Does seem to be a bit of a problem for camera companies model development, not the first time there's been a top of the range model with fewer MP than the model below it.
Obviously the real question is whether its worth 82% in Amateur Potatoeater magazine...
__________________
Look at my photos on my website. Recently updated - too many new things to mention in one go . Also see some more of my pics at my flickr pages and on my funky flickr viewer
Overall, I'm very pleased--this is very close to being exactly what I want in a camera, and I'm seriously considering buying one. My big disappointment is the LCD. I was hoping for a vast increase in resolution, as I find the current LCDs mediocre for live view and reviewing images. With the same 230,000 dots of the current screens, it has only 1/4 the resolution of competing models from C and N. I would be much more sold on the E-30 if it had a better LCD. I was also hoping for a new, improved AF system rather than just borrowing the one from the E-3. I've never used an E-3, so I can't vouch for the AF performance, but I find AF on my E-410 rather poor, especially with moving subjects in continuous AF.
On the plus side, I love the articulating screen and additional control buttons. I am overjoyed with the magnified viewfinder image--just what I need! And the new sensor promises to be excellent and a great improvement--also just what I've wanted.
Now we'll just have to see how Olympus price the E-30. I still think they should be putting this up against the Nikon D90 at $1000 (US). It would be a much harder sell at a higher price, where it would be up against the Canon 50D. I would also be very reluctant to spend more than $1000 for this camera, and a higher price would still leave a big gap between the E-30 and the E-520. Factor in the current economy with wary consumers, and a higher price just doesn't seem like a good idea.
Some of the improvements I favor:
Higher ISO (3200), filters, larger view in viewfinder, 12 mpix, faster focus, more AF points, new 14-54 II lens.
Some of the further improvements:
LCD resolution (having now changed to Nikon, olympus LCD has to improve)
larger LCD (2.7in still small)
Most important:
*Recent crop of digital cameras from Nikon, Canon, Olympus seems to have problems with the autowhite balance (off white, yellowish, only natural color if flash is used). Key reason i bought and sold the e520.
*Speed of writing on to memory card (slow, reason bought / sold D60 & canon 450D. The canon picture froze at the family party= was I embarrassed! ). Olympus CD flash is still faster.
*Color accuracy (related to auto white balance issue)
Pricing:
if pitched at Nikon D90 level, seems like D90 is better buy with 3inch LCD, better resolution, video, higher mpix.
I was also hoping for a new, improved AF system rather than just borrowing the one from the E-3. I've never used an E-3, so I can't vouch for the AF performance, but I find AF on my E-410 rather poor, especially with moving subjects in continuous AF.
The e3 AF is a new improved AF designed and used first in the e3.. Kicks the e520 to the dirt (or my previous Pentax k10d/k20d also).. This was shot without even continues, just focus and shoot (it is so fast with 50-200).. I took 5 shots ALL in focus..
This really was just from a sudden series of snaps as I noticed it fly past me, not planned at all, but the AF with the 50-200 and E3 kept up no problem at all..
Quote:
Now we'll just have to see how Olympus price the E-30. I still think they should be putting this up against the Nikon D90 at $1000 (US).
I think if they want to pull in customers from other systems and new ones willing to spend more than the bottom end, then I think it should be priced below the D90...
I think the $1000 price point would do the trick. The live view with reticulating screen would be the combo that would get my vote over any of the other competitors.
The e3 AF is a new improved AF designed and used first in the e3.. Kicks the e520 to the dirt (or my previous Pentax k10d/k20d also).. This was shot without even continues, just focus and shoot (it is so fast with 50-200).. I took 5 shots ALL in focus..
This really was just from a sudden series of snaps as I noticed it fly past me, not planned at all, but the AF with the 50-200 and E3 kept up no problem at all..
Thank you for the E-3 focus example. What settings do you use for this kind of AF? A single AF point (and which one), or do you set the camera to choose automatically? (BTW, this is exactly the kind of situation that the E-410 does a dismal job with, no matter what AF settings I try.)
is 900k pixels on a 2.7 inch LCD screen better than 200k pixels on the same screen especially as you can zoom or is this a case of more pixel chasing
Let's get this right - there are pixels and dots. Pixels are the combination of three dots (Red, Green and Blue dots), so a 230,000 dot screen has 77,000 pixels.
The best DSLR screens currently used by Nikon and Canon are 3 inch panels with 960,000 dots, or 320,000 pixels, which is VGA (640x480 resolution).
The E-30 and all the current E-System cameras, have 230,000 dot screens, or 77,000 pixels.
The new Panasonic Lumix G1 has a 460,000 dot screen, so that's twice the number of pixels (153K) as the Olympus range, but about half that of the Nikons and Canons.
Reasons that have been given to me for NOT increasing the pixel count include more power consumption and lower contrast and poorer visibility in bright light. I'm not entirely convinced that these reasons hold up.
At some point, you will definitely reach the limits of human eyesight, so more will simply be pixel chasing. But I've seen the screen of the Nikon D300, and it is stunning. It is visibly much sharper than the LCD on my E-410. Details that are lost on my camera show up clearly on the D300 screen. It would be great for live view, which to me often appears grainy on the E-410. It also helps a lot when reviewing images. I find it hard to tell if I've captured what I want on the E-410 LCD, even with the zoom.
Linear Mode
