Olympus E300 8mp SLR

Has any body considered this camera ???

At $995.00 including 14-45 3.5/5.6 lens it sound like good value.

Olympus have announced the PT-EO1 housing for it that they have rated to 6O meters.

I expect they will show it at the Japanese Dive Show Jan 28- 30.

Cheers

Hi Peter,

I think a few people have considered it but put it aside in favore of cameras with better lens selection and better housing choices. And it's a 4/3's small sensor.

Cheers

James

It is an interesting camera. Tio, over on digital diver has an E-1 and posted some pictures from it a few weeks back. While the image quality coming out of the Olympus SLRs (at least the pictures I've seen) has been very nice, I think it is a stretch for many to consider because they are already invested in Canon or Nikon lenses, etc., and are a bit sqeamish about buying into the Olympus system (lenses, etc.) without knowing how "recoverable" that invenstment will be in the future. I believe that Ike is currently testing a housing for that camera, with full TTL functionality, so it might be worth a look. Hadn't heard about Olympus housing it. Again, if image quality were the only concern I think many more would seriously consider it.

If there was a TTL housing I think some wetpixelers would use it - look at how populat the S2 was around here (generally a pretty unpopular camera outside the wedding photog crowd). And there'd be plenty of Olympus fans from the digicam forum, I'm sure. Me, I'd stick to Canon, or even Nikon in preference (i may edit out the Nikon comment later, but I'm feeling very broad-minded at present).

Re "Has any body considered this camera ??? "

I think when one goes to an SLR it's like going from dating to getting married.

For me, going from the 3040 to the 5050 was a no brainer. Just get the camera and housing and keep on shooting.

But when I decided to get a DSLR I had to stop and think about the company I would be keeping. To me it came down to, who had the lenses. For me this narrowed the field to Canon and Nikon as they have been the real players in lenses and SLRs since time began.

I went with the Nikon D70 because is was better than the Rebel. Today I would probably go with the Canon 20D. But tomorrow I might go with the next Nikon DSLR.

Back and fort. Back and forth. Canon, Nikon. Nikon, Canon. Pick one or the other because of their lenses and then stick with your pick because of your lenses.

Bottom line: When you make the move to DSLR you are or should be making a strategic decision and thus the days of going with the latest pretty face are over ... at least they are for me.

Back and fort. Back and forth. Canon, Nikon. Nikon, Canon. Pick one or the other because of their lenses and then stick with your pick because of your lenses.

Peter,

Before the emergence of eBay, I would have agreed wholeheartedly with you. However, now that there is the option of getting a pretty good return on used equipment (with the exception of used digital camera bodies, which isn't the issue here anyway), the decision to switch brands isn't so horrible anymore.

For example. I have long been a Canon person (for many reasons, none of which is worth metioning here). So, when I was getting ready to go to the Galapagos, I started thinking about buying a Canon 100-400IS lens. The price scared me off for a couple days. Then it occurred to me to check eBay. I quickly discovered that there really weren't any good deals there. Then it struck me -- if stuff was selling on eBay for almost the same price as getting it new, what was the real opportunity cost of buying the lens? I could buy it from B&H or another discounter, use the lens on my trip, then get 95% of the purchase price (if not more!) back for the lens on eBay if I decided I didn't like it or couldn't afford it. I couldn't even rent a lens for anywhere close to the small difference! Unlike camera bodies, good lenses hold their value quite well.

So, would I consider a Nikon rig in the future -- absolutely, if I could be convinced there was a compelling enough reason. At the moment, though, I'm quite pleased with what Canon is doing in the digital space.

Mike

PS I kept the lens

It's possible to switch but it's a pain in the butt! I'll let you know how much of a pain it is shortly...

Cheers

James

It's possible to switch but it's a pain in the butt!  I'll let you know how much of a pain it is shortly...

 

Cheers

James

Perhaps that's because you switch so darned often! :wink:

It's possible to switch but it's a pain in the butt!  I'll let you know how much of a pain it is shortly...

 

Cheers

James

James, you sold the Kodak/Aquatica already? I'm interested in hearing what your next choice is and reasons behind it.

Rand

Rand, check out this thread....partial explanation from James

http://www.wetpixel.com/PNphpBB2-viewtopic...1-start-0.phtml

Karl

I haven't sold the Kodak yet, but it's in the works. I got some great shots with the Aquatica, but it's a prototpye and I don't get to keep it. I will post the review though soon - should get it done this weekend.

And if you're looking for any lenses...

Cheers

James

Back and fort. Back and forth. Canon, Nikon. Nikon, Canon. Pick one or the other because of their lenses and then stick with your pick because of your lenses.

My contribution to all the sensible advice above is to choose the brand that you like the most/think is coolest! That way even if a few months down the line you camera is no longer the best - least you will like it more than the new number 1!

It is all about passion. Choose with your heart not your head!

That is why I use a Mac and shoot a Nikon (and come to think of it drive an Alfa Romeo)! Many would argue that they are not as good as a PC or a Canon (or a beemer)- but they look a damn sight cooler - you are not just another sheep - and I love 'em.

A contented owner (so long as Nikon actually bring out their D2X this millenium),

Alex

As one of the more vocal Nikon-haters on this forum, I welcome all those who are joining "the land of Canon", as I believe James put it. Your Nikon past will not be held against you, at least not very much.

