Herald Scotland

Just a quick heads up for those interested: Amateur Photographer magazine has just published the first test of the Olympus E-P1 - in shops now (18th July Issue i think).

Dave I don't know if you can get this in the Netherlands; if you're interested PM me with your contact details and I'll murder you in your oops no I'll copy mine and send it off ;)

I'm going off the idea of the E-P1 now. Mainly due to lack of viewfinder. Eventually they'll have a model with one, but it'll be heavier, so getting close to the DSLRs which are more versatile at the moment.

I held a Canon 500D at the w/e, and boy did it feel light to me compared with my 5D - even with the Canon 10-22 lens. The LCD screen is stunning. If it had a swivel screen instead if video I'd be buying, but I'll probably get a 450D. I've seen mixed reports about high ISO performance of the 500D. Some say better than 450D, some on a par with, and some worse, but all these are viewing at 100%. I guess it'd be difficult to separate them in the real world. Is 15MP and a gorgeous screen worth the extra cost? I can't decide.

I've been reading a fair bit of this thread with interest, but don't think I've posted yet? That said it is a fairly long thread so I may have a post lost in there somewhere ;)

I still have been leaving my D-SLR at home a lot to cut down on size/weight in my pack, although I missed some great photographic opportunities on Monday which I was really kicking myself over. Need to get back to bringing the camera with me!

I know what you mean about the weight of the entry level Canon's Ian. I shoot with a 350D and have actually gone back to using the kit lens with it because it is so light. For a D-SLR it really is a pretty light and compact setup, and whilst I've been considering upgrading to a 40D/50D I dont know if I want the extra size or weight. The only thing I would really like on my 350D is a bigger, brighter display, a bigger brighter viewfinder and sensor cleaning - all these features are available on the 400D upwards though so I wont be too hard to please.

Ian - the fact the 500D is 15MP actually puts me off, although many camera manufacturers (and consumers) seem to be slowing up on the MP race. I must confess I havent seen any full res images from a 500D but surely they are pretty huge to work with physically and big file sizes as well? I've got excellent results printing up to A3 with my 350D (which I think is either 6 or 8MP, cant remember) so I'm not sure I see the benefits. I'm working on the assumption here though that 15MP doesnt actually translate to better image quality?

If high ISO was on my shopping list I'd go for a Nikon D90 or D300 though. Stunning at high ISO, a friend of mine has a D300 and the images have very little noise working at and even above ISO 800. (AFAIK the D90 uses the same sensor as the D300). As he said himself it actually helps him reduce what he would otherwise spend on "fast glass" because he can run at high ISO's rather than wide apertures. Like most though I have a few lenses and accessories for my Canon so swapping isnt really a viable option ;)

If you've gone back to your kit lens for weight reasons, the 15MP will probably be wasted anyway. I can sympathise though, I was cursing myself on my recent Cairngorm trip, my first with my Tamron 17-50 2.8, which is much heavier than the kit lens it replaced. All in, my photography kit adds about 3.5kg to my pack. I was thinking about bringing my compact on future trips, but doubt I would have ended up with results like this:



The high ISO performance of the D300 is very tempting, but I too am unwilling to switch to Nikon as I have a few EF lenses which would then need replacing. I just wish Canon has released the 50D as a 12MP unit with ISO performance to rival the D300. As it stands, I find myself stitching images when I require higher resolution, it makes a big difference when viewing fine detail up close. I'll no doubt end up with either the 50D or 40D when I replace my 350D next year, if I still have a job... :-/

PS: lets see some shots!

Suspect: I agree that for all your requirements all you need is an upgrade - though I'd go for 450D and up for the better viewfinder. This should sort you out for everything except high ISO noise - though some report that the 500D is good for that too, though I doubt as good as the Nikons you mention. Other reports suggest no better than 450D which is good to around 400 or 800. If you wanted to stick with Canon then a cheap(ish) 2nd hand 5D produces very clean images at 1600. Amazing for a camera around 4 years on, but they're heavy and bulky, as are the lenses that do it justice.

I also agree to a certain extent with you about the MP war. For amateur use I'd be really happy with around 8MP (maybe even less) but both Chris and I need to consider requirements for editorial use. (8MP on an APSc size modern sensor should be very quiet these days too at high ISOs). For a double page spread (DPS) at the industry standard of 300dpi you need around 18MP, so even the 15MP 500D doesnt quite cut it without upsizing. For home printing though I'd be happy at 200dpi, and most prints would be A4 or less, thus reducing MP requirements.

"15MP doesn't translate into better image quality" :

this depends on the processor. They're getting better at dealing with noise. If files are clean, the higher resolution should produce a more detailed image. The E-P1 produces good image quality on a smallish m4/3s sensor. Why - because of the processor. About a year ago I thought we were coming to the limits of how many MP we could squeeze out of a sensor, but it seems image quality remains good with ever more MPs. This is good for Pro use, but as you say, we've aleady gone beyond what the average amateur needs, and for most purposes the large files are a disadvantage.

Vorlich - nice colour and movement in th cloud. Not sure why you'd want the heavier xxD over the xxxD models. Image quality is similar. For landcape photography all you get is better build (with more bulk and weight). Maybe the viewfinder is brighter (not sure).

Cheers Ian. I must admit, I haven't looked too closely at either the 40D or 50D, as it would probably result in an impulse purchase. :) Once I decide to look at it more closely I'll maybe evaluate them more critically... Whilst the lower bulk of the 350D is great for backpacking, I find the handling a little fiddly for shooting handheld, I'd prefer a bigger grip...

Aah I presumed as you had the 350D it's small size was OK for you.

It's not ideal, but was the best I could afford at the time - also my first SLR, so it was big jump from what I had before.

Not an slr but i have bought a little gem,a canon powershot A480,thats all i am using at the moment,excellent quality and very versatile,1cm macro,programable shutterspeed up to 15 seconds for those very low light shots and a very versatile self timer,up to 10 shots with up to a 30 second delay,ideal for when you are walking alone and want to get into that shot,no anti shake technology but i carry a mini tripod anyway and the camera is very light,it does what i want.
Not all the pics are brilliant probably as i hand held most of them but a great little camera.

Ah well i tried to post a link to an online album but it didnt work,you will have to take my word for it!