Olympus just announced it's "new" E-450 four thirds shooter. Really though, it could have just as easily been announced as the
E-420 plus, a tweak to the "world's smallest DSLR" announced last year. Both cams share the same 5.1 x 3.6 x 2.1-inch and 13.4 ounce dimensions, 10 megapixel Live MOS sensor with live view, 3.5fps continuous shooting, 2.7-inch LCD, ISO 1,600 max sensitivity, and four thirds lens mount. So what's new? Well, the E-450 has a newer TruePic III+ image processor, a longer 30-minute exposure, improved flash control, and now several "art filter" modes like "pop" and "soft focus" -- pointless if you're doing any kind of post processing on a computer. Then again, it's only $699 when bundled with the ED 14-42mm f3.5/5.6 and ED 40-150mm f4.0/5.6 Zuiko zoom lenses. To prove just how entry-level this shooter is, it'll be available exclusively on QVC (yes,
that QVC) on May 9th.
posted Mar 31st 2009 4:35AM
Sometimes when you lose you really win.
Although I'm curious to see how the four-thirds market progresses, the thing I don't like about it is that the photos are so cropped compared to DX and full frame.
If anything, I'm interested in stepping up to full frame for a physically larger image (not to mention half a dozen other reasons), not cropping yet even more info and stepping down from DX sizes.
That factor alone turns me off from the whole four-thirds market.
I hear ya, Im ok with miniscule cameras, but Im not ok with miniscule sensors. I personally haven't used one of these, but the crop has to be pretty huge, it's a shame really.
Crop factor of 4/3 sensor is 2
They're only "cropped" when compared to the same focal length on a bigger sensor.
There's nothing "cropped" about them. It's simply a slightly smaller sensor, and there are many 3/4 lenses for them. The whole term "cropped" comes from Nikon and Canon, who chose to use the same lenses with smaller senses, so the image was actually getting cropped. On the Olympus, you simply have the smaller sensor, and you have the appropriate lenses for it. Also the sensor size is just a tiny bit smaller than it is on the nikon and canon 1.6 crops. The word "crop" is just plain wrong.
Well, regardless, it's a much smaller image size than a DX image, especially an FX image.
it's only 20% smaller than a DX sensor... Enough with the "it's SO SMALL" drama... it's NOT.
Though I personally also consider the "Art Filters" to be a gimmick, the filter like "Grainy Film" is quite hard to get right in Photoshop/etc on your own. I tried and failed (my best shot actually was in camera sepia filter + grain from high ISO).
As the filters cost literally nothing - it's pure software - I'd say let them be. I do not expect them to clog UI more than e.g. standard "Scene" already do on all cameras.
P.S. I wouldn't mind Oly adding them to my E-520 with firmware update.
why not just crank up that iso to 800 and you'll get all the noise you can eat ;)
@john: grain from the art filter is much bigger than the grain on higher ISOs. I tried. My E-520 doesn't produce such large, easily visible, yet pleasing grain - as it comes out of the "art filter". I guess for such effects one really has to buy the Photoshop/etc.
I can't think of a better way to hype the legitimacy of your products than to make them exclusive to QVC.
Everyone knows that's where all the real photog's shop. My grandparents picked me up a top notch Packard Bell workstation on there last year, coupled with a screaming eMachines notebook ... each were priced at least $100 less than similar offerings from Dell and came with tons of expensive software for free - like MS Paint, Solitaire, and Wordpad!
Praise be for QVC!
Whatever, man. It'll be available everywhere in July, if that makes you feel any less douchebaggish.
dude, just because you missed out on that cubic zirconium hello kitty figurine for $19.95 doesn't mean you gotta take it out on me.
As a e420 user I would have to say for anyone serious about photography save up your pennies and go for the e620 if you want an entry level camera. Don't get me wrong I love my camera but the lowlight capability is not very good... good thing is with the pancake lens a camera this size is tiny and the pictures are way better than anything out of a compact or bridge camera. So yeah... hmm... If you need it small go for it but you might be a little disappointed with the results at low light.
For awhile I considered getting a E420 as a smaller secondary system. At this point though I'm more interested with what Olympus will offer in the µ4:3 format.
I doubt the E-620 will be much better than the (much cheaper) E-520 in the image department. Still, I'll give the retailers some time to stock it first and then decide :)
In-camera Image Stabilization, best dust removal, Pixel Mapping, Live View, great kit lenses and articulated LCD ftw.
> ... but you might be a little disappointed with the results at low light.
I can't say for E-420, but I had a chance to compare my E-520 to Canon 1000D and 400D. Looking at the shots, difference in low light isn't that drastic. Without sufficient light AF becomes a problem, longer exposure times demand IS.
As one of my colleagues /nailed/ the problem: high ISO isn't substitute for light. IOW, you still have to have light to make a shot. He for example bought more or less immediately for his 1000D a flash and never takes it off the camera.
One second, I guess we are skipping an important upgrade here. It might look a bit boring as an upgrade but this little thing sports the same sensor with the new processor.
I wonder if the processing will improve the output of this camera. I remember the E30 and the E620 to be better in noise treatment and if the sensor is the same as before but the processing matches the E30 and 620 I guess it will be a bigger improvement than we are actually expecting.
You forgot better LCD screen, it's brighter.
Better visibility in direct sunlight says press release but still a bit low for a hop of 30 in model number.
425 would have been better number for this.
By that same token, D45 would have been a better name for the Nikon D60. It's all about markettng though.
Is that a joke? the QVC thing? Because if it isn't I'll never be buying any olympus ever as a response.
You should really BUY A CAMERA FOR ITS QUALITIES, not for the channels through which its sold. Your snobbism is only making you sound ignorant.
Olympus is trying to expand their market share with entry level buyers jumping from point and shoots. That's the intended market for the E-400 series. QVC is a good outlet to get those people, like it or not.
Well I'm not supporting a company that supports such channels.
That's noble. Similarly, I scratched the 5D Mark II off my list since Canon Digital Rebels are sold at WalMart.
It's not about being snobbish but about me hating those super annoying shoppingchannels, and not wanting to do anything that extends their existence, pure hate is the motivator.
Not that I can't be snobbish at times, but that's not my argument here.
My wife is an absolute fanatic when it comes to gadgets; she's always looking for the latest stuff to hit the markets. So for her birthday I thought I would do a bit of research and try to find a gift that she would appreciate. So I’ve decided to scour the Internet for some inspiration and came across a website that specialises in cell phones.
The only problem I have now is finding something that she would like!!
Wow, this guys were completely right with their rumor!!!!
http://43rumors.com/olympus-e-450/
Lucky?