Oly E-510


Status
Not open for further replies.

dnaxe

Senior Member
Oct 5, 2006
1,330
0
36
#1
E-510 + 14-42mm - $1,499 (RRP - street prices about $150 lower)
I wonder if this will negatively affect the K10D :|
 

longko

Senior Member
Sep 7, 2006
2,052
1
0
39
Balestier
#2
It's still 2x cropped right?;) The only reason I would leave K10D for E-510 is the live view:bsmilie: Live view + IS = great macro camera.

eh eh.. maybe can buy this, then go get an adapter for k mount lenses (Think got this lens)

Die lah, the more I think the more I heart itchy...
 

airconvent

Senior Member
Apr 12, 2005
4,778
0
36
#3
It's still 2x cropped right?;) The only reason I would leave K10D for E-510 is the live view:bsmilie: Live view + IS = great macro camera.

eh eh.. maybe can buy this, then go get an adapter for k mount lenses (Think got this lens)

Die lah, the more I think the more I heart itchy...
My fren was at Funan and the sales guy proved to him the noise performance of the 410 is better than the 510. Somehow when they introduced the stabilisation, ccd performance was affected. I must say though the camera is small and compact (so nice to hold in your hands!)
and weighs like the Panasonic FZ50...so light. The liveview is useful too but for the price, its better to pay lesser to get the K100D or pay a little more to get K10D although I must confess the Nikon D40x and E410/E510 does give pentax (and canon too!) a run for their money..
 

dnaxe

Senior Member
Oct 5, 2006
1,330
0
36
#4
Didn't realise the E510 would have worse ISO performance. Even the E410 is only passable (i.e. broadly equivalent to other 10mp cams)

well, I think that if I were shooting sports (or for some reason needed lots of telephoto), and if the new "high end" olympus was at least 5 fps, I would be tempted because of the glass.

Stuff like:
Zuiko Digital ED 35-100mm F2.0 -------- $3,200
Zuiko Digital ED 150mm F2.0 -------- $3,600


--

Perhaps it's just because pentax has no long fast glass :| (not that I even need any :p)

(oh. and the 300 2.8 is SGD 11K, which is. MAN.)
 

longko

Senior Member
Sep 7, 2006
2,052
1
0
39
Balestier
#5
My fren was at Funan and the sales guy proved to him the noise performance of the 410 is better than the 510. Somehow when they introduced the stabilisation, ccd performance was affected. I must say though the camera is small and compact (so nice to hold in your hands!)
and weighs like the Panasonic FZ50...so light. The liveview is useful too but for the price, its better to pay lesser to get the K100D or pay a little more to get K10D although I must confess the Nikon D40x and E410/E510 does give pentax (and canon too!) a run for their money..
Never going back to prosumer liao. Since I still have the FZ7:bsmilie: My K10D should be in or on its way to Japan, & now running around with my gf K100D;) But can consider a E410/E510 body if got good buy:bsmilie: Then mount with my Pentax lenses:sweat:
 

dnaxe

Senior Member
Oct 5, 2006
1,330
0
36
#6
Never going back to prosumer liao. Since I still have the FZ7:bsmilie: My K10D should be in or on its way to Japan, & now running around with my gf K100D;) But can consider a E410/E510 body if got good buy:bsmilie: Then mount with my Pentax lenses:sweat:
lol.

perhaps the pentax cameras this year will have live view ;)
 

night86mare

Deregistered
Aug 25, 2006
25,541
0
0
www.pbase.com
#8
2X crop factor, no go if you really think about it and want to shoot landscapes.

I just wish Pentax would get a full-frame. But unfortunately I don't think so, apparently Canon is also not going to do any more full-frame DSLRs from rumours I have heard. =(
 

Helcifer

New Member
Mar 15, 2007
23
0
0
#9
I prefer K10D than E-510. E-510 has a very small viewfinder as compared to K10D. And it is troublesome to autofocus & shoot when using its live view function.
 

longko

Senior Member
Sep 7, 2006
2,052
1
0
39
Balestier
#10
Many would prefer K10D over E510 or E410. Personally if I would get the body, it's just for the cheap trill of taking macros with live view at f11-16:bsmilie: (Of cos must get it cheap also lah)
 

creampuff

Senior Member
Jul 11, 2006
5,116
1
0
Dover
#12
I still think the 4/3 system with the 2X crop factor is the biggest limitation, no matter how good the new camera bodies may be. Wide-angles? :thumbsd:

The Oly viewfinder is puny and naturally needs the live view. Beats me how anyone can hold the camera steady if you're holding it like a P&S relying on the LCD screen. Maybe I'm a traditionalist but live view is closer to using a video cam in my book. :bsmilie:

Last but not least, unless you can predict 4D numbers every week, the price to pay for the lenses is a big disincentive. Ridiculous pricing, and the lenses aren't that small in size.
 

airconvent

Senior Member
Apr 12, 2005
4,778
0
36
#13
Both the 410 and 510 has the same ISO settings but somehow at the same ISO, the images were noiser on the 510. At least that is what my friend observed.
I was quite impressed by the low light imaging of the 410 though. He had this tissue box with a "zao zai mao" good fortune cat inside. Then he places the camera lens into the box with a little light coming from holes in the box. In the view finder, you could not see the cat at all but in live view mode, the cat was visible. He then zoomed in and using manual focus, got the image pin point sharp. The resultant image looked like it was taken in natural light. Most impressive. Problem is you need to be very stable (on tripod) and quite a few settings to adjust just to get this.....set manual, set live view, etc.
I think its main selling point is its very nice size and weight....reminds me of the istDL!

