Olympus E-3

Hi,

 

The difference is between the two versions is equipment with strobe connectors for electrical cable or without them.

 

Yoko

Hi Yoko,

I think the difference is that the Olympus port version (the mounting ring can be removed to mount Nexus ports as well) can be ordered with two Nikonos V bulkheads and two fiber optic ports or with two Olympus type bulkheads and two fiber optic ports.

Phil Rudin

I think the difference is that the Olympus port version (the mounting ring can be removed to mount Nexus ports as well) can be ordered with two Nikonos V bulkheads and two fiber optic ports or with two Olympus type bulkheads and two fiber optic ports.

Phil,

Based on your experience, which of the configurations would you recommend? As I've mentioned I have no prior investments in any system.

From what I've understood so far, it sounds as if you would suggest using fiber optics no matter what strobe I go with.

And what would be the reasons for going with Nexus instead of Ikelite (given that the former is more expensive and much harder for me to get my hands on here)?

I have had great success with fiber optics on the Olympus E-410 housing (PT-E03) with the Inon Z-240 strobes and in tests with the Inon D-2000 strobes IN TTL. I am not aware of any other strobes that work in TTL with fiber optics other than the Olympus UFL-1.

If you shoot manual other strobes may fire with the fiber optics, but I have not tested this.

If you install the Olympus bulkheads you can use the Olympus land strobe housings or an Athena TTL converter for TTL strobes fired with a Nikonos V type cable.

If you add the Nikonos V type bulkheads you can shoot in manual with strobes that use the Nik V cord or in TTL with a converter mounted inside the housing which fits into the hot shoe on the camera.

The E-3 is a pro quality camera and some will want the added features of the Nexus housing like better quality ports. I already own ports that will fit the Nexus housing. The ability to add a 45 degree or 180 degree enlarged view finder. The ability to use fiber optics (Ikelite not designed for F/O) and use of the Inon Z-240 strobes I already own.

Ikelite has a lower cost, built in TTl if you use Iklite strobes (not all work) and a large following of repeat users as does Nexus.

Phil Rudin

Thanks!

I think I will go for the Nexus housing with Oly ports and (initially) two Oly strobes. It's entry level and ony 40 meters, but seems sufficient to begin with. If I want to upgrade I can then go with Inon.

I'm planning on starting out with the 8 mm FE and 50 mm macro. From what I've read here it seems the Oly dome and macro ports would work well with these, right? The 7-14 mm is highly desirable but after much consideration, I don't think I will use it that much above water to justify the price tag (especially as I have to get the 50-200 mm SWD which is also pricey).

I guess the one final decision to make is to go with Oly or Nik V bulkheads then. It sounds as if the Oly bulkhead is the more "open" solution, allowing for more options?

Hi Phil,

I think the difference is that the Olympus port version (the mounting ring can be removed to mount Nexus ports as well) can be ordered with two Nikonos V bulkheads and two fiber optic ports or with two Olympus type bulkheads and two fiber optic ports.

The difference is between the two versions is two bulkheads(you can order with Nikonos V bulkheads or Olympus type bulkheads )and two fiber optic ports or only two fiber optic ports.

Yoko

Hi Phil,

 

No,

The difference is between the two versions is two bulkheads(you can order with Nikonos V bulkheads or Olympus type bulkheads )and two fiber optic ports or only two fiber optic ports.

 

Yoko

And the plot thickens...

Do I dare to go with fiber optics only?

Who knew this was so complicated...

The housing is available in 4 models:

1. Type 1 OLM : 2 Optical Connectors Only, New M6 Mount with Olympus Port converter.

2. Type 2 OLM : 2 Optical Connectors, 2 Sync Connectors, New M6 Mount with Olympus Port converter.

3. Type 1 : 2 Optical Connectors Only, New M6 Mount.

4. Type 2 : 2 Optical Connectors, 2 Sync Connectors, New M6 Mount.

The sync connectors can ordered in either the Nikonos or Olympus variants.

