera with great glass like it used to. They finally gave up on the xD cards, which I saw many of people have trouble with these within a year of purchase. I also lost images from an xD card failure. I'm just not sure Olympus can turn it around at this point so I will be cautious when it comes to investing more in the brand.

That's just my 2 cents.
Dan

[ravncat]

I'm not too worried, because in terms of mirrorless sales in Japan - Olympus was on top, next to panasonic. Even if something does happen to olympus micro four thirds will live on in panasonic. I love mine as a great backup system, Though I have all the lenses I plan to get for it, 12 / 20 / 45

[jerome.oneil]

Thanks for your comments Dan and I do appreciate your view. As of yet I haven't experienced any negatives with the used equipment, I do keep my fingers crossed. I to researched before getting into DSLR, and I purchased my 520 because of cost, quality, and great glass. I've owned an OM-1 for a long time and just loved Olympus and I still do. I guess in a few years I'll see if my dedication with Olympus products has me stuck with lots of glass. Though I would assume Panasonic will still make a 4/3rds camera.

Cheers!
Jerome

[inkista]

Jerome, Panasonic is out of the four-thirds game, and is only making micro four-thirds cameras/lenses now. I think it's pretty likely that Olympus will eventually do the same. The good thing is that four-thirds lenses can be used with full function on micro four-thirds cameras, so spending money on four-thirds glass isn't a dead end. Getting a digital PEN and adapter might be an avenue to explore.

Personally, I'm curious to see what this "digital OM" (OM-D) is going to be. If it's a full-frame mirrorless (unlikely, but wouldn't it be cool?), that could put Olympus back on the map for those who want a poor man's M9, but for whom the X-Pro 1 is still too rich. But given that the rumored pricetag is $1100, I doubt it'll be full-frame (sigh).

Ravncat: I took the leap. Carpal tunnel's been making the 5Dii more and more uncomfortable for me of late. I picked up a used G3 kit. I've since picked up the 20/1.7 (fabulous lens), but I went for the Samyang 7.5/3.5 fisheye, not the 12/2. And I am definitely eyeing the 45/1.8. For now, though, I'm adapting my OM Zuiko 50/1.8 and 50/1.2, and c/y Zeiss Tessar 45/2.8. This little guy is fun.

[ravncat]

Cool, welcome to the fold.

The 12/2 is really well built, and I like it alot

The 45 1.8 is a "steal" in terms of quality, size, performance. I wanted to get the panaleica 45 macro, but don't want to invest so much. I am surprised how much I take this little kit out over my d700. I got it (the 45mm) because I was tired of manually focusing with my super short focus throw lenses (I got an unnamed nikon mount adapter)

I do love that 20mm 1.7, that was the first lens I got for my ep-1. Like the others it's software corrected, but it does provide great results. I think the 45 1.8 is giving me simmilar quality. I haven't really sat down and really judged the lenses against eachother or looked for maximum sharpness, it's been pretty fun to use.

I do hope that we get a nicer sensor down the line at some point, there has been alot of bodies since the ep-1 and gf-1, but there really hasn't been alot of sensor development Every now and then I mount it on my 300 f4 and do Lunar photos

[inkista]

Originally Posted by ravncat

Cool, welcome to the fold.

The 12/2 is really well built, and I like it alot

I can imagine. But I'm still toe-in, so the more expensive lenses are off my list, and I've met ctein and I respect his views mightily. His review of the 12/2 was simply that it was expensive for the performance you got. Then again, it's a 12/2, so it's not like it's an unambitious design. For me, chances are if I'm going to drop THAT much money on wide, I'm more likely to want the Panny 7-14. But I have to figure out if I'm going to drop that much money on a wide. In the meantime, I have a super-cheap fish that's roughly the same size as the 20/1.7, and defishing software.

The 45 1.8 is a "steal" in terms of quality, size, performance.

Pretty much seems to be the consensus view. Pretty much like the 20/1.7, it's the no-brainer. And like Ctein, I'm super-happy in the 85-135 range. I agree, too, that it's the autofocus that's going to drag me in. Adapted lenses are fine and well, but at a certain point it's just so much easier to have autofocus.

I do love that 20mm 1.7, that was the first lens I got for my ep-1. Like the others it's software corrected, but it does provide great results.

Blew me away the first time I saw 100% crop results from it. Given that Lightroom does the same software corrections that the in-camera JPEG engine does, I haven't had to look at the non-corrected images at any point, even shooting RAW.

Even the 14-42 kit lens is impressing me. Cheap feel, but decent image quality. And the tiny size just makes me happy happy happy. I love hauling multiple lenses with me and feeling like the bag is still empty. I can easily see hauling the G3 and four or five lenses around in my Retrospective 5--a bag that's full to bursting if I just shove my 5Dii/24-105, 135L and my OM 50/1.2 into it.

I do hope that we get a nicer sensor down the line at some point, there has been alot of bodies since the ep-1 and gf-1, but there really hasn't been alot of sensor development Every now and then I mount it on my 300 f4 and do Lunar photos

Grin. I tried the 135L on the G3 and it was surprisingly nice (wide open, obviously). I still haven't tried hanging the G3 off the 400/5.6L. One of the reasons I waited this long was simply to see what Nikon and Canon were going to bring to the table. But the sensor improvement was another factor (seriously. The G3's results are looking a lot like my 50D's), and the other was the price drop on used gear. I picked up the white G3 kit for $450--less than I paid for my G9 new. Given that I have an EVF and hotshoe I can use at the same time, and a flip-out LCD, I feel like I made out like a bandit.

Plus the white goes so nicely with silver lenses and matches all my outfits.

