Replacing an Olympus E500 on a budget.
Discussion
I have an ageing Olympus E500 which has served me well over the years.
However, I've concluded that something a little more up to date might yield better images (particularly in low light) but I have a very, very limited budget, probably around £250 all in so would have to be a used camera obviously!
One of my bugbears with the Olympus has always been the prices of lenses - as there seems to be more available cheaper for Nikon / Canon cameras, so I thought if I could find a reasonable Canon or Nikon that would be good - but - would it be any improvement over the E500?
I've seen a Nikon D60 body for £75 - however I suspect this may not be much of an improvement over the Olympus?
I have also seen a D80 and D5000 for £125, and a D3000 with 18-25mm lens for £150.
Once again the burning question is - would any of the above be a large upgrade over the E500, or would I be better waiting until I can spend more?
I appreciate there are many other factors, lens quality and of course me the, the person taking the pictures.
All opinions welcomed, and I won't be offended by any criticism of my choice or my existing camera.
Comprehensive spec for the E500 can be found here.
TIA.
However, I've concluded that something a little more up to date might yield better images (particularly in low light) but I have a very, very limited budget, probably around £250 all in so would have to be a used camera obviously!
One of my bugbears with the Olympus has always been the prices of lenses - as there seems to be more available cheaper for Nikon / Canon cameras, so I thought if I could find a reasonable Canon or Nikon that would be good - but - would it be any improvement over the E500?
I've seen a Nikon D60 body for £75 - however I suspect this may not be much of an improvement over the Olympus?
I have also seen a D80 and D5000 for £125, and a D3000 with 18-25mm lens for £150.
Once again the burning question is - would any of the above be a large upgrade over the E500, or would I be better waiting until I can spend more?
I appreciate there are many other factors, lens quality and of course me the, the person taking the pictures.
All opinions welcomed, and I won't be offended by any criticism of my choice or my existing camera.
Comprehensive spec for the E500 can be found here.
TIA.
OPretty much any modern DSLR will be a significant improvement over your E500.
Like you, I had an E500 and it served me well for many years. I sold all my kit with the intention of going for a Nikon but a spur of the moment purchase has led me to own a mirrorless camera now.
After owning my Canon EOS M since last June I could never go back to a DSLR due to its size.
The more modern sensor also blew me away with the general image quality and low light performance being much much much better than the Oly.
DSLR wise, I'd be looking at something like a Nikon D5100/5200
Like you, I had an E500 and it served me well for many years. I sold all my kit with the intention of going for a Nikon but a spur of the moment purchase has led me to own a mirrorless camera now.
After owning my Canon EOS M since last June I could never go back to a DSLR due to its size.
The more modern sensor also blew me away with the general image quality and low light performance being much much much better than the Oly.
DSLR wise, I'd be looking at something like a Nikon D5100/5200
V8Wagon said:
Pretty much any modern DSLR will be a significant improvement over your E500.
Like you, I had an E500 and it served me well for many years. I sold all my kit with the intention of going for a Nikon but a spur of the moment purchase has led me to own a mirrorless camera now.
After owning my Canon EOS M since last June I could never go back to a DSLR due to its size.
The more modern sensor also blew me away with the general image quality and low light performance being much much much better than the Oly.
DSLR wise, I'd be looking at something like a Nikon D5100/5200
My thoughts more or less, though I was straight into mirrorless from bridge compacts (shudder).Like you, I had an E500 and it served me well for many years. I sold all my kit with the intention of going for a Nikon but a spur of the moment purchase has led me to own a mirrorless camera now.
After owning my Canon EOS M since last June I could never go back to a DSLR due to its size.
The more modern sensor also blew me away with the general image quality and low light performance being much much much better than the Oly.
DSLR wise, I'd be looking at something like a Nikon D5100/5200
The SLRs mentioned are probably the better choice at a lower budget; I would suggest looking into the equivalent to your E500 now are micro 4/3, which for Olympuses (pusi?) rather than Panasonic, are probably the EM5 or EM10. Both are fair bit more than your budget though.
