Olympus E-620 announced

Well I've been around just long enough to realize that someone like Mr. Mustard can take better photos with a P&S that most others with far superior equipment. We can argue sensor noise, corner sharpness and lens/camera superiority but ultimately the artist behind the lens trumps all. Last years Scuba Diving Magazines best of show was taken with a canon G9. Olympus will continue to build on it's 4/3 system that provides an excellent balance between cost, weight and quality

Very true.

I'll still keep shooting with my DSLR however, and stick to the lens I find least annoying to use. I dont think of the 50mm as 'terrible', its just that when I switched I got a very pleasant surprise about how much easier the alternative was to use by comparison, which was entirely unexpected.

Otara

I would venture to say that 95% of the people who are looking to invest in an under $4000.00 total underwater system would be more than happy with the results from this camera. The sensor is only one component of the total system. The 9 to 18 mm (100 to 62 AOV) is around $500.00 and requires only the dome port and gear because of its small size, no extension port required. Look at the results from the DPReview test of the lens and a case can be made for better corner sharpness with small sensors. This may or may not translate to underwater use. But I am sure if you start off with better corners you have a chance of better results.

 

You may also want to checkout the results on the under $400.00 50 mm F/2 macro (24 degree AOV, 100 mm equv. in 35 mm at life size) This lens has the highest DPReview lens rating of any tested lens to date with an IQ. rating of 9.5 of 10. These two lenses and a few accessories will cover most U/W photographers needs for a long time. The 8 mm fisheye can also be added using the same PPO-E04 dome port used for the 9 to 18 zoom.

 

http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/olympu...6_o20/page4.asp

 

http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/olympu...2_o20/page4.asp

 

Phil Rudin

For the 9-18mm, which would you go with the new Athenta port or the Oly dome port?

The Olympus PPO-E04 170 mm dome and the Athena OPD-170 170 mm dome are the same glass and both can be used with the 8 mm fisheye, 7 to 14 zoom, 9 to 18 zoom, 11 to 22 zoom and 12 to 60 zoom with different gears and port extensions. The new Athena "wide zoom" 9 to 18 port has not yet shipped to the US. so I have not had a chance to see or use the port. The cost is going to be around $599.00 plus gear depending on the exchange rate at the time. The question I would ask is do you intend to ever use any of the other lenses because I do think the new port will be as universal as the Olympus/Athena 170 mm port.

http://reefphoto.com/index.php?main_page=p...791760b9fb81759

http://reefphoto.com/index.php?main_page=p...791760b9fb81759

http://athena-opt.com/new.htm#new_Olym_9-18

Phil Rudin

Are you saying that the 110 has some issues but that the 110a doesn't? (I have the 110a.) Can I also ask what kind of grips you've used?

 

 

 

The difference is huge for its intended use: PJ, interior and possible landscape work. There really isn't anything that comes even close and the fact that it's sharp across the frame already at f/2.8 is unique. I can, however, see that this doesn't necessarily translate to it being a good UW performer.

 

I agree that the Olympus and 4/3 system seems to be perfect for UW: fairly small and compact lenses, great already wide open, two steps more DOF than 35 mm cameras (one step more than APS-C). But I don't think that Zuiko lenses are necessarily better than other manufacturers' lenses. Many 4/3 proponents suggest superior sharpness and while they often certainly are sharper wide open than 35 mm lenses, stopped down to give equivalent DOF, the difference seems fairly small. Not that strange, these days even the kit lenses perform surprisingly well so differences will be small!

Yes I have some issues with my 110 that I do not have with the 110a. I only see the problem occur in low light when the camera is preflashing multiple times for the auto focus. It apears the 110 can't deal with that condition and I need to turn it off and back on to reset. If I properly aim my focus light or if there is sufficient ambiant light to focus the camera and the multiple preflasing doesn't occur the 110 works fine with the E-520. I have this tray from Optical Ocean Sales that I slightly modified: http://www.opticaloceansales.com/trays-arm...-2/prod_63.html

I think Jack also sells one that is already modified for the Oly housing.

Brian

Hi Brian,

Have you tried going into the custom menu 1 and turning off the AF illumination mode. Since the pre flashes don't help with the AF because they are inside the housing they do not need to be on. I don't use the Sea & Sea strobes but this may help with the problem.

Phil Rudin

Hi Brian,

 

Have you tried going into the custom menu 1 and turning off the AF illumination mode. Since the pre flashes don't help with the AF because they are inside the housing they do not need to be on. I don't use the Sea & Sea strobes but this may help with the problem.