There are things about the camera that drive me absolutely nuts. But it's so fun. I've forgotten how much fun it was to travel light, and how I fell in love with the possibilities of digital cameras when I got my first powershot S30. One of the first things I did with the G3 was to shoot infrared. Because shooting infrared with a dSLR is a PITA. You can't see through the filter.

But with liveview, exposure simulation, and touchscreen focusing, shooting IR was a cakewalk.


Panasonic G3, 14-42 kit lens. Hoya R72. iso 160, f/8, 10s.

And for using the manual adapted lenses, the focus assist thing is just awesome. I'm wondering why my dSLR doesn't do some of these things about as much as I'm freaked by how stupid some of the Panasonic UI is. (seriously? You're going to print "shutter speed effect on" on the screen when giving me DoF simulation, and "shutter speed effect off" when you're giving me shutter speed simulation? Really?!)

For me, the only serious drawback here is that Panasonic was stupid enough to use the lens stabilization unit as the rotation sensor. So, if I'm shooting with my manual lenses or the 20/1.7, I have to manually rotate portrait images in post. I haven't had to do that since my Powershot S30. Olympus is not this dumb and gives you the bonus of in-body stabilization with all your lenses.

But, as I said. Fun.

[ravncat]

I'll have to look at his reviews and I would agree that the 12/2 is expensive for what it is, I was willing to pay the price though, as I had long budgeted for the 7-14 and not the 45. I was torn between 12/2 and 7-14 which is by all reviews excellent. I just ended up taking a year and a half to get around to it due to life things...

Eventually - I decided that I bought into the system to save on size, and I would've preferred a 10mm (I like the 84 horizontal angle). Since I handhold and the system goes with me almost all the time, that extra aperture coupled with the small size swayed me. (And the 45mm announcement meant I could buy it and the 12.) It'd be neat to have the 7-14 too, but I am not made of money.

The small system is really fun. I get to shoot like I did before I got my DSLR, and I am beginning to wonder if I would have gone DSLR had this style of camera existed in 2005. I really enjoy using the system, it's great fun. I was surprised by how much fun I have with it really. I don't use my kit much, mine is probably larger, as it's the first one to come out, I find I don't need it with the three primes. (I wonder how strong the IR filter is on the ep-1)

I had really hoped Fuji would join u4/3 but, oh well. Nikon and Canon were really slow, I think, but Nikon's offering is really pretty good, crazy fast autofocus, and good quality for the sensor it has, but I think u4/3 seems to have the right size quality balance for the concept. I also debated long and hard between ep-1 and gf-1, I ultimately decided the inbody stabilization would be better for lens compactness and adapting lenses.

Anywho - if you're ever in Japan, and come to the kyoto area, let me know - you can try out my 12, and I can show you a few fun places.

[inkista]

Originally Posted by ravncat

I'll have to look at his reviews and I would agree that the 12/2 is expensive for what it is, I was willing to pay the price though, as I had long budgeted for the 7-14 and not the 45.

Yeah. It's a tough one. The 12/2 vs. the 7-14/4 is a rough decision, but as I tend to shoot things/buildings more than people and the G3's iso 3200 ain't bad, a stabilized f/4 would work for me, and being relatively new to the joys of shooting wide, having ultra-wide and zoom just appeal to me. If I were more into environmental portraits or street shooting, the 12/2 would definitely be the lens of choice.

And 12 - 20 - 45 is a nearly perfect set of doubles, like the old days.

The small system is really fun. I get to shoot like I did before I got my DSLR, and I am beginning to wonder if I would have gone DSLR had this style of camera existed in 2005.

Ditto ditto. But it's nice to have both.

I really enjoy using the system, it's great fun. I was surprised by how much fun I have with it really. I don't use my kit much, mine is probably larger, as it's the first one to come out, I find I don't need it with the three primes. (I wonder how strong the IR filter is on the ep-1)

Once I get a 45/1.8, chances are good my kit will also be going on a shelf, but for now, it's the longest lens I have and it autofocuses, so it stays in the bag.

I had really hoped Fuji would join u4/3 but, oh well.

I think all of us were. But it make sense for them to go their own way, since they're counting on boutique-type appeal and pricing to make the X-Pro 1 work for them, and this way they can charge a premium for the lenses.

I keep hoping Canon will join micro four-thirds, but Canon and Nikon are like ostriches with their heads stuck in the sand.

Nikon and Canon were really slow, I think, but Nikon's offering is really pretty good, crazy fast autofocus, and good quality for the sensor it has, but I think u4/3 seems to have the right size quality balance for the concept.

Yes. This is also what stopped me from going with NEX, as great a system as it is, and as super-sexy as the NEX-7 looks (love the built-in EVF in the corner [rangefinder style], rather than as a viewfinder hump). The lenses are just too big to cover the larger sensor. If the appeal is for a smaller system, the lenses count as much as the bodies. The NEX handles ok, and lord knows the image quality rocks, but again, µ4/3 seems to have hit the happy medium and balance on the nose. We'll see who wins out.

I also debated long and hard between ep-1 and gf-1, I ultimately decided the inbody stabilization would be better for lens compactness and adapting lenses.

Yeah, I was absolutely convinced when I jumped, I was going to get an Oly. And then I played with them in the store, and the built-in EVF and flip-out screen of the G3 just won me over. I long for the IBIS, but the price was right on the G3. Maybe next body.

Anywho - if you're ever in Japan, and come to the kyoto area, let me know - you can try out my 12, and I can show you a few fun places.

Thanks! I don't think it's going to happen any time soon (I have this weird motion sickness disorder that keeps me grounded in my home town for now), but I appreciate the thought.