I just want to know what exactly does Olympus do to "make taking pictues fun vs. the other guys" I don't get this. That seems like kind of a weird thing to say well mabye not weird but I just don't understand it.
I've not studied all the options in the Nikon line, and even less in the Canon line... but I've noticed that to get to certain stuff you have to hit the MENU button and dig around for stuff. E.G. This one ladies camera had ISO, AEL, and metering buttons on the body... but she didn't like how it kept focusing continually. I looked all over the body and finally found only in the menu the ability to turn off continuous focus mode and set it to single focus mode.
I was somewhat surprised because my body has buttons for all of those functions. As for the full frame bodies, they're heavy. I notice they have some bulk with them. I don't want to feel like I'm working out when carrying a camera. APS-C is much much better, but APS-C sensors are only a tad larger than 4/3. I also like the 4/3 aspect ratio due to the type of crops I usually do.
If I went pro, I'd go Nikon. Great high ISO... and other goodies. As-is I'm doing fine with Olympus. It's just a hobby for me now. The lens selection covers pretty much all I can think of. I've got too many lenses as it is I think, but lens lust has me buying more and more.
Olympus /is/ filling in the lens selection and creating "budget" copies of lenses that are only pro at the time being. Take a look at their lens roadmap for 2007-2008. I don't want to sell my stuff and pay twice as much on
L glass.
Olympus isn't the #1 camera company, but I'm not buying stuff for name recognition. I buy products for 1) price 2) ease of use 3) features you get for your money. Olympus wins on all 3 I believe. They're only a step behind the latest and greatest specs sometimes, but thats to be understood with what you pay. In other ways they are a step ahead.
I am /not/ a pixel peeper who cares about megapixels, or if I have 400 focus points, or low grain at ISO 960000. I don't want to spend $3,200 on a body for features like this. I enjoy what I have, and I'm not shooting with my body to impress anyone.
Way too many "other" users brag to me about tech specs...When I get the prints back, it looks just as good as theirs, and at a fraction of the cost (without an L lens, or some expensive IS lens) If people are that interested in specs they ought to earn ultimate bragging rights with the Hasselblad H3D II 39 megapixel Digital Camera Kit. The body only costs $33,995.00 after all. I wonder if an 4x5 print from that camera would look any better from a 4x5 made by my E-500.:lmao:
Maybe I /should/ sell all my Olympus gear and go to Canon. Like. Right now. But I have a feeling my pictures would look no better for what I do with my camera, and I'd probably end up paying more for good glass than I did originally with my Olympus system.
Some people have the most fun shooting with Holgas, some have the most fun shooting Leica... and some have the most fun shooting with Olympus. Some of you guys act like Olympus is a few steps from filing bankruptcy and that Canon and Nikon are gods. Their SLR camera division is very profitable, there are more who use it then you might think. I do not believe the SLR system from Olympus is going to disappear anytime soon.