If you want to use Nexus M5 (Master) ports, you'll need an M6-M5 converter.

I've done a lot of diving with Seatool & Zillion housings lately, using Inon Z-240 for macro shooting, and Sea & Sea YS-250 for wide angle. These housings fire strobes optically, and I've had nothing but good experiences.

Who knew this was so complicated...

 

The housing is available in 4 models:

1. Type 1 OLM : 2 Optical Connectors Only, New M6 Mount with Olympus Port converter.

2. Type 2 OLM : 2 Optical Connectors, 2 Sync Connectors, New M6 Mount with Olympus Port converter.

3. Type 1 : 2 Optical Connectors Only, New M6 Mount.

4. Type 2 : 2 Optical Connectors, 2 Sync Connectors, New M6 Mount.

 

The sync connectors can ordered in either the Nikonos or Olympus variants.

 

If you want to use Nexus M5 (Master) ports, you'll need an M6-M5 converter.

That's right

Thanks!

Yoko

Thanks!

 

I think I will go for the Nexus housing with Oly ports and (initially) two Oly strobes. It's entry level and ony 40 meters, but seems sufficient to begin with. If I want to upgrade I can then go with Inon.

Regarding the PT-E03 and the Olympus flash is anybody concerned with a housing and flash that is only 40m? I loaned a sea and sea unit when my film housing was being rebuilt a few years and dived to 42m (didnt realise it had a limit less than 60m) and flooded the flash. Now I dont get down to 40+ too often but I do go there in clean water. I assume this rules this unit out for me?

What is the Olympus 14-42mm lens like for macro photo's?

regards

Ardy

DPReview review was posted today:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympuse3/page34.asp

Good and bad news:

The E-3 is then a camera that produces fantastic results as long as you stay within its comfort zone. Thanks to the limitations of its sensor, if you push the envelope at all (trying to capture too much dynamic range, pushing the sensitivity in low light, trying to eke the finest detail out of a scene) it starts to under-perform compared to the best of its competitors. If your photography regularly takes place at the point where all cameras start to demand compromises, pushing hard against the edge of acceptable performance, the E-3 is not the camera I would recommend.

 

Ironically the exact opposite is true when shooting in extreme environmental conditions, where the E-3's superior weatherproofing puts it in a different class altogether to any camera in this price bracket. If you want to shoot in dirty, damp or humid conditions the E-3 should be high on your shortlist.

Alex

Hi Ardy,

Regarding the Olympus PT-E03 housing, I have had mine to 45 meters in Cayman. The housing is an entry level housing targeted at the dive industry standard of 130ft/40 meter depth range. You can read my review at the following links for information on the 14 to42 mm zoom.

http://wetpixel.com/i.php/full/olympus-e-4...rwater-housing/

http://underwaterjournal.com/pdf/archive/UWJ-issue5.pdf

REGARDING-QUOTE FROM DPREVIEW

"The 12MP D300 has 100 or so more pixels vertically, which is inconsequential to say the least. Once again the differences here are very small; the D300's more conservative approach to image processing means that at a pixel level the E-3 looks a little sharper, but in terms of absolute detail there really isn't much in it, and what difference there is is just as likely to be down to the difference in lens quality as anything inherently 'better' or 'worse' about either camera (the Olympus 50mm F2 macro lens is one of the sharpest optics we've ever used)."

Also from the DPReview is the fact that you are buying an overall package not just a sensor and that Olympus glass like the 50 mm F/2 macro are about the sharpest optics around.

Its clear that the Nikon D3 and D300 are the best cameras that Nikon has ever made in their price range and the E-3 is by far the best camera Olympus has ever made.

I would not expect to see Canon or Nikon owners dumping equipment to run to Olympus nor would I expect to see people invested in Olympus glass run based on this review.

The E-3 is a wonderful piece of equipment with many "pro" features and should be a great U/W camera with the 50 mm macro, 7 to 14 zoom and 8 mm fisheye. I am looking forward to testing the Nexus E-3 housing in the next few weeks to find out for myself.

