Three way test: Nikon D300 vs. Sony A700 vs. Olympus E-3

[bousozoku]

What Digital Camera did a new test using three of their readers with the D300, A700, and E-3.

In the end, the E-3 didn't fare well, which was disappointing, especially with the A700 also in the test. I was a bit surprised to see that they photographed it with the 14-45mm lens, since it isn't sold that way.

I was surprised to see that one of the testers mentioned that the E-3 was too small, even though he has a Canon 300D and 20D.

Everyone thought that it was troublesome with settings and buttons and that the images were underexposed.

Seeing the Nikon D300 in first place wasn't a surprise, but seeing the E-3 in last was. I still haven't been able to handle one, but the placement of buttons, especially on the left hand side now, seems more random than with the E-1.

Any thoughts?

 

[drakon09]

I could make all three cameras look good; frankly I don't much attention to attention-seeking reviews like that. I do understand why magazines do that though; articles like those sell well.

 

[cheeseme]

Dun trust that too much, just read for reference. Probably the writer prefer Nikon personally. Or Nikon may have given a higher "benefit".

 

[Mikefellh]

I was a bit surprised to see that they photographed it with the 14-45mm lens, since it isn't sold that way.

Some reviewers will do anything to handicap Olympus so that another brand will win.

 

[olymac]

I could make all three cameras look good; frankly I don't much attention to attention-seeking reviews like that. I do understand why magazines do that though; articles like those sell well.

I actually do like articles like those because it makes one compare and contrast. It highlights the strong points as well as point out the weaker aspect of the reviewed products.

I have only experienced the D300 and the E-3. I didn't buy the E-3. I do think that the D300 is a very decent camera. Hmmmm .... wonder how the will fare in that review :dunno:

 

[bousozoku]

I found it interesting, as well as surprising. There were a lot of little issues that didn't make sense to me. The magazine article author had a similar point of view to mine.

To me, a lot of people have the warm and fuzzy feeling when they first adjust to a product, whether it's a camera, a car brand, a piece of software, et cetera. Personally, I think Canon SLRs are an ergonomic mess, but many people feel comfortable with them the first time and then, think the rest of the world is backwards to them.

The latest Olympus bodies seem more of an ergonomic mess than the E-1, especially the E-3. It's just a matter of adjusting to changes, but obviously that's more difficult for some than others.

I was surprised to see no mention of the heavy anti-aliasing on the E-3. Everyone was generally pleased with the image quality, though one mentioned that there was too much noise at ISO 200.

 

[drakon09]

Noisy at 200? The dude must've been smokin'! :bsmilie:

I personally like the images at 400 - gives a nice texture to the images not easily replicated, though ISO 100 images from the E-1 still takes the cake.

 

[headfonz]

i read the article at kinokuniya last week, the test was really just a extended hands-on rather than a detailed review. it seems like the 3 testers were just given each camera for a couple of hours to shoot with and then the feedback was taken. they may not have even been given a manual as the testers all seem to be a bit lost with each camera's menu.

i find it strange since these are semi-pro or pro models and user customisation and understanding of the functions is required before a decent assessment can be carried out.

 

[Oly5050]

hmmm...cannot find the article. can someone give me a direct link?

 

[olymac]

i read the article at kinokuniya last week, the test was really just a extended hands-on rather than a detailed review. it seems like the 3 testers were just given each camera for a couple of hours to shoot with and then the feedback was taken. they may not have even been given a manual as the testers all seem to be a bit lost with each camera's menu.

i find it strange since these are semi-pro or pro models and user customisation and understanding of the functions is required before a decent assessment can be carried out.

RTFM ..... that would take up a few hours :bsmilie:

 

[headfonz]

RTFM ..... that would take up a few hours :bsmilie:

agree, it would. but if its a review, the reviewer should at least have a proper understanding of the operations / functions before making any assessment. if the reviewer is not using the tool correctly because the instructions weren't followed, how can he/her say that the tool is not working as it should? :dunno:

i wouldn't bother with the conclusions or recommendations of any hands-on with some random pictures thinly disguised as a review.

 

[OlyFlyer]

What Digital Camera did a new test using three of their readers with the D300, A700, and E-3.

In the end, the E-3 didn't fare well, which was disappointing, especially with the A700 also in the test. I was a bit surprised to see that they photographed it with the 14-45mm lens, since it isn't sold that way.

I was surprised to see that one of the testers mentioned that the E-3 was too small, even though he has a Canon 300D and 20D.

Everyone thought that it was troublesome with settings and buttons and that the images were underexposed.

Seeing the Nikon D300 in first place wasn't a surprise, but seeing the E-3 in last was. I still haven't been able to handle one, but the placement of buttons, especially on the left hand side now, seems more random than with the E-1.

Any thoughts?

Equip a camera with a real cheap, obsolete lens and you get bad reasults. What a surprise! :bsmilie:

I did not read the reviews, I normally don't rad them because the value behind seems to be less and less. This seems to be just another review proofing my point.

I have the E-3 and after having handled the D300 for some time, I don't understand how people can complain about the ergonomics of the E-3. It is a perferct camera IMO ergonomicwise. Of course, this is just my opinion, so take it with a grain of salt. I am not sad or regret my choise, in fact the more I use it the more I like it.

 

[spidey89]

Equip a camera with a real cheap, obsolete lens and you get bad reasults. What a surprise! :bsmilie:

I did not read the reviews, I normally don't rad them because the value behind seems to be less and less. This seems to be just another review proofing my point.

I have the E-3 and after having handled the D300 for some time, I don't understand how people can complain about the ergonomics of the E-3. It is a perferct camera IMO ergonomicwise. Of course, this is just my opinion, so take it with a grain of salt. I am not sad or regret my choise, in fact the more I use it the more I like it.

Lol,i like the E-1's ergonomics more than the E-3,but I feel at home with both eitherway :bsmilie:

 

[microcosm]

Very interesting how things can be swung around for tests like that... sponsors sure have a way to swing things around, don't they? I wonder, just wonder, if anyone would have the real courage to take flagship bodies and top of the line lenses and do a real shoot out... that would be very very interesting to see...

E-3 with 14-35mm f2.0 SHG lens... the images would be a sight to behold...

 

[olymac]

......i wouldn't bother with the conclusions or recommendations of any hands-on with some random pictures thinly disguised as a review.

If What Digital Camera comes fr the same publisher as What Hi-Fi, then I concur with you

 

[bousozoku]

What Digital Camera always seem to come up with reviews that I can trust.

The fact that readers were used to test the cameras seemed odd to me. Each month, they've been running a user opinion corner concerning a certain camera, but otherwise, they do a very balanced view of things.

I've just considered the article an experiment and don't care any longer.