Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

E520 vs e510

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • E520 vs e510

    Am thinking of either of these bodies, some I have read say the 510 has a weak aa filter, one of the jobs I will use it fr is iso800 night shots, maybe iso400
    Pana 45-175, GX1, 14/2.5,14-45, 45/1.8, 7.5/3.5 soon
    OLY E-pm1- 14-150(wife's), e500,25/1.4 CCTV,

  • #2
    Re: E520 vs e510

    I don't know about the E-520, but I know that with the E-510 the higher iso's are not a problem as long as the shot is not underexposed. Noise becomes a problem with underexposure. There are other members here who could, I'm sure, give you better advice from their experience.

    Jeff
    Last edited by Ians Tata; 14th September 2011, 02:00 PM. Reason: spelling
    My grandson, Ian (not our own FTU Ian), calls me "Tata", so I am...

    Ian's Tata

    Do Not Meddle In The Affairs Of Dragons...
    For you are crunchy and good with ketchup.

    http://ianstata.com
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/ians-tata/
    http://www.edwardswaterhouseinn.com/ 2014, 2015, & 2016 TripAdvisor Certificates of Excellence
    https://www.facebook.com/edwardswaterhouse

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: E520 vs e510

      Dan, the E520 does apply more noise reduction than the E510 with the result that the E510 gives a bit better sharpness out of camera. Apart from price this is why I went for the E510.

      I am very pleased with the performance up to and including ISO 800. As always exposure has to be good avoiding underexposure. Both the E510 and E510 suffer from banding at ISO 1600.

      I shoot with the sharpness setting at -1 since I find this gives me the best performance IMHO.

      Either one will give you great performance, and there may well be others that will give the E 520 the nod.


      Bill
      E510, 14-42,14-54, 50-200, EC1.4, FL36R

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: E520 vs e510

        Hi Dan,
        I've been using the E520 since late 2008.
        As long as you keep the ISO low you'll find that the camera is producing nice photos.
        I seldom go past ISO400 only using ISO800 occasionally, but that requires a steady hand or a tripod. As I don't have a tripod, I seldom use it for night/low light photography.

        What images do you expect to create ?
        You do find better cameras out there for night photography - ALL newer generations of OLY/PANA cameras will do better anyhow.

        Some examples:

        Red lamp - ISO1600 - Only reason it ended up red, was that I had to be creative to "hide" the noise and banding in the photo.
        PP in Olympus viewer - Can do a somewhat better job using LightRoom


        St.Petersburg - ISO400 - City lights
        PP in Olympus viewer - Can do a somewhat better job using LightRoom

        Ferris wheel - ISI400 - Strongly lit object - no night sky visible (Intentially)
        PP in Olympus viewer - Can do a somewhat better job using LightRoom

        EXIF's intact on all

        Hope you find what you are looking for !

        PS - I wouldn't use any other camera - but I don't do a lot of night shots anyhow.

        René
        René

        Cameras : Olympus E-M5, E-520, E-600
        Lenses : mZD12, mZD45, mZD12-50, ZD35, ZD14-42, ZD40-150, Sigma 70-200

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: E520 vs e510

          Thanks Rene, some good points
          Pana 45-175, GX1, 14/2.5,14-45, 45/1.8, 7.5/3.5 soon
          OLY E-pm1- 14-150(wife's), e500,25/1.4 CCTV,

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: E520 vs e510

            Hi Dan

            I think using any make of camera for night shots will be challenging for the camera.

            I set my E-510 to fire works mode once for night shots and it gave surprisingly good pics. If you use RAW for night work, a good PP program should restore the pictures to a decent level.

            I aggree about the AA filter on the 510, its weaker than the 520 and 620 which is why the 510 is so liked for its high definition and sharp results. A little bit of noise in my book is OK as it enhances detail, but too much noise reduction just smears the pics in its attempt to wipe out the noise, end result not the sharpest or best definition pictures.

            Yes, under exposure can increase shadow noise, but then that happens on most other makes of camera to one degree or another.

            The Olympus E cameras probably have one of the best Jpeg processors of any make of camera and it is so good that even some pro's shoot in Jpeg as its on board conversions are superb with minimal PP being required. Obviously, RAW will drag out a tiny bit more detail and colour but its not significantly better than Jpeg.

            Peter

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: E520 vs e510

              Originally posted by Ians Tata View Post
              I don't know about the E-520, but I know that with the E-510 the higher iso's are not a problem as long as the shot is not underexposed. Noise becomes a problem with underexposure. There are other members here who could, I'm sure, give you better advice from they're experience.

              Jeff
              Yes, I agree with Jeff here. ISO 800 is fine on the E-510 if the exposure is right.

              I will also note that the E-520 has different curves processing than the E-510, and I personally find the E-510 to be much more pleasing for night photography. The E-520 will try to boost the lower end of the exposure (I'm not talking about Shadow Adjustment Technology either) while the E-510 will retain those dark shadows that you want in night photography.

              Add the weaker AA filter and sharper images of the E-510, and I would give the E-510 a thumbs up for image quality in what you're using it for.
              Olympus E-3 | Olympus E-PL2 PEN | Olympus E-PM1 PEN | Zuiko ED 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5 SWD | Zuiko 14-54mm f/2.8-3.5 | Vivitar 100mm f/2.8 Macro | Carl Zeiss Sonnar 135mm f/2.8 | Konica Hexanon 50mm f/1.4 | Konica Hexanon 85mm f/1.8 | G.Zuiko 50mm f/1.4 | Zuiko 35mm f/3.5 Macro | Zuiko 25mm f/2.8 | KMZ Jupiter-3 50mm f/1.5 | E.Zuiko 200mm f/4 | Zuiko 75-150mm f/4 | Olympus EC-14 teleconverter | VF-2 and VF-3 Viewfinders | EMA-1 Mic Adapter | Olympus FL-36R and FL-50R speedlights

              cyclopsphoto.ca

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: E520 vs e510

                If you go for the E520 then I would suggest using Normal Gradation & not Auto Gradation which brings noise into the shadows if ISO starts to go past, say 200. I find it better to adjust the curves later on to the amount desired & not the fixed amount from the Auto Gradation setting.

                I started with the E410 which my son now uses & I find that the photos are a little sharper from that compared to the E520, but then, nice detail can still be had from the E520.
                Ross
                I fiddle with violins (when I'm not fiddling with a camera).
                Cameras: OM-D E-M1 & Mk II, Olympus Stylus 1, OM-D E-M5.
                Lenses: M.ZD12-40mm f2.8 PRO Lens, M.ZD40-150mm f2.8 PRO Lens with MC-14, M.ZD12-50, M.ZD60 Macro, M.ZD75-300 Mk II, MMF-3, ZD14-54 II, Sigma 150mm F2.8 APO Macro DG HSM.
                Flashes: FL36R X2, FL50R, FL50.
                Software: Capture One Pro 10 (& Olympus Viewer 3).

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: E520 vs e510

                  Thanks Ross

                  I knew about the extra noise in the shadows when using auto gradation on the 520, but apparently its not quite as bad on the 620. Totally aggree, adjusting the tone curve in PP really can get some good detail out of the shadows not to mention fixing blown out skys. My Silkypix seems to remove noise quite well, but I rarely get excessive noise in my Jpegs any way.

                  Cheers

                  Peter

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X