You could use any old 4/3 lenses you have, though this still needs an adapter which isn't cheap, and AF only works with some lenses as far as I know. The micro 4/3 lens range is now very good, but mostly not cheap.
I'd stick away from the D80. We had one for Mrs CVP and it's the worst Nikon we've ever had and only lasted a year before it was replaced. The images always seemed soft whatever we did and whatever lens we used.
At around £250 - I'd support the mirrorless recommendation. At £269 new you have this click here
I am sure you will be pleasantly surprised with the advances since the E500.
Alternatively you could stick Olympus and London Camera Exchange have a used E3 at £250. You will then still be able to use your current lenses. It is the last of the line though so when it expires you'll have to change system at that point, http://www.lcegroup.co.uk/Used/Olympus-E-3-Body-On...
At around £250 - I'd support the mirrorless recommendation. At £269 new you have this click here
I am sure you will be pleasantly surprised with the advances since the E500.
Alternatively you could stick Olympus and London Camera Exchange have a used E3 at £250. You will then still be able to use your current lenses. It is the last of the line though so when it expires you'll have to change system at that point, http://www.lcegroup.co.uk/Used/Olympus-E-3-Body-On...
I replaced a Olympus E600 with a Nikon D80 a few years back.
The E600 was fine for what it was but the lure of Nikon's (cheaper) back catalog of lenses was strong.
In terms of performance there's probably not that much between them technically. The Nikon felt older but more professional and had a better viewfinder and had better autofocus.
The D90 is a better camera than the D80 if you can stretch to it and would be a stronger upgrade to the Olympus.
As an alternative as you have some good 4/3 lenses though I would be tempted to move to Micro four thirds if you don't mind electronic viewfinders. You can get an autofocus adapter that allows you to use your existing lenses on this system. If you need two cameras you could go for a main camera and a pocketable camera too. (pocketable one would need a small m4/3 lens rather than adapted 4/3)
The E600 was fine for what it was but the lure of Nikon's (cheaper) back catalog of lenses was strong.
In terms of performance there's probably not that much between them technically. The Nikon felt older but more professional and had a better viewfinder and had better autofocus.
The D90 is a better camera than the D80 if you can stretch to it and would be a stronger upgrade to the Olympus.
As an alternative as you have some good 4/3 lenses though I would be tempted to move to Micro four thirds if you don't mind electronic viewfinders. You can get an autofocus adapter that allows you to use your existing lenses on this system. If you need two cameras you could go for a main camera and a pocketable camera too. (pocketable one would need a small m4/3 lens rather than adapted 4/3)
TonyRPH said:
Some good suggestions, thanks to all who have contributed so far.
Both my O/H and I have E500's so our lens investment is high - and being able to use another camera which can use these lenses would be a massive bonus.
So the E3 is a great suggestion, but we would need two...
If you want to keep using your Olympus 4/3 lenses then the only real option is the E-M1, which you won't get on that budget. The other Olympus cameras would work too (with an adapter) but they don't have PDAF and would be very slow to focus with the (non-micro) 4/3 lenses.Both my O/H and I have E500's so our lens investment is high - and being able to use another camera which can use these lenses would be a massive bonus.
So the E3 is a great suggestion, but we would need two...
OP - given your current budget I can only feel a change of brand would be an infuriating learning curve with not much benefit.
Even if you are looking at the huge range of glass that, say, Nikkors would offer you, you will want to be sure of picking the good ones and a body that will handle them.
For example, my "budget" (I didn't actually have a budget!) in adding a second body last week was a factor of 10x your apparent spend and even then you might be disappointed in a small aspect like the inability of the designers to incorporate a screen suitable for manual focus. For me, that's a compromise. For someone else it would be a deal breaker. Only you know what it is about your present kit, apart from the fact that technology has leapt forward, that might actually be holding you back - and that's what you need to work out in detail before you assess where you would have to be to improve your kit sufficiently to justify your cost outlay.
