Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] OT SLR Research report

Subject: [OM] OT SLR Research report
From: Ken Norton <image66@xxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 13 Feb 1999 08:26:43 -0600
>>Oh, and I looked at the F100, F5, EOS-1n, EOS-3 and the Pentax 645-AF.
>>Report to follow...
>
>As long as you're looking at toys, don't forget a G2...

G2?  Hey, I've got to draw the line somewhere.  <g>

Ok, here goes:

My goal yesterday was not to compare every imaginable feature/capability of
the cameras but to determine how the cameras felt and handled.  In directly
comparing the cameras I was shocked at what I discovered!  I've been trying
to maintain an open mind on the Nikon vs Canon thing and didn't think it
would be a slam dunk one way or the other.  I also encountered a few
suprises.  Read on.

Nikon F5:  Wow, what a camera!  This really is pretty much the ultimate
35mm camera--except it is big and heavy.  I'm relishing the thought of
backpacking with this monster!  Positive note is that it is all
inclusive--no motor drives to attach, etc.  It's a complete, all-in-one
package.  Viewfinder display is relatively non-obtrusive and really didn't
interfere too much with composing.  (I'm very sensitive to viewfinder
interference, hence why I use 1-4 and 2-4 screens in the OMs).
Disadvantage of the viewfinder is that the selected focus spot brackets
darken a little, but hardly enough to identify which spot is active.  Also,
when in dynamic af, there is very little to no indication of which spot is
tracking the subject.  When holding the camera in vertical mode the shutter
release is positioned very well and the camera balances well.  Actually,
I'd say that the balance on the camera is supurb and even though it is
heavy it handles very well.

Nikon F100:  I thought this was going to be lighter than the F5.  Oh well,
Nikon goofed in that department.  Even though it is lighter, it doesn't
feel it.  The additional mass of the F5 down below is gone in the F100, but
so is some of the stability.  Oddly enough, the F100 seems to need the
booster pack to give it the balance the F5 has.  Ok, nitpicks aside, the
viewfinder in the F100 is far better as the active spot flashes red vs the
F5's invisible in low light gray spot.  The focus screens in the Nikons are
very bright and clear.  The bokah is better than Olympus's 2-series
screens, but the brightness is about the same.  The image clarity is so
bright and clear that it's almost like looking through a completely optical
system with no focus screen involved.  Unfortunately, some of the focus
"snap" that the Nikons are known for is gone.  It actually was a bit more
difficult to manually focus the Nikon than the Canon.  At around half the
cost of the F5, the F100 is very tempting and I could actually get a couple
of them.  Hmm.

Canon EOS-1n:  Fastest autofocus around!  Without a doubt the sports
photographer would pick this puppy first!  Also, I'd say that it was a bit
more accurate than the Nikon.  Viewfinder isn't as bright but does have
more snap.  Brightness was somewhere between Olympus' 1-series and 2-series
screens.  Focus screen is not laser etched.  Viewfinder display is
distracting with five squares lined up across the screen.  What?  No
vertical dots?  Obviously this camera is better at horizontal compositions
than verticals.  Motor drive was faster/quieter than the Nikon, but the
camera had noticebly more shock from the mirror/shutter.  The camera needs
the mass/weight just to keep the shock under control.  I played around with
their new 35-135??? internal stabalization lens.  WOW, it actually works.
But....  Get real folks, let's think about it.  The lens was a variable
aperature 4.5-5.6 and the IS helps improve two stops.  The size/weight of a
fixed aperature 2.8 zoom would have been the same. Duh!  Still, it's a nice
lens and I wouldn't mind having it.

Canon EOS-3:  Ahem, uh, where do I start?  Well, I'll keep this one short
and sweet.  Viewfinder is like watching fireworks.  The focus screen is so
noisy that I couldn't compose a picture in it if my life depended on it.
Until they optically overlay the spots on the viewfinder so they are
completely invisible (when off), I'll have to pass on this puppy.  The eye
control is cool, but doesn't work well for me as I'm constantly scanning
the entire image and watching my edges and rarely look directly and solely
at the subject.  Compared to the EOS-1n, F100 and F5, the EOS-3 feels like
^#%@.  Multi-spot capability is nice, but not an important enough feature
for me to deal with the downsides of this camera.  Camera is NOT balanced.

