Help decide between two cameras!

[garritynet]

Hello,

I am looking to get a nice DSLR camera and maybe take some nicer pictures than I am able to with point and shoot cameras.

I have always been unsatisfied with the quality of various digital cameras although everyone else seems to think I take nice pictures. Anyway I think having a sweet DSLR camera would both come in handy and make for a nice hobby.

I have narrowed the decision down to either the Canon XSi or the Olympus E520.

I like the Canon because the reviews say it takes great pictures. I like the E520 because it gets very good reviews as well and its cheaper it is cheaper. I have also heard that Olympus lens are very good for what you pay and that since the E520 has in body stabilization I will save a lot on different lenses as the Canon IS lenses are very pricey.

Any insight? I know the XSi is supposed to be a hell of a camera for the money but is the E520 a smart decision at $100 cheaper? I can find it at $484 direct from Amazon sometimes so its really more like $150 cheaper. Are the Olympus lenses better than the Canon ones at the same price?

I don't have a particular need for a camera but I probably won't be taking pictures of wildlife or mountain tops. Mostly my cats will be my subjects

 

[jpeyton]

XSi

 

[996GT2]

Not many reasons to get the E-520 over the XSi...the Olympus has a rather primitive 3 point AF system and its high ISO performance is quite a bit inferior to the Canon's (mainly due to the fact that its sensor is physically smaller).

If you really want in body IS, look at the Pentax K200D or K20D.

 

[ivan2]

played around with the E520 at an airport store and have to say im not too impressed. Main complain will be the viewfinder image that is dark and small despite it has a pentaprism. The left side of the body looks awkward and holds awkward, probably because of the barrel shape and the overall small size. It's tiny though, with lens on, it feels more solid than the xsi, which is very plasticy. I know I will be using the middle focus point only anyway so I won't worry much about the focusing on this budget camera. The thing is that when it has pancake lens on, it looks adorable, so no pancake, no deal, I guess...

 

[Maximus96]

i paid $441 shipped with ebay with the 10% off plus 30% live.com cash back. its a great deal for the body+kit lens. and its was thru Cameta Camera, not some no name seller.

edit: looks like live.com is only giving 20% back for ebay...

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: ivan2
played around with the E520 at an airport store and have to say im not too impressed. Main complain will be the viewfinder image that is dark and small despite it has a pentaprism. The left side of the body looks awkward and holds awkward, probably because of the barrel shape and the overall small size. It's tiny though, with lens on, it feels more solid than the xsi, which is very plasticy. I know I will be using the middle focus point only anyway so I won't worry much about the focusing on this budget camera. The thing is that when it has pancake lens on, it looks adorable, so no pancake, no deal, I guess...

it's a pentamirror.

 

[garritynet]

Maximus96- What are you talking about?

ivan2- Thanks for the input.

996GT2- Is the high ISO performance really THAT much inferior? Well the XSi isn't too much more.

 

[andylawcc]

i have the E-410. AF is slow, and sometimes it just gives up. One solution is to Manual Focus, but on the kit lens it is painfully agonizing because it has electronic focus adjustor, instead of a mechanical one. ISO800 is somewhat usable, and 1600 is just desperation shot.

Other than that, however, I do love my Olympus. I don't find the viewfinder too tiny or dark, but it certainly can do better. The grip on the body is much better than the Canon's plasticky feel (as mentioned above). Also, Olympus body AND lenses are smaller compare to Canon's offering.

On the other hand, you get a whole lot more choices for lenses if you go with Canon. Currently, I do have most of my focal length covered for the type of shooting I make: 14-42mm, 40-150mm (hardly use). My main gripe is the lack of a relatively affordable ultra wide angle lens cuz I want to shoot landscape / architecture

So it also depends on what you want shoot; if you mainly are going to take pics indoors and with your cats, then you want a fast AutoFocus, good low light performance (lenses with smaller aperture numeric value), and a wide-angle to normal focal length lens (which means you don't need a 70-300mm tele lens).

 

[996GT2]

Originally posted by: garritynet
Maximus96- What are you talking about?

ivan2- Thanks for the input.

996GT2- Is the high ISO performance really THAT much inferior? Well the XSi isn't too much more.

From what I have heard, the E-520's ISO 800 is really pushing the limits of the sensor, and there is softening even at ISO 400.

The XSI is definitely worth it over the E-520 IMO. Faster overall performance, better AF, better high ISO performance, bigger screen, etc. The only thing you're missing is in-body IS and the XSI's kit lens comes with IS anyway, so it's not a big deal unless you really are looking to build up a big collection of non-IS lenses.