 

Phil Rudin

Thanks Phil, I think that will work. i was wondering if there was a way to turn off that function.

Well, placed the order today for an E-620, Zuiko 9-18, PT-E06 and the PPO-E05 port. Got a good price on everything and apparently Olympus is going to do a 12% price increase (in Sweden and/or Europe at least) on April 1, so the time was right...

Turns out Olympus Sweden doesn't even stock the PPO-E04 so couldn't get a price for it. I'm thinking of going with the new Athena port anyways, as I probably won't go for the fisheye anytime soon. Would be great to hear some opinions of it (hoping of course that Phil will get his hands on one!).

I intend to get the E-620 in the water as soon as I can. The Athena 170 mm port works very well with the 9 to 18 mm zoom as well as the 8 mm fisheye. The best part is you can use both with the need for any extensions. The Athena gear for the 9/18 zoom will be a bit more costly than the Olympus gear.

Phil Rudin

http://www.sfups.org/Galleries/PhilRudin/index.html

Phil, I was actually thinking of the new dedicated port for the 9-18, the 100 mm (?) one that looks very similar to the 14-42 port...

Thomas

Cool, I would like your feedback on that port, I have not seen one or had a chance to use it yet but it sure would take up less space in my travel bag.

Phil

Hello all,

I am interested in reading your thoughts on the advantages and disadvantages of the E-620 and E-520.

Thanks,

Jim

Just a quick update. Received my E-620 yesterday. Haven't had a chance to properly try it out yet, but menus etc are about the same as the earlier models, some stuff has been "hidden" but can be accessed fairly easy.

The camera sits very well in the hand, although the grip of the E-520 is slightly better for one handed shooting. The size difference between the two isn't that big of a deal in reality and with a lens on. The hinged screen feels solid and well made, although maybe not quite as solid as on the E-3.

The backlit buttons are really cool and work very well! The viewfinder is MUCH better. In terms of size it's not that much bigger, but the information has been moved to the bottom and this helps a LOT. Apart from that, not much to say so far. Even with the WB sensor, indoor AWB is fairly poor and one touch is as usual a good idea.

The camera is very well balanced with the 9-18 (and obviously with the 14-42 or the 40-150).

And so for the item that's probably of most interest to people here: my camera store mailed me to inform me that they've been in touch with Olympus and expect to receive the PT-E06 housing in mid May.

Tom

Tom...just out of curiosity I'm wondering if you can post me a photo taken with the noise filter off on ISO1600. A photo with shadows would be ideal.

I played a bit with the E620 at PMA, I can say that the two differences I also saw were that the liveview was quite a bit faster than the E520 and that the 7 point AF was a lot better than the 3 on the E520.

I'm actually hearing more like end of month/1st week of May on the PT-E06.

Jack

Tom...just out of curiosity I'm wondering if you can post me a photo taken with the noise filter off on ISO1600. A photo with shadows would be ideal.

This is the best I can do so far... A quick shot of my shoe cabinet (not nearly as crammed as my wife's...). I've also included a 100% crop of the area with the most shadows. Looked at lifting it in LR, you can pull it about 0.7 steps without much of a problem, should be able to do more with RAW. On the whole - much better than E-3 (banding issues) and E-520 (color noise at ISO 800).

Handling is great! Buttons are a bit small compared to any previous camera, including the E-4x0 series. However, this is not an issue in real world use. And the rest is just sublime... I hope to get a few hours with it in broad daylight tomorrow, will post some images after that.

Should add: samples are ISO 1600 with NR off. Not a setting I would normally use...

This is the best I can do so far... A quick shot of my shoe cabinet (not nearly as crammed as my wife's...). I've also included a 100% crop of the area with the most shadows. Looked at lifting it in LR, you can pull it about 0.7 steps without much of a problem, should be able to do more with RAW. On the whole - much better than E-3 (banding issues) and E-520 (color noise at ISO 800).

 

 

 

Handling is great! Buttons are a bit small compared to any previous camera, including the E-4x0 series. However, this is not an issue in real world use. And the rest is just sublime... I hope to get a few hours with it in broad daylight tomorrow, will post some images after that.

 

Should add: samples are ISO 1600 with NR off. Not a setting I would normally use...

Thanks. Yes, just from the sample I'd say much better than my E520 and if I were buying today the E620 would be the camera I'd get.