Pentax 645-AF:  Slow shutter-sync speed (still haven't gotten a difinitive
answer on exactly what the sync speed is), only a single focus spot and
noisy.  The viewfinder is excellent and the information displayed in
various places is terrific.  The focus motor in the lens was so noisy that
I almost jumped out of my skin.  It was very reminise of the first
generation AF stuff from Olympus and Minolta.  I hope that they get some
quieter motors in next year's lenses.  I don't like the thought of using
that noisy of a camera during a wedding.  Motor drive was quiet though.
The focus screen is bright, snappy and the way life is supposed to be.
Very tempting and makes me wonder if the new Contax 645AF might be the way
to go.

Ok, direct comparison times:  (non-scientific, and strictly user
impression, not spec sheet)

Size:  The F100 seemed the smallest of the bunch with the EOS-3 just
behind.  The EOS-1n actually felt larger than the F5.

Weight:  Obviously, the EOS-3 was the lightest, followed by the F100, but
the EOS-1n felt tons heavier than the F5.  What? you ask?  Yup, even though
their weights are almost identical, the EOS-1n felt much heaver because...

Holdability:  The F5 fit my hands perfectly.  The balance, size and
gripability of the F5 matched my hands very well.  I suffer from carpel
tunnel and the Nikons didn't stress the tendons in my wrist at all.  THe
EOS's grip was slightly larger, but didn't fit right.  This was exactly the
information I needed to determine what camera system to go with.  After
about 2 minutes with the EOS-1n I was ready to set it down.  I just didn't
want to hold it.  Your mileage may vary as everybody's hands are different.
 The EOS-3 I couldn't hold still and the F100 needed just a bit more mass.
Hmm.  I don't think my wife is going to like this.  <g>

Lens mount:  The Canon lens mount is definetely better and wider.  The
Nikon's is tiny in comparison to even the Olympus mount.  But it works.

Lenses:  The Canon lenses are supurb, but the newer, better quality Nikon
lenses feel far better being manual focused.  Much closer to the OM/Zuikos
in feel.  Nikon is finally starting to get decent AF lenses.

Ok, now for the suprise:

The Tokina 20-35/2.8 lens is the most awesome wide angle lens I have ever
used.  The sharpness and contrast are so high that I almost left my entire
camera bag in exchange for an F100 and this lens.  If there is any one item
that could tear me away from the Olympus, it's this lens.  Without a doubt,
this lens is the sharpest wide angle I have seen and it is so good at the
20mm setting without showing any apparant distortion at any setting.  There
was absolutely no vignetting.  Did I mention the contrast?  Oh, what about
the contrast?  Hey, did anybody say anything about contrast?  I also looked
at Nikon's offering, but at twice the price it didn't have anywhere near
the contrast.  This is a must have lens, no matter what.  Every other lens
I looked through yesterday was a dog in comparison to this lens.

So, yes, I liked the lens.

I've tried to be as open as possible to either Canon or Nikon, but it is
clearly apparent that I'm now leaning in the direction of Nikon.  The
question now remains as to which one.  My selecting Nikon over Canon is
strictly based on my usability.  Either system is excellent and when
comparing features, they both would do nicely.  But, the question remained:
 What camera felt right?  This is a very subjective thing and everybody has
unique desires.  I hope that I didn't come across as bashing Canon, because
that is far from my attitude.  Canons are excellent cameras and I'd be
happy with them, but I now believe that I'd be much happier with the Nikons.

Alas, if only Olympus had decent AF.

Ken

Kenneth E. Norton
Image66 Photography

image66@xxxxxxx
(515) 791-2306

< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz