Moose, you never miss any chance to promote your 300D :-) Barry was asking
for the E1 and E300 comparison not 300D. Ok, we know it very well you are
very happy with your 300D.
Yes, I had a 10D and it is a fine camera, the major complain at that time
was C*non does not have a reasonable good superwide for 1.6x sensor, I only
had a 17-40L which was ok but it was just a 28-64 F4 (in 10D) and it cost
US$700. Not to mention about superwide, even as a standard zoom it was a bit
less. I wish a long time for a 28-105/F2.8 and the E-1 give me a closely
matched 2.8-3.5 of very light weight. Of course I bought the 11-22
immediately to enjoy the fun of super wide. It is a fact that Olympus E-1 is
having more noise than all the others with 1.5x and 1.6x sensor. It is
around 1.5 stop noiser than 10D, this is the major complain and low light
focusing is another one. Beside that I like its image quality much more than
the C*non, even I use RAW all the time, I found you need a better image to
start with, otherwise you will only get a "good" result but not an
"excellent" one.
Talking about lenses, I never like the slow one even I can use high ISO to
compensate for the speed. I like DOF control (mostly shallow DOF), less than
1% of my shots are at F8 or below.
For flash, I found the on camera flash very limited, no bounce, low power no
FP mode....ect. the FL-36 and FL-50 are excellent. Especially the FL-36
which is ten times better than the C*non 420EX at similar price. With normal
auto mode, full manual control (normal and FP), flash distance dispaly
change with ISO and aperture setting, TTL auto/FP mode with on flash
compensation settting, no need to get inside the camera menu. Now I always
carry the FL-36 and the FL-50 will be used only for big event.
C.H.Ling
----- Original Message -----
From: "Moose" <olymoose@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Barry B. Bean wrote:
>
>>My apologies if this one has been beat to death already, but what are the
>>important diferences between the E1 and the E300?
>>
>>
> You do need to understand that, as far as I know, no one on the list has
> both. The closest you can get is C.H., who had a 10D and sold it to buy
> an E-1. As I recall, his major stated reason was difficulty in finding
> lenses for the 300D that he liked with the small digital sensor. You
> might want to go into the archives and look at the thread 'E1 and
> ancient Zuikos', esp. C.H.'s post.
>
<Snip>
>
> OK, dispasson aside from here on--- And remember others just love their
> E-1s -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Personally, although there were a lot factors, three in particular
> weighed heavily in favor of the 300D for me.
>
> First, I tried out an E-1 with the 50-250 lens in a moderately lit, but
> certainly not dark, photo shop and found the focus at the long end slow
> and uncertain, even with lots of nice contrasty stuff to focus on, while
> a 300D focused easily. I now think this is a bigger deal than I did
> then. Having done the large family gathering thing at Christmas with a
> zoom slow at the long end, I had some trouble even with the better body.
> Of course, this was indoors at night, trying to sneak unsuspected
> close-ups a room away, but still... The 300D will focus in darkness, if
> you use the focus assist of the flash, but it's not good for people
> pics. They think they are in a cheap sci-fi film and flinch or look
> grumpy.
>
> Second, the E-1 doesn't have a built in flash. OK, so that's very
> 'professional' I suppose. I believe that on the full frame, $8,000 Can*n
> 1Ds, but not on the E-1. I don't do much flash photography except for
> gatherings of family, friends, etc. To do that with the E-1, I would
> have to spend a significant amount more money for something extra to
> hang on the camera. I can do that on the 300D too, of course, but for
> the run of the mill stuff, it's all built in. The E-Volt/E300 has a
> built in flash and the low light focus may be improved, I hear.
>
> Third, the difference in image noise is quite large, especially above
> 200 iso. Now to those who have always done most of their photography
> with 50, 100 and. 'gasp!', 200 iso film, and who intend to make digital
> photography just like film, that's no problem. To me, the digital option
> of switching speed at will and the image noise much less than film at
> the same iso demonstrated by many DSLRs, opens up possiblities that
> weren't available before. For one thing, IS generally gives about
> 1.5-2.5 stops of extra hand holdability. How much nicer, cheaper and
> easier to just up the sensor speed by a couple of stops. There went a
> lot of size, weight and cost - and it works with all lenses. Another
> change is in the kind of lenses that can be used and under what
> circumstances they work. I like teles a lot and the difference between
> an f2.8 long tele or zoom and an f4 one is 1 stop and a lot of size and
> weight and $, f5.6 is 2 stops slower and even lighter and cheaper. But
> if I just up the iso setting, I don't need the speed in many situations.
> For another example to add to those in reviews, here is my test of noise
> at different isos with the 300D
> <http://moosemystic.net/Gallery/Compar2FM1600sa.jpg>.
>
> A perfect example of what low noise at speed opens up is the new Tamron
> 28-300/3.5-6.3 (XR Di LD Asph. (IF) Macro, whew!). This marvel is about
> half the size and less than half the weight of the great old SP
> 60-300/3.8-5.4, optically excellent and focuses to 1:2.9 - at the 300mm
> end!
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|