I had the chance to play with a friend's E-500 before, and the view through the viewfinder is pretty small indeed. The viewfinders on my D200 and EOS 40D are both light-years ahead of the E-500's in size.

 

[garritynet]

Would the Pentax K200D be comparable to the XSi as far as image quality? Is it a contender against the Canon?

I know the Canon XSi is supposed to be a great camera but if I can save a hundred bucks by going with another brand I can use that $100 to buy stuff I don't need so any help is appreciated.

Thanks!

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: garritynet
Maximus96- What are you talking about?

ivan2- Thanks for the input.

996GT2- Is the high ISO performance really THAT much inferior? Well the XSi isn't too much more.

the size of the sensor is about 2/3 of a stop smaller, so at the same sensor tech the sensor is going to be about 2/3 of a stop noisier.



the k200d is pretty comparable. it doesn't have live view but it is weather sealed. when used with the better pentax lenses the whole system should be able to shoot in rain, snow, or dust without getting a bunch of water or dust in it.

 

[GoSharks]

Originally posted by: ElFenix
the size of the sensor is about 2/3 of a stop smaller, so at the same sensor tech the sensor is going to be about 2/3 of a stop noisier.

The K200D is a great value.

 

[Maximus96]

Originally posted by: garritynet
Maximus96- What are you talking about?

look here for the live.com cash back deal for ebay. basically, you use paypal with buy-it-now and will get a percentage back. when i bought mine it was 30%, looks like its fluctuating and is now at 20 or 25%

 

[magomago]

Originally posted by: garritynet
Would the Pentax K200D be comparable to the XSi as far as image quality? Is it a contender against the Canon?

I know the Canon XSi is supposed to be a great camera but if I can save a hundred bucks by going with another brand I can use that $100 to buy stuff I don't need so any help is appreciated.

Thanks!

yes it is =) good camera, many people online love the K10D - which is essentially the same camera but in the K100D body

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: GoSharks

Originally posted by: ElFenix
the size of the sensor is about 2/3 of a stop smaller, so at the same sensor tech the sensor is going to be about 2/3 of a stop noisier.

if the technologies used are the same, sensor noise is almost completely dependent on the size of the sensor (once you're comparing prints and not pixel peeping). because a 135 sized sensor is 4x the size of a 4/3 sensor, it will have sqroot 2, or 2 stops, better noise performance. so it's like it's 2 stops larger. you could use a 2 stop slower lens, or 2 stops faster shutter, and get the same noise performance. which is why the $2000 zuiko 35-100 f/2 only matches the $500 70-200 f/f L.

 

[garritynet]

ElFenix- Are you saying that the 200D has a smaller sensor than the XSi or are we still talking about the E520? I know that the E520 uses a 4/3 system. Dose this mean that any 4/3 system is inherently going to have more noise?

Also, could someone give a noob a real world example of when higher noise would have a practical effect ?


Thanks for all your replies. I really just don't like the XSi but I can't put my finger on why. I have held it and it just feels flimsy and uncomfortable. I guess if it takes good pictures I can get past that but at the same time.

 

[Heidfirst]

Originally posted by: 996GT2

If you really want in body IS, look at the Pentax K200D or K20D.

or Sony A200 which imo is the current bargain entry level DSLR.
Of course it doesn't have some features like LiveView that you get with the XSi but would you really miss it?

 

[bobdole369]

OK, I think we're confusing the poor chap.

4/3 is the aspect ratio of the sensor. There is also 3/2 aspect ratio sensors.

It's not necessarily true that any 4/3 would have more noise than anything else.

The only time the aspect ratio of the sensor comes into play is when you take your photo to the lab for prints. 3/2 cameras can print 4x6's without a problem straight out of the camera. 4/3 must be cropped.

As far as sensor noise -

Some very good info here:

http://www.cambridgeincolour.c...camera-sensor-size.htm

Basically - if the megapixels are the same - and the sensor size is different - the camera with the larger sensor (and thus less densely packed megapixels) - will have the least noise.

 

[996GT2]

Originally posted by: bobdole369
OK, I think we're confusing the poor chap.

4/3 is the aspect ratio of the sensor. There is also 3/2 aspect ratio sensors.

It's not necessarily true that any 4/3 would have more noise than anything else.

The Olympus 4/3 sensor IS PHYSICALLY SMALLER than Canon and Nikon's APS-C sensors. That's why it has more noise. The aspect ratio of a sensor is irrelevant to noise. When we use 4/3 we're simply referring to Olympus's name for their SLR system, not the aspect ratio.

Nikon's APS-C sensor is 370mm^2 in area. Canon's is 330 mm^2. Not a big difference among those 2.

However, Olympus's 4.3 sensor is just 225 mm^2 in area, hence its poor noise performance in comparison to Canon and Nikon.

