Jeremy Z
No longer a newbie, moving up!
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2007
- Messages
- 1,179
- Reaction score
- 32
- Location
- Chicago burbs
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos OK to edit
Here's my situation & current equipment.
I like the looks and ergonomics reviews of the Olympus E-500, and I have always loved Olympus optics. They are second-to-none, IMO. The price is pretty good, and it is available with two kit lenses which are pretty well-liked, for something like $650. If I bought this camera, I could buy an adapter to use my OM mount lenses, and if I bought a flash for it, it could also be used on my C-750 UZ. Are these good enough reasons to buy the Olympus despite the fact that the results are slightly worse than with the Canon? Also, I have a feeling that good optics are only going to be offered by Olympus, which means I will have to grab my ankles if I want something halfway fast. Tamron & Sigma probably aren't going to offer their lenses for Olympus, due to the oddball 200% multiplication factor.
I've had a few Nikons in my day as well, and have always loved the rugged build quality. The optics were good too; on par with the Olympus Zuiko. The ergonomics seem to be more well-liked than the equivalent Canon. Nikon optics are quite pricey, but at least Sigma, Tamron, & Tokina make good aftermarket options.
The new Sony gets great reviews and takes the Minolta Maxxum lenses, and it also has integral dust removal and anti-shake built into the camera body. I know this isn't as effective as optical IS, but I don't see myself spending that kind of money, so this is a huge advantage over Canon, Nikon, & Olympus. The only problems are that I can't use my non-dedicated Vivitar 2800 flash because of the oddball Maxxum flash mount, and the range of optics is a lot less than what is offered for Canon or Nikon. (but more than Olympus) Last and least, I have a hard time getting excited by the Sony name in a camera. Every piece of Sony electronics I've owned has had its buttons wear out sooner than Panasonic. It would be sweet if Sony would take Zeiss lenses like their ultrazoom cameras do... I'd buy one in a heartbeat if this were the case.
Synopsis:
Canon Rebel XT - Good everything except ergonomics. Wife would probably like it the best.
Nikon D50 - good overall, but images aren't as well-liked by reviewers as the Canons
Olympus E-500 - Great price, will work with existing optics I have, but aftermarket lens choices will be limited. Flash would be compaitible with my Olympus C-750. Good kit lenses. Not quite as sharp as Canon.
Sony Alpha 100 - Great features such as body anti-shake, but oddball flash mount means extra cost in the future, fewer lenses available.
Pentax *ist - Ready to play with the big boys? I don't know. Available optics? I don't know.
What would you guys get if you were me & why? FWIW, I probably won't be buying until spring. (need to sell a motorcycle to finance this stuff)
- Olympus OM1n with Zuiko 50mm f/1.8, 28 mm f/3.5, 135 mm f/3.5, Olympus T-20 flash, Sigma 28-80 f/3.5-4.5
- Olympus C-750 UZ (10x optical zoom, 4 MP)
- Canon SD600 Digital Elph, 6 MP
- A couple older rangerfinder 35 mms (Yashica Electro 35, etc.)
I like the looks and ergonomics reviews of the Olympus E-500, and I have always loved Olympus optics. They are second-to-none, IMO. The price is pretty good, and it is available with two kit lenses which are pretty well-liked, for something like $650. If I bought this camera, I could buy an adapter to use my OM mount lenses, and if I bought a flash for it, it could also be used on my C-750 UZ. Are these good enough reasons to buy the Olympus despite the fact that the results are slightly worse than with the Canon? Also, I have a feeling that good optics are only going to be offered by Olympus, which means I will have to grab my ankles if I want something halfway fast. Tamron & Sigma probably aren't going to offer their lenses for Olympus, due to the oddball 200% multiplication factor.
I've had a few Nikons in my day as well, and have always loved the rugged build quality. The optics were good too; on par with the Olympus Zuiko. The ergonomics seem to be more well-liked than the equivalent Canon. Nikon optics are quite pricey, but at least Sigma, Tamron, & Tokina make good aftermarket options.
The new Sony gets great reviews and takes the Minolta Maxxum lenses, and it also has integral dust removal and anti-shake built into the camera body. I know this isn't as effective as optical IS, but I don't see myself spending that kind of money, so this is a huge advantage over Canon, Nikon, & Olympus. The only problems are that I can't use my non-dedicated Vivitar 2800 flash because of the oddball Maxxum flash mount, and the range of optics is a lot less than what is offered for Canon or Nikon. (but more than Olympus) Last and least, I have a hard time getting excited by the Sony name in a camera. Every piece of Sony electronics I've owned has had its buttons wear out sooner than Panasonic. It would be sweet if Sony would take Zeiss lenses like their ultrazoom cameras do... I'd buy one in a heartbeat if this were the case.
Synopsis:
Canon Rebel XT - Good everything except ergonomics. Wife would probably like it the best.
Nikon D50 - good overall, but images aren't as well-liked by reviewers as the Canons
Olympus E-500 - Great price, will work with existing optics I have, but aftermarket lens choices will be limited. Flash would be compaitible with my Olympus C-750. Good kit lenses. Not quite as sharp as Canon.
Sony Alpha 100 - Great features such as body anti-shake, but oddball flash mount means extra cost in the future, fewer lenses available.
Pentax *ist - Ready to play with the big boys? I don't know. Available optics? I don't know.
What would you guys get if you were me & why? FWIW, I probably won't be buying until spring. (need to sell a motorcycle to finance this stuff)