Early One Morning (playing with an E620)

[jonoslack]

Hi There
Still trying to decide whether to keep this camera - I went out this morning at 7 to put it through it's paces. I'm still thinking about the IQ, but it's lovely to use, and small, although, as one would expect, it benefits from the better Zuiko lenses.
These were taken with the 12-60 and the 50-200 (old version).

Whaddyareckon?

 

[jonoslack]

a couple more

 

[Brian Mosley]

Hi Jono, you can't force it... but the chicken is getting there!

I'm still learning with the E-620, and enjoying it more and more as I get to grips with it.

Cheers

Brian

 

[Bill Gordon]

As usual your images are top, however, if I were changing it would be to the G-1 that has some interesting features that the Oly does not have and the results that we have seen on this forum are really quite nice. The only problem of course, is the ridiculous price for the adapter for Oly lenses!!

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

I like the colours of these, Jono (and the photos as such). Don't know if it's you or the camera, but they look saturated in a pleasant way. Looks like a keeper to me, at least until Olympus launches the E-720, which will obviously be a weather sealed E-620 body with the E-3 viewfinder

 

[viablex1]

I say its a keeper, never get tired of looking at flowers..

 

[kevinparis]

love the chicken...keep the camera



Kevin

 

[ddk]

Hi Jono,

Love the chicky!
Knowing how much you like the Sony and having been here before, my question to you is how often and for how do you think that keep playing with this Oly?

 

[Robert Campbell]

Delightful pix as ever, Jono. I found the E620 a bit too small, so it had to be the E30.

 

[woodyspedden]

a couple more

Jono

Don't know if your body or lenses have a problem but the focus on most of these images is not spot on which is way unusual for you. You usually have it "nailed." Maybe my old tired eyes on the other hand

Woody

 

[jonoslack]

And the Verdict is . . . . .

it's gone back today.

Thanks everyone for the comments - Woody, I don't think there was anything wrong with the focus - on the chicken it was focused on the bum rather than the beak - but that was my fault!

I thought the camera was lovely - the firmware, button layout (when you got used to finding them) menus, options were all great, I didn't think it too small to handle, and the image quality was excellent, and still showed the Olympus colour we've all learned to love.

It also reminded me how it's great to have the larger depth of field of the 4/3 sensor for so many different things - I'll definitely be shooting more with the system in future.

So - why did I send it back?

Well, I tried it with all my Olympus lenses, and as you might expect, I found that it performed a lot better with the 12-60 then with the kit lens, the 50-200 was noticeably better than the 70-300 and the 7-14 better than the 9-18.

What that meant is that if I were going to use it much, then I'd want to use it with those lenses, in which case the size difference between it and the E3 was fairly irrelevant. Basically, lovely though it was, it wasn't going to get used as a lightweight carryabout kit, and if it wasn't that . . . then it wasn't going to get used. So, reluctantly, it's gone back to my lovely dealer to be their demo again.

Roll on Olympus m4/3 offering!

 

[Jonathon Delacour]

Re: And the Verdict is . . . . .

it's gone back today.

Roll on Olympus m4/3 offering!

Hrmmph! And here was I thinking that we had a gentleman's agreement to hold off on a decision about the E-620 until after the Olympus m4/3 announcement on June 15.

But, Jono, if this is the way you want to play it, that's fine by me. Just don't be too surprised if/when I announce my Pentax K-7 purchase!

 

[Brian Mosley]

Well, though I'm not surprised with the m4/3rd offering so close (which I know you'll want!) - I do find the small form factor makes a difference, even when shooting with the larger lenses.

The E-30 is delightfully lightweight though, and I think handles focusing better with the 14-35mm (probably power issues)

Cheers

Brian

 

[jonoslack]

Re: And the Verdict is . . . . .

Hrmmph! And here was I thinking that we had a gentleman's agreement to hold off on a decision about the E-620 until after the Olympus m4/3 announcement on June 15.

But, Jono, if this is the way you want to play it, that's fine by me. Just don't be too surprised if/when I announce my Pentax K-7 purchase!

Threats eh Jonathon :ROTFL:
Well, I haven't made a final decision about the E-620. I've just made a final decision not to get one until after the release. I had the dealer's demonstration unit for 5 days to play with and decide, I had to return it or buy it, so I returned it.

