Guest stnami Posted February 20, 2008 Share #1 Posted February 20, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) Olympus E-3 Review: 1. Introduction: Digital Photography Review Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 20, 2008 Posted February 20, 2008 Hi Guest stnami, Take a look here some idea........... Oly> Pana ?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
sdai Posted February 20, 2008 Share #2 Posted February 20, 2008 Very little resolution or dynamic range headroom in raw files Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
spylaw4 Posted February 20, 2008 Share #3 Posted February 20, 2008 Quotes: "It sits at the heart of a system that is slowly maturing into a serious competitor for the dominant players, with some superb lenses, particularly the fast zooms." "for the price the E-3 offers a compelling and highly competitive feature set, some of which (such as the tilting screen, in-body IS, SSWF dust removal, splash proof body) is unique at this level." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
martinb Posted February 20, 2008 Share #4 Posted February 20, 2008 Read some of the review, but what's more interesting was to see just how sharp RAW files from the Panasonic DMC-L10 are! Looks like they are almost up there with the M8 in sharpness and resolution. Have a look here when compared to the E-3! Olympus E-3 Review: 31. Compared to...: Digital Photography Review Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevelap Posted February 20, 2008 Share #5 Posted February 20, 2008 From the list of cons: 'Resolution not as good as best in class (stronger AA filter?) Highlight dynamic range not as good as competitors Poor auto white balance in artificial light Very little resolution or dynamic range headroom in raw files Noisier results than most competitors above ISO 400 New multi-point AF system seems easily confused Focus hunting in low light Occasional metering errors (possibly linked to AF point in multi AF mode)' Oh dear. My first slr was an Olympus OM1 (great camera, much loved) and I was really hoping that Olympus could pull something out of the hat with the E-3. This review, and others, seem to suggest that they haven't quite pulled it off though. I wonder if they might come to regret pinning their hopes on the 4/3rds system, particularly at the upper end of the market. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted February 20, 2008 Share #6 Posted February 20, 2008 Poor auto white balance in artificial light To be fair, AWB wasn’t designed to cope with artificial light. I wonder why some reviewers still insist on testing AWB with lighting well outside the range of colour temperatures it is designed to handle. The E-3 is quite a nice camera actually. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riley Posted February 20, 2008 Share #7 Posted February 20, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) i challenged Joinson with this Rriley wrote: > usual ifs and buts you wont find in Canon reviews > while 40d pros' list is padded out (some they mention twice) with features you cant live without like: > * New warning screen if CF door opened during write (no more lost images) > * New AF-ON button brings consistency of control with EOS-1D series > * Supports both EF and smaller, lighter EF-S 'digital' lenses > > meanwhile E3 gets its features bundled into 1 line > * Extensive feature set and a huge range of customization > and inversely gets its 'cons' doubled up > > # Highlight dynamic range not as good as competitors > # Some highlight clipping on bright days unless you reduce exposure > # Very little resolution or dynamic range headroom in raw files > # Some ergonomic issues (control layout, small buttons, user interface) > # Long, unstructured menus make finding some settings frustrating > > these people just cant help themselves > -- > Riley > > I'd give my right arm to be ambidextrous For one thing the two reviews you mention where written totally independently by different people... S -- Simon Joinson, dpreview.com not the most satisfying answer, then theres the DR thing while 40D is praised for its DR, # Good tonal response, dynamic range extended compared to competition, EOS 30D # Highlight tone priority option delivers even more dynamic range with very little downside E3 is condemned # Highlight dynamic range not as good as competitors (better than other E-Series cameras) he also claims E3 suffers from blown highlights, something i can say just doesnt happen in my observation #Some highlight clipping on bright days unless you reduce exposure this is P mode, no alterations direct into Australian summer sun Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted February 20, 2008 Share #8 Posted February 20, 2008 then theres the DR thingwhile 40D is praised for its DR, # Good tonal response, dynamic range extended compared to competition, EOS 30D # Highlight tone priority option delivers even more dynamic range with very little downside E3 is condemned # Highlight dynamic range not as good as competitors (better than other E-Series cameras) Apparently the dynamic range of the E-3 and EOS 40D is about the same, according to the measurements by dpreview.com, although one wouldn’t get this impression from the lists of pros and cons. The only differences (more latitude in the shadows, less in the highlights) are due to slight differences in exposure (with -1/3 EV the E-3 should yield nearly identical results to the 40D). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riley Posted February 20, 2008 Share #9 Posted February 20, 2008 Apparently the dynamic range of the E-3 and EOS 40D is about the same, according to the measurements by dpreview.com, although one wouldn’t get this impression from the lists of pros and cons. The only differences (more latitude in the shadows, less in the highlights) are due to slight differences in exposure (with -1/3 EV the E-3 should yield nearly identical results to the 40D). quite right moreover in RAW there wont be a substantial issue between E3 and 40D FWIW, there have been a lot of posts that D300 is blowing highlights without -1/3 stop EV high order consensus has it that wells sizes on 40D and E3 are now about the same Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevelap Posted February 21, 2008 Share #10 Posted February 21, 2008 To be fair, AWB wasn’t designed to cope with artificial light. I wonder why some reviewers still insist on testing AWB with lighting well outside the range of colour temperatures it is designed to handle. The E-3 is quite a nice camera actually. Agree with your point concerning WB. In the interests of fairness I sought out another E-3 review, published in the BJP (British Journal of Photography) magazine 19/26 December '07. This one was much more favourable, ie: "after testing the E-3 in terrible weather conditions, I am sure it is a viable alternative to the Nikon D300, Canon 40D or Sony Alpha 700" and "The E-3 struck me as well designed, well built and benefiting from a sensor and processing retaining more detail, even at high ISO settings, than some comparable APS-C models." Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
spylaw4 Posted February 21, 2008 Share #11 Posted February 21, 2008 I would not remotely dream of suggesting that there might be a remote possibility that the review could possibly have been coloured by the "spat' between Olympus and dpreview? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riley Posted February 22, 2008 Share #12 Posted February 22, 2008 well they claim 'no bias' in the grilling theyre getting over there jpeg DR tests are really just tone curves from the default jpeg engine, whats worse is dp choose the point to cut it off in the shadow side. You can read about the reality of dp DR tests here How To Magically Improve Your Camera's Dynamic Range of course there are other reviews, and other DR databases these guys run IMATEST, and do both jpeg and RAW DR tests Olympus E-3 Digital Camera Imatest - Review - The Imaging Resource! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gIzzE Posted February 22, 2008 Share #13 Posted February 22, 2008 I went to buy an E3 body the other day so I could use my Leica 14-50 and Summilux 25 f/1.4mm prime with it and still have the Digilux 3, as I do love the controls and feel of the Leica body. The main reason I was looking at the E3 was because alot of people had said they had sorted out the noise levels at higher isos on this camera, but I have to say I was gutted with the results in that area, they were slightly better than other four thirds cameras but it reminded me of the Canons from 8 years ago. I think the E3 is a great camera though, and the only area where it is let down is the higher iso noise levels, as for 'retaining more detail than other comparable APS-C models' I really not sure about that, but then the guy in the store did say that coming from the 20D I probably had high expectations as that camera was way ahead of just about every other brand when it comes to useable high isos and has only really been beaten by the 5D, 40D and 1ds, and of course the new Nikon D3. In every other area though it was a really nice camera, I guess it really does show that it comes down to buying what is right for you. I ended up coming away with a Nikon D300 with a 17-35mm AF-S lens and a 30mm f/1.4, last thing I ever thought I would buy to be honest as I have never been a Nikon fan, but I was seriously impressed with it to buy it there and then. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.