I think what really happened is that James realised that his Kodak was in fact a very ugly camera, as I pointed out long ago. I haven't really taken any pictures with my 1Ds yet, but it is nice to hold. Now I'm off to polish it some more.

This forum is starting to sound like the playground banter at a private school......I've got a ***** shirt and ******* shoes and my mommy drives a ****** :shock:

Who cares! Does anyone really think that the quality of your shots depends on a particular brand? on a certain number of pixels? on a type of housing? with a brand of strobe?

I'm interested in seeing shots taken by people....not brands of cameras....I've never seen a camera influence composition :wink:

Come on guys....let's get off Brand Bashing and Brand Promotion and get back on the art and pleasure of underwater photography

Sorry for the rant..... :oops:

Karl

Karl,

Thanks for posting this.

I know, this brand bashing and pumping IS rediculous. Rob, I know you are just joking around but jeeze. This is why you don't see a post here from me (like you would see at DPreview.com) saying "Bye Bye Nikon!" Believe me, I am NOT happy about switching systems. Do you think it's fun selling off the best wide angle zoom in the market and the ONLY macro zoom?

In fact, this switch has little to do with the camera and a LOT to do with the housing/viewfinder/port setup that I'm getting. I'm getting a great housing that I think will last me a LONG time. That's the bottom line.

Cheers

James

Guys,

Wow, what a curve this thread has taken! I've played with the Olympus E300 and it certainly is cool.....Plus the price is right for many just starting out wanting more than a mid-range, shutter lag camera might be able to produce....

If Ikelite has enough demand for Nikon D2X housings I'm sure they'll make one.....As for the EOS 1DS MKII and other 1D cameras.....Beautiful to gaze upon, wax on about capability but no thanks....Far too much cost and weight to lug around. If Jim Watt and others can make printable and publishable photos with Canon's D60 (and now likely EOS 20D), plus Alex and me with a Nikon D100 I think a lot of this simply throwing $$$$ away. I've even used a Digital Rebel (!!!!!) and am on track to sell photos taken with my Canon G6!!! Computer post processing is a wondeful thing

As James points out you can also upgrade somewhat easier with lower cost cameras if you choose a housing that doesn't require a second mortgage, Ikelite of course in my biased opinion

IMHO if someone wants "the best" whatever that is and is willing to spend the $$$$ so be it...I think most underwater photography enthusiasts wrestle with the total cost of a Nikon D70, Digital Rebel or EOS 20D, etc. by the time you add up housing, ports, cords, strobes, etc. So new options like the Olmpus E300 might keep people interested in creating UW photos that feed all our souls.........

Sorry about the second rant (after Karl Dietz's comments, who's web site looks like he has a family to help support, too but any hobbyist who spends $10-$15K +++ to make underwater photos of stuff already shot to death I think is a little koo-koo

So in summary I think the Olympus might be another good choice once I see some tests on low light capability, etc....

YMMV

David Haas

Founder - PUPHU (Plastic Underwater P{hotography Housing Users

I agree. When shooting underwater it's the housing you use, not the camera. It's the combination of body, lens, housing and ports that matter, not whether it's canon or nikon or fuji. Brand is overblown.

While I'm very pleased with the Canon body, the lenses are not as good as I'm used to for underwater use. I'll work through that though. Likewise the Seacam is beautifully made but the ergonomics don't match my Nexus. I fully expect to fix that after I get the final ports and make some adjustments. The best camera on the world is useless without a good housing and the achilles heel of the Kodak is that it's so hard to house. It's a monster otherwise despite its lousy reputation.

It does no good to hate a brand or to love one. What did any of us do to contribute to Canon's or Nikon's or Apple's success? Nothing. The best thing that could happen to any Canon lover is for the D2x to be a great camera. What else will drive Canon to improve and to keep prices in line? I hope the Mamiya ZD kicks butt.

David Haas

Founder - PUPHU (Plastic Underwater P{hotography Housing Users

So, since my S&S housing is polycarbonate, that means I can still be a member!

Oh, I don't think hobbiests care what pros have already shot.

Everything I shoot has been shot before. Does that mean I should give up or just make sure I spend no money doing it?

"How much is good enough" is a legitimate point of view but certainly not the only one. I don't really care whether Jim Watt can sell D60 shots or not. His goals and mine are totally different. For him it's business and for me it's pleasure. I don't have to justify my purchases on the bottom line and I don't have to resort to Sea & Sea housings.

This forum is starting to sound like the playground banter at a private school......

Sorry, Karl, Dr Mustard started it.

Who cares! Does anyone really think that the quality of your shots depends on a particular brand? on a certain number of pixels? on a type of housing? with a brand of strobe?

Brand no, not as such. Pixels, housing, strobe yes definitely. Wouldn't have sold my spleen on Ebay in order to obtain 11 megapixels if I didn't believe that. Camera is just a tool of course, but good tools are handy to have.

James, I thought you to be a happy Canonian now, but clearly not the case. No more Canon/Nikon jokes from me for six months or so until the distress of losing your macro zoom is over.

I think that will be all from me on this thread. I'm off to scan some trannies on my Nikon coolscan.

Best wishes all,

RW