Chuck Norcutt wrote:
> Well, I do own a Canyon 5D but I also own about 10 OM bodies, about 20
> OM mount lenses, (and thanks to Bill B) was three, now four T-32's and
> various OM accessories like slide copier, bellows, focusing rail, extra
> screens, etc, etc.
>
Yeah, much the same, more bodies, more lenses, fewer flashes, although I
have the cool little T18.
> I've been a loyal Oly user for more than 30 years. I waited and waited
> for Olympus to make their move on the digital front and when the E-1
> arrived I was very disappointed.
Yup, yup, yup.
> The E-1 is a rugged, mechanically well designed body with great ergonomics
And great color rendition.
> but with a too small and noisy sensor. That and autofocus were both
> technologically two years behind
> the times when it was announced let alone shipped.
>
I remember trying out an E-1 in a camera store with the 50-250. It would
have trouble locking onto focus with high contrast targets in moderate
light. that was Oly's pro body. Canyon's entry level amateur body, the
300D, would lock on instantly with a similar focal length zoom.
I really wanted to buy an Oly DSLR. I'd converted from a Nik*n Ftn to an
OM-1 shortly after they came out, and stuck with Oly for over 30 years.
But the E-1 simply didn't meet my photographic needs nearly as well as
other options
> ......
> Ergonomically it's just so-so. But it does jobs that other cameras
> can't do.
>
That's it in a nutshell. I started with a 300D, an OM adapter and one AF
lens. That camera kept bringing in the images I wanted. I took it on a
picture making trip alongside an OM-4 and got keepers from both, but the
low noise and quick AF of the Canyon kept amazing me. The Turkey Vulture
close-up I posted yesterday was simple reflex by me and the 300D.
Shooting along the coast, I sensed something dark pass over my head,
raised the camera and pushed the button. With MF, I'd have likely simply
missed the shot. With iso 800 film, or an E-thingie of that time, big
grain or lots of noise. Without great AF or with slower sensor, unsharp
image.
> Moose can tell a similar story to support a 5D decision but centered
> mostly on high ISO and resolving power; both to support his telephoto
> view of the world. But I'm sure he'll tell his own story and do it much
> better than me.
>
Well.... I was having a good time with the 300D, getting images I'd
imagined, but not got before in some situations. But it has some
limitations, some a result of older technology, some to keep it from
overlapping with the next higher camera in their line, some just cause
it was inexpensive. So I kept my eyes open for the next step, always
hoping that Oly would break out with something impressive. I'm still
waiting. Please don't be offended, but the E-500 and E-300 are run of
the mill, entry level cameras. Perfectly competent at ordinary tasks,
but nothing special. The E-330 is special, very special, in its niche,
but again pedestrian for all other uses. I still may get one someday for
macro.
I was still sort of tied to Canyon, both because I now had an AF long
range zoom I liked a lot and for the OM lens compatability. I watched
and waited, but nothing compellingly better than what I had came out for
a while. I was tempted by the 20D, but the options for quality wide
angle were limited and expensive. I'd been living with the limitations,
but for my 'real' DSLR, I wanted good WA.
Then the 5D came out, and it was lots of like at first sight. It would
use my OM WA lenses, which by then had been proven to be right at the
top of the performance range of those available for it. I could use my
by now two AF lenes with it. And the quality of the images it made -
swoon. So I bought one, and I've never had a moment of regret. It's too
big, it cost a lot, it isn't ergonomically great, but the images! I
think it's still the best 35mm size DSLR available for pure image
quality. IQ is a lot more than just Mp count, not all mps are created equal.
The 5.1 mp central area of the 5D sensor gives a cleaner, higher
resolution image than the same physical area that is the whole sensor in
the 300D, and 6.3 mp. Many of the images have an amazing 3D quality to
them. This a full frame crop from 14th shot I took with the 5D.
The 5D simply allows me to take images I could not have taken before,
and couldn't take with any Oly DSLR made so far, in dimmer light,
farther away, moving faster, etc. I assume you have been to see the
jellyfish in Monterey Bay Aquarium. Dim light, moving, fairly deep 3D
subjects, so tripod and fast lens don't work, thick glass means flash
won't work, even if allowed. But sheer sensor sensitivity wins
<http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/tech/5D/Jellyfish/_MG_0194.htm>. And
it doesn't just get a usable image at iso 3200, it gets one with little
noise even at full pixel and with beautiful tonality; the jellies just
glow, like in person.
> Anyhow, in the end I chose a Canyon because I saw it as a business need.
>
And I bought it to do what I wanted to do, and couldn't with anything Oly.
> It had nothing to do with Canyon being popular although you may now
> understand some of why it is popular.
>
I'm not entirely sure why they are popular with the masses, but I'm sure
why the 5D is popular with me.
Well, you hadda ask. I'll go play with my OMs now, as I was doing this
afternoon.
Com'on sp550 UZ, live up to your potential, so I can buy a digiOly!
Moose
> Scott Peden wrote:
>
>> Ohhh!
>>
>> So, is it safe to tell me why you use a Canon? All I get from other folks is
>> that Canon is popular, no one has an Olympus... but then again, I only know
>> one person with a Lecia too!
>>
>> All the Oly users I know, I converted and they are quite happy.
>>
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|