 

[Heidfirst]

Originally posted by: 996GT2


The Olympus 4/3 sensor IS PHYSICALLY SMALLER than Canon and Nikon's APS-C sensors. That's why it has more noise.

not just physical size of the sensor though, as already mentioned it's more about the size of the pixels e.g. a 6Mp 4/3 sensor (if it existed) would most likely have less noise than a 12Mp APS-C sensor (assuming that both are of the same generation as again over time improvements are made to base performance).

 

[996GT2]

Originally posted by: Heidfirst

Originally posted by: 996GT2


The Olympus 4/3 sensor IS PHYSICALLY SMALLER than Canon and Nikon's APS-C sensors. That's why it has more noise.

not just physical size of the sensor though, as already mentioned it's more about the size of the pixels e.g. a 6Mp 4/3 sensor (if it existed) would most likely have less noise than a 12Mp APS-C sensor (assuming that both are of the same generation as again over time improvements are made to base performance).

Right, but the E-520 is 10 MP, so it's got a sensor 2/3 the size with almost the same pixel count as the XSi...and so its pixel density is higher. Also, Olympus's NR algorighms are not as well developed as Canon's or Nikon's, so there is significant softening beyond ISO 400.

 

[bobdole369]

When we use 4/3 we're simply referring to Olympus's name for their SLR system

Thank you.

 

[bobdole369]

OK so the 4/3 tends to be noisier. Noones mentioned the relative lack of lens availability for the Olympus/Pentax/SOny, etc - when compared to the veritable sea of lens options for the Canon/Nikon world.

 

[996GT2]

Originally posted by: bobdole369
OK so the 4/3 tends to be noisier. Noones mentioned the relative lack of lens availability for the Olympus/Pentax/SOny, etc - when compared to the veritable sea of lens options for the Canon/Nikon world.

This is true to some extent, but mostly only if you are into specialty lenses like super-telephotos >400mm or tilt-shift lenses. In addition, many of Nikon's older lenses have no AF motor built in, and focusing via the camera's AF motor is noisy and often slow and inaccurate. For most shooters, the range of lenses offered by Olympus/Pentax/Sony is more than enough.

Also, third party makers such as Tokina, Tamron, and Sigma make a wide range of lenses for all DSLR brands. For example, if you really wanted an 800mm super-telephoto for the Sony Alpha or Pentax mounts, Sigma makes an 800mm f/5.6 EX.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Heidfirst

Originally posted by: 996GT2


The Olympus 4/3 sensor IS PHYSICALLY SMALLER than Canon and Nikon's APS-C sensors. That's why it has more noise.

not just physical size of the sensor though, as already mentioned it's more about the size of the pixels e.g. a 6Mp 4/3 sensor (if it existed) would most likely have less noise than a 12Mp APS-C sensor (assuming that both are of the same generation as again over time improvements are made to base performance).

once we're talking about printing the size of the pixels has very little influence on noise. which is why pixel peeping is silly. the two largest factors influencing noise are size of the sensor and then the technological features of the sensor (i.e. what process it uses, gapless microlenses, amplifier noise, etc.). which is why crop sensors are now able to compete with the original 5D, with it's 3+ year old tech. the other silly thing about pixel peeping is that lower numbers of pixels will always appear to have less noise because they are less accurate.



in the real world, basically all current SLRs have about the same noise performance from 100 to 400. once you're above 400 the larger sensors start to outperform the smaller sensors.

Originally posted by: bobdole369
OK so the 4/3 tends to be noisier. Noones mentioned the relative lack of lens availability for the Olympus/Pentax/SOny, etc - when compared to the veritable sea of lens options for the Canon/Nikon world.

there are plenty of lenses out there. for the average user, especially someone just starting, the lens selection is fine. most people aren't going to buy anything other than the kit standard zoom and a long focal zoom.

Originally posted by: garritynet
ElFenix- Are you saying that the 200D has a smaller sensor than the XSi or are we still talking about the E520? I know that the E520 uses a 4/3 system. Dose this mean that any 4/3 system is inherently going to have more noise?

Also, could someone give a noob a real world example of when higher noise would have a practical effect ?


Thanks for all your replies. I really just don't like the XSi but I can't put my finger on why. I have held it and it just feels flimsy and uncomfortable. I guess if it takes good pictures I can get past that but at the same time.

the k200d actually has a slightly larger sensor than the xsi. so do nikon dx cameras and sony cameras. it's not a large enough difference to see anything, even when pixel peeping.

the e520, part of the 4/3 system, has a significantly smaller sensor than pentax, sony, nikon, and canon.

noise destroys detail and reduces dynamic range. it is kind of like using a really grainy old film.