E330 or E500?

[xtremefusion]

Hi everyone,

I am taking a leap from prosumers to DSLR..Just wanted to seek some advice from all of you as to which would be the camera to purchase. Gladly appreciated for all comments that is given.

I have gone thru the specifications for both cameras and I am interested in E330. What would be the lenses to get with this camera then? Still learning loads from here but gathering advices...

[Raptor1]

Since you are already interested in the E-330, i suggest you go along with it.
As for lense, i would like to know your budget. Get an external Flash too. (FL-36 or FL-50 depending on your budget)

Lens -
14-45 + 40-150mm ??
or 11-22mm + 50-200mm ??
Optional - 35mm or 50mm Macro ??

[plastic]

If you are seriously going to get the E-330, then go for the body only, and then get the 14-54 High Grade lens first. Then build up from there. A spare battery is good too, because the E-330 can be a power guzzler.

If I were buy a E-330 system from scratch, the list (in order) would look something like this :

- E-330 Body only
- 15-54mm f2.8-3.5
- Spare battery
- 2-4GB CF card (highly recommend that you shoot in RAW)
- a nice camera bag (very important to spend that little more to get good protection)
- FL-50 flash if the built in flash is not suffice (also consider Metz Digital flashes as they are paying more attention to Olympus now)
- save for the 50-200mm if you use a lot of tele, shoot wildlife, etc.
- or go for the 7-14mm if you use a lot of wide angle
- or the coming 150mm Macro from Sigma if you like close ups and also go general wildlife.

The best thing about the Zuiko Digital lens family is that unlike Nikon & Canon that produces 70% crap lenses and call that a large selection of lenses, ALL of High Grade and Super High Grades are very good lenses, rivalling quite a number of good glass made by German optics companies like Leica and Carl Zeiss. Their entry level Standard Grades have a few good lenses too, like the 40-150, and the 35mm macro.

Click here to see a list of lenses and accessories for the Olympus cameras. Included are Sigma and Leica D lenses and comments. Quite a simple and easy read.

[xtremefusion]

Originally Posted by plastic If you are seriously going to get the E-330, then go for the body only, and then get the 14-54 High Grade lens first. Then build up from there. A spare battery is good too, because the E-330 can be a power guzzler. If I were buy a E-330 system from scratch, the list (in order) would look something like this : - E-330 Body only - 15-54mm f2.8-3.5 - Spare battery - 2-4GB CF card (highly recommend that you shoot in RAW) - a nice camera bag (very important to spend that little more to get good protection) - FL-50 flash if the built in flash is not suffice (also consider Metz Digital flashes as they are paying more attention to Olympus now) - save for the 50-200mm if you use a lot of tele, shoot wildlife, etc. - or go for the 7-14mm if you use a lot of wide angle - or the coming 150mm Macro from Sigma if you like close ups and also go general wildlife. The best thing about the Zuiko Digital lens family is that unlike Nikon & Canon that produces 70% crap lenses and call that a large selection of lenses, ALL of High Grade and Super High Grades are very good lenses, rivalling quite a number of good glass made by German optics companies like Leica and Carl Zeiss. Their entry level Standard Grades have a few good lenses too, like the 40-150, and the 35mm macro. Click here to see a list of lenses and accessories for the Olympus cameras. Included are Sigma and Leica D lenses and comments. Quite a simple and easy read.

Hey plastic & raptor1! Thanks so much for the advices ..

Yeah, I definitely would get a spare batt. + flash + macro + 15-54mm...

Secondly, I would probably save up for telephoto lens and a macro lens (since i love shooting macro alot).

thanks once again

[selamatlzh]

Personnally a dual lens kit is good for a start. Spare battery is not necessary, i hardly used my second batt though I am a season shooter.

If you want to shoot macro buy an extension tube and use it with 40-150.

http://forums.clubsnap.org/showthread.php?t=153023

[tomcat]

If considering getting the extension tube for macro, might as well spend a $100 more and get a proper and good 1:1 macro lens... the ZD 35mm macro. The workable range of the EX-25/ZD 40-150mm combo is so short and limiting and slow to focus that it can be very frustating to use for macro work.

[Pablo]

Hi,

As tomcat mentioned, the 35mm macro is a good lens to buy. "well worth the price!!!".

Personally I would choose the E-500 over the E-330.
What you basically get for the extra price of the E-330 is not worth paying for.

You are buying a DSLR not a P&S. The live view is not going to help you getting used to the difference in my opinion.

That "mere" 1 mega pixel can be usefull when you have to crop an image.

The battery life is good for the E-500 and as such, unless you are careless looking after the charge of your camera battery, one should be quite sufficient.

If I were given the extra money when I bought my E-500 so that I could have bought the E-330, I would still have bought the E-500.


Cheers

[plastic]

Pablo, if you noticed... he mentioned he like macro shooting... I think the E-330 would be a much better camera for that purpose. I find that the Live View helps load. I think it all boils down to everyone's shooting requirements. Seems like Oly is making some really good bodies based on everyone's different shooting styles and requirements. I am proud to be an Olympian... LOL.

[OlyFlyer]

If I had the money to buy E330 with everything else I have, I would also still get the E500 and buy some other stuff for the difference in price. I don't think live view is worth its price. But, if I was very much into macro I would definitly get the E330. I also take photos of flowers and insects, I did that with my old film camera also. I find it quite uncomfortable to crawl on the ground and having to look in the viewfinder with my head on the ground. Since I do not take that many macros, for me it is not worth the money.

Then, there is also the missing 1 Megapixel issue to consider. Taking a lot of macros that you later have to crop can take advantage of the 1 million extra pixels. That is, I guess the drawback of CMOS sensor, keeping the same size gives less pixels. I prefer more pixels than not having to crawl on ground some times. But still, if I did not had to crawl, maybe I would not need to crop the picture.

So, Liveview against 1 extra megapixel, well in my case the megapixel won, but really, it is up to you what you value most.

[VR Man]

I suspect the e330 would find its main following with

Underwater Photography

Street photography

P&S digicam users wanting to upgrade to a dSLR

[plastic]

Originally Posted by VR Man I suspect the e330 would find its main following with Underwater Photography Street photography P&S digicam users wanting to upgrade to a dSLR

And Macro! Definitely Macro. Even using a VA-1 Varifinder has its problems.

[OlyFlyer]

If only the design was not that ugly with the mirror swinging sideways instead of traditionally upwards maybe even I had considered it. It would probably fall on the 1 megapixel issue. I regard that as a degradation and think Oly should have come up with a solution not to degrade the resolution.

Ugly or not ugly, that's just a matter of taste, but the lack of 1 megapixel is a fact.

[tomcat]

How did this '1 megapixel' difference come about?
As far as I know, the E-500 has 8 effective megapixels (like the E-300) and the E-330 has 7.5 effective megapixels.

In any case, lesser pixels means larger per pixel size for the same sensor size, right? Maybe that's one reason why the E-330 has lower noise at high ISO speeds than the E-300 and E-500.

[OlyFlyer]

Originally Posted by tomcat How did this '1 megapixel' difference come about? As far as I know, the E-500 has 8 effective megapixels (like the E-300) and the E-330 has 7.5 effective megapixels.

Sorry, you are right, just 0.5 million pixels less.

Originally Posted by tomcat In any case, lesser pixels means larger per pixel size for the same sensor size, right? Maybe that's one reason why the E-330 has lower noise at high ISO speeds than the E-300 and E-500.

Actually, you are right about the image and pixel size issue, but I belive you are wrong about the noise. CMOS is actually technically more noise sensitive than traditional CCD, but I guess Oly managed to handle noise better in E-330 than in E-500. Also, I think the more pixels you have the more distinct noise will show in the image.

[xtremefusion]

Originally Posted by VR Man I suspect the e330 would find its main following with Underwater Photography Street photography P&S digicam users wanting to upgrade to a dSLR

Haha! Exactly what I tot so too...

[xtremefusion]

Originally Posted by OlyFlyer If I had the money to buy E330 with everything else I have, I would also still get the E500 and buy some other stuff for the difference in price. I don't think live view is worth its price. But, if I was very much into macro I would definitly get the E330. I also take photos of flowers and insects, I did that with my old film camera also. I find it quite uncomfortable to crawl on the ground and having to look in the viewfinder with my head on the ground. Since I do not take that many macros, for me it is not worth the money. Then, there is also the missing 1 Megapixel issue to consider. Taking a lot of macros that you later have to crop can take advantage of the 1 million extra pixels. That is, I guess the drawback of CMOS sensor, keeping the same size gives less pixels. I prefer more pixels than not having to crawl on ground some times. But still, if I did not had to crawl, maybe I would not need to crop the picture. So, Liveview against 1 extra megapixel, well in my case the megapixel won, but really, it is up to you what you value most.

I love taking Macro pics alot...It's like standing on one leg, or lying flat on the floor just to take a simple shot of a flower petal, i dunno...maybe different individuals have their own expectations of their own DSLR + what the camera can perform for u that kinda thing.

I'm really still a novice when it comes to DSLR but I learn and pick up as I go..AND i definitely know that DSLR IS different from using a P&S.

[xtremefusion]

Originally Posted by plastic Pablo, if you noticed... he mentioned he like macro shooting... I think the E-330 would be a much better camera for that purpose. I find that the Live View helps load. I think it all boils down to everyone's shooting requirements. Seems like Oly is making some really good bodies based on everyone's different shooting styles and requirements. I am proud to be an Olympian... LOL.

hehe I'm actually a 'her'...I dun really bother with the liveview but more of the macro aspects of this camera plus of course the sensor. =P

I think personally E500 and E330 are really good cameras but it's just the specifications that are suited for the buyer's needs right? Plus I agree that e500 can shoot macro also, i mean why not? get the lens put it on and wala! I'm not saying that e500 isn't a good camera...If E330 didn't come out, i would have gotten e500 anytime...but it's the features that are packed in e330 that I think I would be more suited for it. I'm still considering at the moment...esp when I have to pay more. Not feeling very rich at the moment...

[Hacker]

If you get the E-500, the savings you make will easily mean that you add an additional lens to your collection, e,g, 35mm.

[OlyFlyer]

Originally Posted by xtremefusion I love taking Macro pics alot...It's like standing on one leg, or lying flat on the floor just to take a simple shot of a flower petal, i dunno...maybe different individuals have their own expectations of their own DSLR + what the camera can perform for u that kinda thing. I'm really still a novice when it comes to DSLR but I learn and pick up as I go..AND i definitely know that DSLR IS different from using a P&S.

Maybe I was misunderstood. So, here is a shorter version:

If I was extremly macro interested, I would chose E-330 because of the live view. I know, that with E-500 I have to be flat on ground with my ears listening to the grass growing. Not a very comfortable position, but considering the number of macro I take, it is not worth the price. And, yes, macro is possible without live view also. It is done by many people without E-330, even in the old ages before the digital age there has been macro photographers.

[plastic]

Originally Posted by OlyFlyer And, yes, macro is possible without live view also. It is done by many people without E-330, even in the old ages before the digital age there has been macro photographers.

In those days (looking at my F2AS), there were removable prisms, waist level finders and right angle finders... Macro was EASY then! Not now!