On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 11:27 AM, Ken Norton <ken@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Since I'm now bound by the "Oath of the Turned-Over Leaf" I'm no longer
> going to deride any cameras or even reviews of cameras. DeepPee's reviews
> are wonderful, glorious and most accurate. If they say a camera stinks, then
> it MUST be odious. I've discovered that I'm wrong on so many levels about
> cameras and camera design that it's best for me to just agree with others
> and be done with it.
Heh. Fat chance. ;^)
> All that said, the ONLY E-thingy that has come and gone which I even have
> even the remotest interest in is the E-330. That Live View A-Mode is why.
> Oh, and the fact that it has among the best color characteristics of all but
> the E-1.
You can kind of do sneaky street photography with the 410 and other LV
B bodies, but LV A is stealth itself.
I think you'd also like the fact that the AA filter is less strong
than the E-1's. Very easy to oversharpen. I found it important to
use LV B with the DZ 50-200 because I couldn't always be certain what
it was focusing on. Therefore, you have to drag a tripod along to do
landscapes etc. -- something I rarely do now with the E-3. The 50-200
would sour you a bit on the E-1 too, which is worse at focusing the
50-200 than the 330. The E-3 makes the 50-200 work as intended.
(Mine is the old version of the lens ...)
In direct comparison, the E-1 and E-3 are -- to my eyes -- very, very
close. The E-3 is a tiny bit hotter in the highlights, but color is
ever so close. They are hard to compare in that the E-1 has
saturation/color balance presets that don't have an exact counterpart
on the E-3. I think CS1-2 and the preset for skin tones is the most
neutral on the E-1. What do you think?
Joel W.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|