Longko : Hey...I also have the FZ7. I bought it to replace the FZ5 and get stabilised x52 (which works very well!) but of late had not had the chance to use it much. Would probably let it go before its price dropped further. :)
 

airconvent

Senior Member
Apr 12, 2005
4,778
0
36
#14
I prefer K10D than E-510. E-510 has a very small viewfinder as compared to K10D. And it is troublesome to autofocus & shoot when using its live view function.
Hi
Glad to know you are keeping your K10D :). Its a good camera really and there are now so many pentaxians to keep you company...or to be more exact, so many K10dians...;)
 

grantyale

Senior Member
Oct 4, 2004
1,798
0
36
Bedok
#15
Zuiko Digital ED 35-100mm F2.0 -------- $3,200
Zuiko Digital ED 150mm F2.0 -------- $3,600
(oh. and the 300 2.8 is SGD 11K, which is. MAN.)
It's not a 300/2.8 but a 300/4... and the 35-100/2 is a 70-200/4... Think about it... What a rip. :sweat: Had I have that kind of money, I'd rather go the other way to get EOS 5D+70-200/4.
 

VSonic06

New Member
Dec 24, 2006
806
0
0
#16
It's still 2x cropped right? The only reason I would leave K10D for E-510 is the live view:bsmilie: Live view + IS = great macro camera.

eh eh.. maybe can buy this, then go get an adapter for k mount lenses (Think got this lens)

Die lah, the more I think the more I heart itchy...
I have the K10D and have used the E-510 extensively...

1. LV is very good for macro shoots (7x, 10x 'live' image on your LCD!) for general use, turn it off. Its operation is very clunky.

2. You can get a K->4/3 adapter and use your manual K mount lenses. 50mm becomes 100mm because of the 2.0 FOV crop. Image quality is fantastic with Pentax FA glass :) Debunks all the myth about 'awesome' (also awfully expensive Oly ZD glass)

3. Ultra-wide glass on ZD is limited to the $2.6k ZD7-14mm glass for now. On the Pentax, more options of UWA glass and they're far more affordable (DA 12-24 $1.1k, Sigma 10-20 <$1k). DA* long zooms will be here soon to fill the telephoto void.

4. On the E-510 I used I'm getting NOISE BANDS (!!!!!) in low light shots with high contrast...pretty bad :(

ISO400 and 800 samples:


 

microcosm

New Member
Sep 17, 2006
10,513
10
0
#17
Didn't realise the E510 would have worse ISO performance. Even the E410 is only passable (i.e. broadly equivalent to other 10mp cams)

well, I think that if I were shooting sports (or for some reason needed lots of telephoto), and if the new "high end" olympus was at least 5 fps, I would be tempted because of the glass.

Stuff like:
Zuiko Digital ED 35-100mm F2.0 -------- $3,200
Zuiko Digital ED 150mm F2.0 -------- $3,600


--

Perhaps it's just because pentax has no long fast glass :| (not that I even need any :p)

(oh. and the 300 2.8 is SGD 11K, which is. MAN.)
I shoot editorials for a UK magazine and the E-410 has already paid for itself in one shoot.

About the Zuiko Digital lenses... yes... they are glass to die for, else ZD would not have had the reputation of being the Leica of the East. And for sports, don't forget the very very useful 90-250mm... (180-500mm 35mm equiv). That is one of the best lens that I have ever used. Just too bad that in my assignments I usually shoot handheld and the 90-250,, proved to be too heavy for hours of shooting, else I would have kept it.

The 35-100 (70-200mm) must be one of the fastest in its class. f2.0 at the widest and yet the image quality, edge to edge is unmatched. But that said, if you were to invest in the Super High Grade lens, you might want to hold on to the camera body purchase until the end of the year when the Pro body and even up to summer 2008 for the semi pro bodies to be released. They would be a better match for the Zuiko Digital Super High Grade lenses. Cheers.
 

spidey89

Moderator
Staff member
Jun 6, 2007
8,157
12
38
South Western Singapore
#18
but then,if E-510 has a worse ISO reduction in comparison with E-410,i think it makes up with it's IS,which is better since it has less noise in comparison to E-410
 

dnaxe

Senior Member
Oct 5, 2006
1,330
0
36
#19
It's not a 300/2.8 but a 300/4... and the 35-100/2 is a 70-200/4... Think about it... What a rip. :sweat: Had I have that kind of money, I'd rather go the other way to get EOS 5D+70-200/4.
Uh.

Would the aperture figures be multiplied? I believe the DOF would be less shallow, but an f/2 lens should still be f/2?
 

microcosm

New Member
Sep 17, 2006
10,513
10
0
#20
2X crop factor, no go if you really think about it and want to shoot landscapes.

I just wish Pentax would get a full-frame. But unfortunately I don't think so, apparently Canon is also not going to do any more full-frame DSLRs from rumours I have heard. =(
Trust me my friend, you really don't want a full frame sensor in your camera. You really don't want one.

It's not a 300/2.8 but a 300/4... and the 35-100/2 is a 70-200/4... Think about it... What a rip. :sweat: Had I have that kind of money, I'd rather go the other way to get EOS 5D+70-200/4.
If you have that kind of money, you will want those lenses. And by the way, it is not crop factor. And the aperture does not double. Go read up again about the things you say instead of misleading people.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom