Olympus E420 DSLR gets reviewed

We got a little hands-on time with Olympus's tiny E420 DSLR back at CeBIT, but the cam's now shipping and the crew at LetsGoDigitial put one through its paces. As you'd expect, the E420's diminutive stature won praise for being light and compact while still fitting well in the hand, but the real accolades were saved for the new Live View feature that allows for instant focusing with supported lenses and solid image sensor that delivers images on par with the more expensive Olympus E-3. The only major negatives appears to be some noise at higher ISO settings and the lack of an IS system, but those aren't necessarily major flaws -- and if you're in the market for a DSLR, the review just beyond the read link might be well worth your time.

[Hotrod @ Jun 3rd 2008 8:58PM]

Wow, images on par with an E-3? I'm real excited about the e-520 now.

[Hero @ Jun 3rd 2008 9:28PM]

any word when it comes out. All I've heard it June.

[Hero @ Jun 3rd 2008 9:28PM]

The 520 that is. . .

[Temple @ Jun 3rd 2008 10:29PM]

Think the E420 is an amazing small camera; built sturdy for its small size (unlike the cheap plasticity feel of the Canons Rebels and Nikon D40/D60s). Personally I'm a Nikon shooter (own a D300), but I'm seriously thinking about getting the E420 as my little Leica replacement. There is no way I'm getting an M8 (at $5,000) with its sub-par image quality and crazy price, and I've been looking for a small carry around camera that would replace my film Leica M6 TTL.

While I'm not a huge fan of the four-thirds system (2.0 crop), I'm immensely interested in getting this camera. I'm even thinking about getting the Leica four-thirds lenses that they made for the Panasonic LX2/Leica Digilux 2. Also the Olympus F/2 Telephoto lens is also interesting (if a little expensive).

[Michael Zhou @ Jun 3rd 2008 10:41PM]

To be fair the Leica has superb image quality.

[SOOPERGOOMAN @ Jun 3rd 2008 11:25PM]

Really, you're excited? But there's no lens.....lol
sorry couldn't resist temptation. It's a great camera.

[Boudu @ Jun 3rd 2008 11:38PM]

>>To be fair the Leica has superb image quality.

Not so much with the newest digital M8. Leica lenses weren't really designed for the modern digital sensor (like pretty much every modern lens is), and the M8 has been known to have serious IR sensitivity issues. One review has even stated that the similarly compact Canon Rebel XTi outperforms the $5k Leica M8 in image quality.

I'm saying this as someone who owns and shoots Leica, but even their glass is really outclassed by modern Nikon and Canon lenses, and certainly not worth the price. What Leica does have is that it embodies all the technical wonders of the photographic equipment, and the "kiss" sound of the shutter is the bonus, but it does not produce "superb image quality".

[jon @ Jun 3rd 2008 9:21PM]

Not to act immature, but naming a camera the "420" seems like a lapse in judgment on Olympus's part.

[Temple @ Jun 3rd 2008 10:22PM]

Only if you're a stoner. . . I know what it means, but it's not the first thing I thought of. My first thought was that its a successor to the popular 410.

[lawyer bird @ Jun 3rd 2008 10:27PM]

first thing i thought of...haven't smoked for months

[Joe Dombrowski @ Jun 3rd 2008 10:00PM]

Am I really the only one who doesn't want a compact slr? The weight and size offers resistance against your hand to help you keep it steadier, so I'll take all the size I can get.

[Matt @ Jun 3rd 2008 10:30PM]

No IS is a major flaw since Olympus doesn't put it into their lenses. I think there are one or two sell the farm Zeiss lenses that incorporate it into the lens, but if you're in the market for those lenses you're not going after this entry level camera.

[Eugene @ Jun 3rd 2008 10:42PM]

How does it compare to the Nikon D60?

[mrpoo @ Jun 4th 2008 12:57AM]

It kicks it in the balls.

[spuds @ Jun 4th 2008 1:30AM]

Bleah, Letsgodigital is a crap site. Their reviews read like a re-telling of the spec sheet and press release. Should've liked to DCResource's review which came out a few days ago.

[Kwai Noi @ Jun 4th 2008 1:54AM]

I've used an Olympus e500 for about 3 years and I think it performs very well. And it is much sturdier build than the others in its price range. And I don't treat it like a baby (It is banging around in a back pack most of the time) so I am surprised it has lasted as long as it has. The 8 meg sensor is all I need for the shooting I do with it.

The sensors in the Olympus are small so there isn't much that can be done about the image noise in low light. But it does look like it could be a really good DSLR for anyone that needs more than the point & shoots but can't afford the grand or more for the names Canon or Nikon.

If I want better I turn to my 50 year old Rolleiflex TLR, it also has a live view system that doesn't black out when you shoot.

But the best thing is that with a fine grain film I can easily do a 5400 X 5400 pixel scan and print it out at 22" X 22" without interpolating, it's like having a 30 megapixel camera. Plus I get the fun of playing with toxic chemicals in a small room.

[Alex Moyler @ Jun 4th 2008 4:17AM]

No no no! No Olympus! Blehhhh.

[Markarian @ Jun 4th 2008 9:19AM]

I'm sorry but Oly's and the Four-Thirds system is a joke. A sensor that small has no place in a DSLR. Yes, I'm biased, I'll admit (Canon Rebel XTi with EF 28-135 IS). But unless this camera retails for $399, there's no value here whatsoever.

I do have to give them credit on one front, however, as it seems they've created a LiveView system that beats Canon.

[Ihar `Philips` Filipau @ Jun 5th 2008 8:34AM]

In Germany you can get the body for 370€. (E-510 body is about 400€, E-520 - 520€)

In US it seems still above $400, but I doubt that price would remain on that level for a long time.

From my comparison of photos from my friends (XTi vs. E-510), I can hardly see something serious against Oly (*). Even more: since the Oly owner is into photography for quite some time, his photos which are made on worse camera still look better than the photos made on more technically advanced XTi. Skill outdoes sensor size.

(*) Highlight clipping is probably only serious problem of the Olys. But it can be fixed with shooting in RAW.

[Sarah @ Jun 4th 2008 10:53AM]

Umm, Digital Camera Review had a review of this in April and I'm sure they weren't the only ones... a little slow on the uptake Engadget.

[Ron Aviles @ Jun 4th 2008 11:01AM]

Ok, you pro canon, nikon users need to understand there is a market for these type of cameras. The 4/3's system is not bad, and as a size comparison the E-520 is a better size comparison vs the Rebel XSi, D60.

I have both a 5D (full L line up. bla bla) and a the E-420 with the 25mm Zuiko pancake lens. The Olympus is definitely small, and I love it for going around and casually taking pictures when I don't want to bring my 5D around. The sharpness of the pancake is sharper than I expected.

- It's definitely noisy at iso1600, but keeping around iso 800 the
photos are usable.
- Doing adjustments in the menu is one the of easiest I ever used.
- Did I mention its small?

I took a pic of the size comparison vs a 5D here. Sorry for the
crappy quality. I took it on my N82

http://twitpic.com/1rz5

I am VERY happy with this camera. More happy with this than my sigma DP-1 that I recently returned.

[happy_penguin @ Jun 4th 2008 12:11PM]

I am a Nikon user. I also own a Canon 35mm. I welcome Olympus into the circle. We need competition to keep things fresh. Back in the day it was Canon, Nikon, Olympus and Pentax in the prosumer range of 35mm. It would be nice to see that again.

[spiritflare @ Jun 8th 2008 7:17AM]

after much debate between the D40-D60 and Leica D-Lux-3, i decided to go for the Oly-420 because of the following:

image quality - reading all the consolidated reviews of the E-510/410 - on digitalcameratracker; dpreview; and cameralabs.com - the noise levels are as good or comparable to anything from the D60 or even Rebel-XSI (see cameralabs upto ISO 800). Only ISO 1600 is a bit iffy, but that can be cleaned up with noise-removal. A Leica D-Lux-3 is smaller, but noisier. A D60 may have slighly better noise performance at 1600, but it's bigger.

Size..nothing is currently smaller for DSLR (as of June 2008). Although it can't go in a pocket, with the pancake lens, it's pretty sweet for a waist-bag or tiny knapsack.

Build Quality - very sleek, beautiful body.

Live View - Live View in a tiny DSLR like this is amazing - with upto 10X Zoom...

Features: Face-Detect - no big deal (but nice to have anyhow); REAL-time preview of White Balance; REAL-time preview of exposure levels -0.3 to +0.3

Lenses: sharp LEICA lenses available, albeit costly.

The only downside I could see is lack of image stabilization - but if you really don't know how to use your shutter/ISO, then you can get the 4/3 lenses with built-in OIS.


So overall, for small size, good build quality, and great image quality, how can you beat it?

[Paddy @ Jun 12th 2008 5:53PM]

Hi, so I'm a DLSR newbie looking to get an entry level camera, and the E420 seems to fit my needs best from looking at the usual suspects. One thing that I find very confusing; every review I have seen of the E420 says it has no image stabilisation, but I was looking at one the other day, there on the label "Image stabilization" listed as a feature. Checked out the site and it is detailed there:
http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_section/product.asp?product=1372

Now I see this is digital as opposed to mechanical on the 520, but why is it ignored?