Phil Rudin

Hi,

Seatool has announced the release of Seatool housing for E-3 on Feb 18, 2008.

http://seatool.net/list/index.html

Seatool housing for E-3 is scheduled to be available in Mar - Apr.

Yoko

Thanks for the heads up.

Please keep us posted when more info becomes available, I'm definitely interested.

My E3 should be on the way soon.

Hi all,

as mentioned before, UK Germany is developing a housing. I was not on the "Boot" show, so I do not know if they have presented a prototype.

Innovative concept: The main camera functions can be operated from the handle with one hand, and you can add a second battery for the camera for longer use.

You can see a CAD simulation here:

http://www.scubanova.de/uwpix/viewtopic.php?t=2136

Greetings

Jock

Helge sent me the first cad drawings back in November and more in January. The camera fits onto a tray much like it would fit onto the battery grip. The same battery grip controls can then be accessed from the grip on the outside of the housing. The grip can also be removed and used from a remote location via fiber optic cable.

Should be interesting to see how this works in the real world.

Phil Rudin

Seems like there's going to be quite a few options available for the E-3. Good thing.

First of all question, probably mostly aimed at Phil, do you think there will be other brands of housings available for the E-420 apart from the expected Oly and Ike housings? It would be nice to have something as small as the Seatool housing for that one... Talk about small SLR setup.

As for the E-3, unless I decide to pick up the E-420 just for UW, I think it stands between the Seatool and the Nexus based on everything I've read here. I would probably go with a couple of Inon Z240 strobes with ULCS arms.

Now, the question is whether to go with Seatool or Nexus. Both seem to support FO which I've decided to go with. However, I have a hard time understanding which ports go with Seatool. I really like how the Nexus supports Oly / Athena ports out of the box, but at the same time would prefer the (probably) smaller size of the Seatool.

And what about UK-Germany? How do they compare to the others?

Also from the DPReview is the fact that you are buying an overall package not just a sensor and that Olympus glass like the 50 mm F/2 macro are about the sharpest optics around.

But for underwater, the sharpest lens available isn't necessarily the key feature. Magnification and reach are also important whereas sharpness is only important at the apertures we actually use (where most lenses do well). The Oly 50mm performs like a 100mm on full frame both in perspective and effective magnification. If you wish to compare it and the E-3 as a system to its DX/APS-C counterparts the 4/3 system is disadvantaged in perspective and magnification flexibility. Meanwhile, I doubt the 50mm's sharpness will translate into any meaningful advantage for its system.

It is true that the Olympus 50mm F/2 macro does resolve more lines/mm than 35mm macro lenses in that range which makes the claim that it's the sharpest optics around technically correct. However, that measure does not take into account the difference in sensor size. To capture the same details on a 4/3 sensor the as a 35mm sensor an Olympus lens has to resolve 2x the number lines/mm as a 35mm lens. In other words it has to be twice as sharp for the system to stay even.

Taken as an overall package the Olympus system with that 50mm lens is not be best one for capturing the most detail.

in layman's terms...aren't you splitting hairs so to speak. I remember the fellow that housed the large format camera underwater. The photos were very nice but really not any better in "usable" terms than a full frame photo. In the market that oly competes, it compares favorably with the big two and any difference you see in photos is almost negligible until you get to the higher ISOs. Even on DPReview the cameras side by side perform roughly the same despite the lens advantage given to Canon in the test (f1.4).

If that question was directed at me, I was simply responding to the suggestion that the Oly system was better because someone thinks it has the sharpest macro lens. Frankly, I think all macro lenses right now outresolve the flat ports and water columns that are involved.

I believe strongly that larger sensors CAN be better. In the Hasselblad case, the problem is that lens selection, and more specifically lack of optimized ports, cause it to underachieve. The bulk of the effort in housed SLR systems is targeted at 35mm so I don't think the Hassy vs 35mm issue at all applies to 35mm vs 4/3.