Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)
Interested in hearing the Pro's & Con's of the Olympus EVOLT E-300 DSLR.
With it's 14~45mm lens, this seems like the ideal zoom for digital. Added
to that, it's claimed, "Dust Free" design, I would that this would be a very
popular DSLR. Although I don't see much about it. Is it because it doesn't
look like an SLR, that people are shying away from it? I also found it to
be quite light, for it's size, and features, only 19 ozs!
Circuit City has lowered the price to $809.99, which really makes it
tempting! Why, or why not?
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)
"Bill Crocker" <wcrocker007@comcast.net> wrote in message
news5ednYdVm8oWngDfRVn-vA@comcast.com...
> Interested in hearing the Pro's & Con's of the Olympus EVOLT E-300 DSLR.
> With it's 14~45mm lens, this seems like the ideal zoom for digital. Added
> to that, it's claimed, "Dust Free" design, I would that this would be a
> very popular DSLR. Although I don't see much about it. Is it because it
> doesn't look like an SLR, that people are shying away from it? I also
> found it to be quite light, for it's size, and features, only 19 ozs!
>
> Circuit City has lowered the price to $809.99, which really makes it
> tempting! Why, or why not?
>
> Thanks,
> Bill Crocker
>
Because, night shots aren't that great. I get alot of noise with mine when
shooting in low light conditions.
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)
On Tue, 31 May 2005 20:38:32 -0400, "Bill Crocker"
<wcrocker007@comcast.net> wrote:
>Interested in hearing the Pro's & Con's of the Olympus EVOLT E-300 DSLR.
>With it's 14~45mm lens, this seems like the ideal zoom for digital. Added
>to that, it's claimed, "Dust Free" design, I would that this would be a very
>popular DSLR. Although I don't see much about it. Is it because it doesn't
>look like an SLR, that people are shying away from it? I also found it to
>be quite light, for it's size, and features, only 19 ozs!
>
>Circuit City has lowered the price to $809.99, which really makes it
>tempting! Why, or why not?
>
>Thanks,
>Bill Crocker
$645 from Buydig.com.
If you've been following the threads,
you should know the pros and cons by now.
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)
>Bill Crocker writes ...
>
>Interested in hearing the Pro's & Con's of the Olympus EVOLT E-300
>DSLR.
There's a 500 post thread on this NG where the merits and demerits of
this camera and the entire Oly 4/3 system are being debated. Read it
and you'll see the pros and cons, it's hardly worth re-starting the
arguments again.
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)
Turbo1010 wrote:
> "Bill Crocker" <wcrocker007@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news5ednYdVm8oWngDfRVn-vA@comcast.com...
>> Interested in hearing the Pro's & Con's of the Olympus EVOLT E-300
>> DSLR. With it's 14~45mm lens, this seems like the ideal zoom for
>> digital. Added to that, it's claimed, "Dust Free" design, I would
>> that this would be a very popular DSLR. Although I don't see much
>> about it. Is it because it doesn't look like an SLR, that people
>> are shying away from it? I also found it to be quite light, for
>> it's size, and features, only 19 ozs! Circuit City has lowered the
>> price to $809.99, which really makes it
>> tempting! Why, or why not?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Bill Crocker
>>
> Because, night shots aren't that great. I get alot of noise with
> mine when shooting in low light conditions.
Do you stick with the lower ISO values? Use any dark-frame subtraction
facility?
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)
In article <d7j646$scr$1@madmax.keyway.net>, Turbo1010 says...
>
> Because, night shots aren't that great. I get alot of noise with mine when
> shooting in low light conditions.
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)
"Bill Crocker" <wcrocker007@comcast.net> wrote in message
news5ednYdVm8oWngDfRVn-vA@comcast.com...
> Interested in hearing the Pro's & Con's of the Olympus EVOLT E-300 DSLR.
> With it's 14~45mm lens, this seems like the ideal zoom for digital. Added
> to that, it's claimed, "Dust Free" design, I would that this would be a
very
> popular DSLR. Although I don't see much about it. Is it because it
doesn't
> look like an SLR, that people are shying away from it? I also found it to
> be quite light, for it's size, and features, only 19 ozs!
>
> Circuit City has lowered the price to $809.99, which really makes it
> tempting! Why, or why not?
>
> Thanks,
> Bill Crocker
>
>
It is a nice camera, but like it's bigger brother, the E1, noisy above ISO
400.
The Zuiko 14-54 is ED glass, the 14-45 is a kit lens. Remember, in terms
of 35mm FOV optics, they are comparable to 28-108mm and 28 - 90mm,
respectively.
I shoot weddings with the E1, and it is a great camera in many ways, though
I rarely go over ISO 400. The dust thingie works.
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)
Dust free thing is really great. Not a speck so far,and I do some
construction site photography. I have a bunch of prime lenses in
addition to the kit lens (very sharp and clean) and am always changing
-- the camera loves my old Pentax K lenses. This, for me, was a major
reason for buying (though as a long time Oly user I have flash units,
batteries, etc. that work with it).
My only problem with the camera, a slight one, is a quirky exposure
system that can underexpose scenes in which there is a relatively small
bit of extreme brightness (like a headlight)in the EVS mode (this being
a bit more noticable than on my other Olys, and a bit more
unpredictable than normal backlighting situation). One has to pay close
attention or do some bracketing. I also find it necessary to increase
flash output in most situations -- a problem with other dslr's I think.
There is also a very, very slight magenta cast to outdoor greens --
easily fixed in post processing if one notices.
Otherwise, I am very happy with the camera. It is rugged and the
'notorious' noise problems are really pretty minor and, if noticable,
pretty easily fixed. I just did some art gallery and interior
decorating work at 400-1600 ISO and only had to noise reduce a couple
of shots. Oh, and I think this is useful, the Oly compression
algorithms seem such that one can get really fine results in the HQ
mode. I've done a lot of pattern and other testing to confirm this --
on the E-300 as well as on my Oly 5060. Of course, for those really
critical shots you might want to use raw or SHQ, but for heavy travel,
etc. this can be be a great help. Go for it!
You are about to answer a thread that has been inactive for more than 6 months. If you still wish to proceed, please ensure that your posting is original and does not duplicate or overlap any prior responses to this thread.