http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/ Engadget Comments for Olympus E-600 reviewed, lives up to its billing as a top-notch entry-level DSLR http://www.engadget.com/media/feedlogo.gif http://www.engadget.com en-us Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/There are some weaknesses about the 4/3rds system, but here are some strengths you might not know about:
1. Since the 4/3s sensor is slightly smaller than an APS sensor in other DSLRs, the focal length of the lens reaches farther than with other cameras. The 150mm lens with my kit becomes 300mm at the 35mm equivalent. This means with a smaller piece of glass, you can zoom way in to capture a far away subject.
2. Since the sensor is slightly smaller than other DSLRs, it doesn't have as much surface area to work with with low light. However, a lens with a wide-open aperture will let a lot of light in for the camera, and your picture can keep more of the subject in focus because the smaller sensor allows a greater depth of field. The sensor is still big enough to isolate a subject with the creamy bokke that everyone likes. Especially with a good lens.
3. You can mount legacy 35mm lenses on it with adapters. The distance from the glass to the sensor is shorter than other systems. I put a manual focus, manual aperture prime lens from the '70s on my camera, and it works great. The old lenses aren't as sharp as the new ones, but they definitely give the pictures more character. ]]>Dec 4th 2009 9:23AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/
I was shopping for my first DSLR back in August and I boiled my choices down to the D5000 and E610. I ended up going with the D5000, however I was very tempted by the Olympus since it offered almost the same performance for quite a bit less. Not to mention that the autofocus motor is built into the camera, not the lens--which I think is a huge selling point. Also the articulating LCD on the 610 is fantastic--not so much on my D5000.

That being said, I must say that your first strength of your E450 is a little misguided. Sure its great using a standard telephoto lens and getting the 1.6x magnification due to the sensor being smaller, but the huge negative here is that you'll get quite a bit of sensor crop from using these lenses. It doesn't really make it a negative, but to me it outweighs the positive.

Also you might be shooting raw already, but if you aren't I highly recommend starting to shoot raw format over jpg. Gizmodo had a good writeup yesterday http://gizmodo.com/5417220/with-an-eye-to-the-future-try-raw-photos-today]]>Dec 4th 2009 9:51AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/
I've never heard of sensor crop with these cameras. I've only heard of there being lens crop. The 4/3 sensor only uses part of the glass on a lens made for a full frame camera, thus the lens needs to be twice as sharp to perform as well as a lens made for 4/3s cameras. ]]>Dec 4th 2009 10:06AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/
Another cool thing to do with RAW files: You can slightly overexpose a RAW file and process it into an HDR photograph without using a tripod. This means you can take a portrait of someone moving around, and really make it pop with HDR processing. http://abduzeedo.com/awesome-hdr-portraits ]]>Dec 4th 2009 10:31AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/
I meant lens crop--I apologize. I personally find it a nuisance since it makes it a little more difficult to frame your photo since you can't really rely on the viewfinder to accurately show what is cropped and what isn't. Also lens crop can be a problem with some wide-angle lenses as the lens crop can cut out some of the wide-angle distortion. But again, it really isn't a deal breaker here.

Anyways, RAW does have the disadvantage of not being 'finished' right out of the camera, but it gives you lots of flexibility if you want to learn some post processing. However, the biggest turn off for me is since jpg is lossy, I don't like the fact that everytime I edit the photo and re-save it loses image fidelity. Just some advice if you do use jpg, I recommend after any photo editing saving it as a lossless format such as Tif.]]>Dec 4th 2009 10:47AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/Dec 4th 2009 9:25AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/Dec 4th 2009 9:28AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/
No]]>Dec 4th 2009 9:59AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/Dec 4th 2009 3:05PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/Dec 4th 2009 9:59AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/Dec 4th 2009 10:07AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/Dec 4th 2009 10:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/Dec 4th 2009 10:24AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/Dec 4th 2009 10:11AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/Dec 4th 2009 10:40AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/Hey dude I had same question]]>Dec 4th 2009 11:54AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/Dec 4th 2009 12:08PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/Dec 4th 2009 12:08PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/
I just picked up the Pentax K-x this week. I'm pretty sure the Pentax is the better camera, but it is more expensive.]]>Dec 4th 2009 12:29PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/Dec 4th 2009 12:33PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/
You can pick up the body and 18-55mm lens for about that, true. The cheapest 18-55mm and 55-200mm kit I was able to find was $642. I ended up getting the body, the 18-55mm and 55-300mm lenses, and a four year extended warranty for $900.]]>Dec 4th 2009 12:46PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/and @ everyone else
Pentax K-x it is! Maybe I can find it in navy and includes 300mm or get that separately.
Thanks for all the comments guys!]]>Dec 4th 2009 1:32PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/Dec 4th 2009 11:54AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/
If it were me, I would get the K-x. ]]>Dec 4th 2009 12:48PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/a) Proper APS-C sensor, which means better low-light capability (K-x is renowned for that and beats cameras twice as expensive), better dynamic range and better depth-of-field control
b) More choice of lenses without using a converter, including thin pancake lenses
c) Built-in image stabilization giving even better low-light capability
d) HD video capability

The E-600 is:
a) 65 grams lighter body-only, even though it is slightly larger in physical dimensions.

LloydChiro discussed the crop factor as a zoom range extending advantage. I might as well just crop my pictures and get a similar effect. On the other hand, it is tougher to get good ultra-wide angle landscape lenses for the 4/3 cameras like the Olympus due to the crop factor.

The K-x runs off AA (rechargeable or not) batteries which weight a bit more and are less reliable than proprietary Lithiums... they are however way more common, easier to procure in the middle of nowhere and cheaper.

I'd take the Pentax over this one any time.]]>Dec 4th 2009 1:05PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/
Erm, notice the big "image stabilization" logo in the corner?

Also in its favor Olympus has the best sensor dust-busting system in the industry.]]>Dec 4th 2009 1:37PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/
But, I agree. I think I would go with the Pentax K-x.]]>Dec 4th 2009 2:52PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/
Yes, I missed that logo, You are right, that is no advantage to either system.

Regarding dust removal - I know Olympus were the first with good dust removal technology but are there any tests to show they are still better? Not saying they aren't, just wondering.]]>Dec 4th 2009 3:15PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/
What you write is correct.

My point was different but I find it hard to explain here. Basically, if you crop an image taken with an APS-C sensor in order to make it appear having the same "zoom length" as an image taken with a 4/3 sensor using the same focal length then you will have ended up using a 4/3-sized portion of the APS-C. Which in some sense is worse, and in some sense the same.]]>Dec 4th 2009 3:53PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/
However, they are currently expensive and their auto-focus and viewfinder leaves something to be desired. In a year or so they will probably get more affordable and thus more viable options.

The Olympus E-600 is neither here nor there. It has the small 4/3 sensor, but is still a DSLR-sized camera, even if a small one.]]>Dec 4th 2009 1:09PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/The Olympus cameras can be had for really cheap, though. And for the small entry price, you get an outstanding camera.

(just maybe not as good as the Pentax...)]]>Dec 4th 2009 3:02PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/Dec 4th 2009 3:25PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/
The smaller 4:3 sensor has unfortunately always left these cameras about a stop behind in terms of noise. So while the newest ones manage a pretty good ISO800 ISO, the newest APS-C sensors are doing the same with ISO1600.

Except perhaps in natural lighting, auto white balance and WB presents tend to be more or less useless on any brand of dSLR. ]]>Dec 4th 2009 7:35PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/04/olympus-e-600-reviewed-lives-up-to-its-billing-as-a-top-notch-e/Dec 5th 2009 3:31PM