If the m4/3 doesn't seem to be what I want, then I might easily go back to the E620 . . . or possibly the E3 replacement when it comes.

As for the K-7 purchase - I think it seems lovely, but it falls between stools for me (neither as small as the M8 or with the resolution of the A900), but if I was trying to have just one system I'd be all over it.

 

[jonoslack]

Hi Brian

Well, though I'm not surprised with the m4/3rd offering so close (which I know you'll want!) - I do find the small form factor makes a difference, even when shooting with the larger lenses.

Well, you've hit the nail on the head really - I'm pretty certain that the m4/3 will suit me better for a small but still high quality outfit, although there are still questions to be answered about attachment viewfinders.
As I said to Jonathon, I might easily go back on my decision if the m4/3 isn't what I want.

I haven't got anything to say against the E-620, except that it isn't weathersealed, but that's like criticising it for not being MF. Everything it says on the tin it does - charmingly and excellently.

The E-30 is delightfully lightweight though, and I think handles focusing better with the 14-35mm (probably power issues)

Cheers

Brian

Yeah, well, this is where it starts to compete with the A900, and although I'm certain that an E-30 with the 14-35 is great, I've already got the A900 with the zeiss 24-70, which isn't that much heavier.
E30 +14-35 = 1560gm
A900+24-70 = 1805gm

so 245gm difference
you get f2, and I get 24mm
The attraction of m4/3 is, of course, that if one suddenly needs a small fast prime, and one already has one . . .

 

[pellicle]

Re: And the Verdict is . . . . .

I don't think there was anything wrong with the focus - on the chicken it was focused on the bum rather than the beak - but that was my fault!

me neither, but then I thought it was intentional rather than fault ;-)

 

[jonoslack]

Re: And the Verdict is . . . . .

me neither, but then I thought it was intentional rather than fault ;-)

:ROTFL::ROTFL:
You know me better than I know myself
Who wouldn't focus on a bottom than a beak.

 

[Bill Gordon]

Interesting discussion. Jono, I think that you are in love with the Sony line and that everything else looks less inviting. Am I right?? Sorry that we did not get together this year but my body said "stay home" and I am glad that I did. Perhaps next year!!

 

[jonoslack]

Interesting discussion. Jono, I think that you are in love with the Sony line and that everything else looks less inviting. Am I right?? Sorry that we did not get together this year but my body said "stay home" and I am glad that I did. Perhaps next year!!

Oh no Bill, it isn't that - the A900 being 24mp and full frame has distinct advantages . . and distinct disadvantages, but it's what I would be carrying around for landscape stuff under normal circumstances.

I want something smaller and lighter to carry about which is still great quality, the E30 combo simply isn't that much lighter. I also want something with a smaller than full frame sensor for doing nature photography with a larger depth of field.

It isn't that I'm in love with Sony but it's horses for courses.

The m4/3 probably will be it - I also use the M8 lots of the time, but it wasn't really relevant to this discussion.

 

[pellicle]

Hi

I want something smaller and lighter to carry about which is still great quality, the E30 combo simply isn't that much lighter. I also want something with a smaller than full frame sensor for doing nature photography with a larger depth of field.
...
The m4/3 probably will be it

well that's about where I'm at with this experiment too (the micro 4/3rds) I got into it to get a light weight camera to take backpacking. I currently use a 4x5 (a Toho if you don't know them, light and with a 6x12 120 roll back quite good). I started objecting to the size of DSLR's with digital compacts (like my coolpix 5000) giving results close enough to 35mm to allow me to leave it at home but DSLR not quite making me feel I could leave my 4x5 in the closet (just yet).

So I am looking for a light weight versatile platform to expand what I can do with my coolpix and nearly cover what a 5D or the like could do.

That lead me to the G1.

My existing "trial" is to have

• 
  [*]the G1
  [*]Olympus 21mm
  [*]Olympus 50mm
  [*]Olympus 100mm
  [*]Olympus OM-1 (optional)
  

{ok ... why are my bullet points black?}

with me so that I can put the OM-1 onto the 21mm for ultrawide and have all the others (and some extension tubes) for almost everything I can imagine.

I'm presently fiddling with a gorillapod (with a ball head) and some carbon fiber tubes to have a decent light tripod too.

dunno if that helps your thinking much ...