My experience with Olympus

[Injektilo*]

I started taking pictures about 3 years ago, digital made it affordable for me.
I started with a cheap point and shoot, but decided I needed a DSLR to get the pictures I was seeing in my mind.

I first got the E520 back when it first came out (there was a price war online and I got it super cheap). I soon realized that the kit lens was limiting and wasn't working for me (or I wasn't working it).

I wanted something that would challenge me and also be extremely fast in low light. I settled on the PanLieca 25mm f1.4. The lens has forced me to think about my frame and how to compose with the lines in it. I've learned most of what I know about composition from this lens, it's helped me improve by leaps and bounds. I also love the DOF and bokeh on this lens, any thing shot wide open on this lens takes on a dreamy feel as long you have the focus just right. Here's a few my most popular shots on this lens









I shot exclusively with this lens for almost a year before finally deciding I needed a wide angle to get the other shots I kept seeing but where unable to capture with the 25 alone. I did a bit of research and was torn between the sigma 10-20 or the Zuiko 7-14. After reading all the reviews I could find I decided on the more expensive 7-14 because of the lack of distortion and the raving reviews.

I've only been able to shoot a few times with this lens but in my last session I feel I have found my nitch with it and can't wait to explore whats possible. Here's a few from each session

session 1




Session 2




Session 3


Session 4






There's a few things I love about this camera, the colors are amazing, I can meter to 60 seconds and live view works well for being one of the first camera to implement it.

However it's not without it's a drawbacks, noise is unbearable for me on anything above iso 100. The banding you see once you start shooting around iso 800 is intolerable, one wonders how oly could let something like this go into production. No matter though cause I shoot everything 100 and use a tripod for almost all my shots. Another issue is the viewfinder is pretty much unusable. I can make do with it but I find it impossible to frame a shot properly through it and only attempt to use it when hand holding a shot, otherwise I use live mode only.

I've thought about upgrading to the E3 but from what I hear it's not really worth it for just an articulating screen and weather sealing (the only 2 features that I am drawn to on the E3).

So that's my opinion, thanks for reading.
Check out some more of my photo's on flickr.com/injekt

[Atomic2]

Seeing as you put in a lot of time into taking your shot, you should probably shoot in RAW and there is a significant amount less noise.

The E3 is also a lot better with noise.

[Injektilo*]

Seeing as you put in a lot of time into taking your shot, you should probably shoot in RAW and there is a significant amount less noise.

The E3 is also a lot better with noise.

I shoot only raw, I'll probably rent an e3 to see if it's worth the upgrade, I won't be able to tell untill I actually use it.

[BlueRob]

Maybe my tolerance to noise is greater than yours but with my E-420 I feel its decent up to ISO 400.
Great shots BTW.

[Greg McCary]

The E3 has much less noise. I have shot at night as high as 800iso with nice results. I really like your style and if you get a chance write a review on the lens come back and post a link. If I owned the 7-14mm I would be set but it certainly is a costly lens. I have thought some on the 9-18mm but am not sure how well it performs in low light. Thanks for sharing you have some great stuff.

[Injektilo*]

The E3 has much less noise. I have shot at night as high as 800iso with nice results.

That isn't exactly a glowing review of the E3, I mean people with cheap ass canons are shooting iso3200 with no noise at all. Oly needs to work on this, and maybe put out a full frame option.....the sensor on the E3 is only marginally better than the 520 making it not worth the upgrade for me, especially for the cost, it's just not professional equipment.

I really like your style and if you get a chance write a review on the lens come back and post a link. If I owned the 7-14mm I would be set but it certainly is a costly lens.

I probably won't bother writing a review, there's more than enough out there and they all say the same thing "beautiful lens, little to no distortion, awesome pictures, price is too high" oh and they all mention the inability to use filters, not a big deal for me ;)

All I have to say is that it certainly is a challenging lens, trying to frame a shot at 7mm without cropping is difficult, but fun at the same time.

I have thought some on the 9-18mm but am not sure how well it performs in low light. Thanks for sharing you have some great stuff.

You don't really buy a wide for low light situations, I mean f4 isn't exactly fast and it does have trouble focusing in low light, but with something this wide there really is no need to focus unless you are shooting something inches from the lens. I typically just manual focus to just below infinity and leave it.

Thanks for compliments though, just like everyone else I still have a lot to learn. I've found a niche that I'm good at, now I have to start working on things I am not good at...portraits, daytime landscapes, wildlife photography.

[Sushigaijin]

Nice shots, and welcome.

I started with the kit lenses and the 50/2. After shooting a few rounds with all of them, I put the kit lenses in a different bag and just carried the 50. I'd personally rather carry one super high quality fast prime than a couple of OK zooms. That PL 25/1.4 may very well be my next lens depending on if Olympus finally releases the storied 100mm macro this summer.

The E3 is a small upgrade from the 520 - really the most important differences are the weather sealing and articulated screen, although I'd add the very nice optical viewfinder and rugged build. If those aren't things you're worried about, your money is better saved.

And from the look of your samples, you don't need to buy any kit anyway.

[Greg McCary]

That isn't exactly a glowing review of the E3, I mean people with cheap ass canons are shooting iso3200 with no noise at all. Oly needs to work on this, and maybe put out a full frame option.....the sensor on the E3 is only marginally better than the 520 making it not worth the upgrade for me, especially for the cost, it's just not professional equipment.

I have never shot with the 520 but many night shots with the 510. I never got anything usable over 200iso, but with the E3 there is quite a bit better IQ. This was shot at 800iso. But there is better but at what price. You get what you pay for. Yes I would like a full frame camera but by the time you buy the camera and then a lens with IS you have laid down quite a chunk of money. For the price I think the E3 holds it's own. I get the job done.