But if it's a restricted budget I'd change either just one thing at a time, or think laterally that it needed an additional item you haven't got - tripod, for example?
Even if you are looking at the huge range of glass that, say, Nikkors would offer you, you will want to be sure of picking the good ones and a body that will handle them.
For example, my "budget" (I didn't actually have a budget!) in adding a second body last week was a factor of 10x your apparent spend and even then you might be disappointed in a small aspect like the inability of the designers to incorporate a screen suitable for manual focus. For me, that's a compromise. For someone else it would be a deal breaker. Only you know what it is about your present kit, apart from the fact that technology has leapt forward, that might actually be holding you back - and that's what you need to work out in detail before you assess where you would have to be to improve your kit sufficiently to justify your cost outlay.
But if it's a restricted budget I'd change either just one thing at a time, or think laterally that it needed an additional item you haven't got - tripod, for example?
Ideally I need to borrow another (newer) camera to really find out if an upgrade (on my budget) is worth it.
My only real issue with the E500 is the small LCD screen, and poor low light capability (low light not such a huge problem).
The other thing (which a filter might cure?) is when taking pics on cloudy days, the image always appears washed out - almost over exposed but playing with shutter speeds / aperture doesn't seem to help.
I also feel that the Olympus lenses are pretty good, and that buying a low end Canon / Nikon with lenses - those lenses may not be as good as the Olympus?
ETA: This is the kind of thing I'm thinking of.
The grass is somewhat washed out in this image, and the harsh light of the sky seems to dominate the picture.
My only real issue with the E500 is the small LCD screen, and poor low light capability (low light not such a huge problem).
The other thing (which a filter might cure?) is when taking pics on cloudy days, the image always appears washed out - almost over exposed but playing with shutter speeds / aperture doesn't seem to help.
I also feel that the Olympus lenses are pretty good, and that buying a low end Canon / Nikon with lenses - those lenses may not be as good as the Olympus?
ETA: This is the kind of thing I'm thinking of.
The grass is somewhat washed out in this image, and the harsh light of the sky seems to dominate the picture.
Edited by TonyRPH on Friday 6th February 15:38
Some of the Olympus glass was very good indeed, hence the high prices.
The problem with the photo you show is one of metering and dynamic range. The sky is very bright and the rest of the photo is darker. The camera can't expose correctly for both so either over-exposes the sky or under-exposes the rest. You really need to use exposure compensation (as a minimum) or full manual to make sure the highlights and shadows are not clipping, and then even out the exposure in post. Alternatively you could take bracketed shots and combine them into an HDR image.
The problem with the photo you show is one of metering and dynamic range. The sky is very bright and the rest of the photo is darker. The camera can't expose correctly for both so either over-exposes the sky or under-exposes the rest. You really need to use exposure compensation (as a minimum) or full manual to make sure the highlights and shadows are not clipping, and then even out the exposure in post. Alternatively you could take bracketed shots and combine them into an HDR image.
TonyRPH said:
marctwo said:
Some helpful stuff
Maybe I'm expecting too much from auto mode and I need to explore the bracketing features etc.I guess I am a lazy photographer in many ways
I think this guy does a good job of explaining things in an understandable way:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCs4S07E5NC0R7pVuz...
Then you may like to consider developing your knowledge and skills in a couple of areas: intermediate level exposure control and some post processing skills.
Far be it from me to suggest anyone should stop themselves from helping the economy tick over, but you'd have similar issues with a different camera set to auto. And don't be tempted by thinking a filter is some sort of panacea!
Far be it from me to suggest anyone should stop themselves from helping the economy tick over, but you'd have similar issues with a different camera set to auto. And don't be tempted by thinking a filter is some sort of panacea!
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff