So what do you think of the e-620....

[Raist3d]

Olympus announced recently the E-620- basically a camera at near e-420 size (uses same smaller battery) but with a lot of E-30 features for MSRP USD $700. What do you think?

Vote for the option that describes how you feel the closest.

Update: In case you don't know what camera this is:

E-620

- Raist

[dougjgreen]

If Olympus had come out with this at the time that they intro'd the E-30, I probably would have stayed with the Olympus system instead of going to Nikon.

I may still eventually get an e-620, purely for the in-body IS, but for now, I've got what I need with Nikons.

[Olygirl]

It looks like a good camera. I see it's out now on Amazon.

I got an e520 and I'm very happy with it. I may buy an e420 (for the size) since the body is so cheap now on amazon in the future.

[drmarkf]

Looks like the ideal light travel body for me to use, especially for candid street photography with Liveview and for high & low viewpoints.

Now, am I going to sell the E-1 or E510 or keep both?

[Dirk]

i could just make a flaw remark that it is not a Nikon . I find it not interesting , i think olympus can do way better than this.. too small , wrong format , why is in the body and not like vr in the lens?

i like te Nikon d90 better but it also costs a lot more ..

don't shoot me i own a oly fe-210 as well..

[craftysnapper]

Originally Posted by D50&d70freak

too small , wrong format , why is in the body and not like vr in the lens?

But then it would just be a Nikon if it did not have those very things .....which is a bad thing

Originally Posted by D50&d70freak

don't shoot me i own a oly fe-210 as well..

Looking at the images in your gallery I'd say that the fe-210 is all you need.

[Mr. Pickles]

Originally Posted by D50&d70freak

i could just make a flaw remark that it is not a Nikon . I find it not interesting , i think olympus can do way better than this.. too small , wrong format , why is in the body and not like vr in the lens?

i like te Nikon d90 better but it also costs a lot more ..

This can be the kind of talk that starts "flame wars". Olympus can do "way better" than this E-620...just like Nikon can do "way better" than their D90...and both have done just that.

The size of the camera has become a pretty lame argument, since it really only matters to the ones using it. I'm sure there are loads of people who think the Olympus E-3, the Nikon D3, and/or the Canon 1DMkIII are too big and too heavy.

Wrong format? That is a bold statement that begs trouble. No real way to take that if you're an Olympus fan but the wrong way. Unless it is meant as the wrong way, then look out. Just for grins, pull up some of your Olympus FE-210 images and check those "format" numbers. Pretty darn exact on the 4/3 format, eh? Now pull up the specs for just about every other P&S like camera from Olympus, Nikon, Canon and check those "formats" also. Four-thirds isn't so crazy "wrong". Millions and millions use that format everyday. It isn't "wrong". It is new, and new isn't always bad.

IS in the body works. What is wrong with that? This has been a topic a lot. There are pros and cons to BOTH ideas. In body IS is available from everyone except Canon and Nikon, so this isn't an Olympus "fallacy". You can blame Sony, Pentax, etc too. In body IS people pay form their IS ONCE. In lens folks do NOT. They pay for it on every lens that has it. Sounds nuts to me, but I'm just one person. Yes, the in body design is "tuned" or "designed" for that particular lens, which should make it perform a stop better...but a tripod does too and no IS needed.

And from all of this, we have learned what? That I have an opinion, and you have an opinion, and Olympus does and Nikon does and everyone else does. There is no right and wrong. It is all about choices. If there were no choices, perhaps you'd be shooting a Canon because there would be no Nikon at all?

[drmarkf]

"I'm sure there are loads of people who think the Olympus E-3, the Nikon D3, and/or the Canon 1DMkIII are too big and too heavy."

Yes, I do, for sure, for travel work in particular.

" Sounds nuts to me, but I'm just one person. "

And I'm a second!
We are talking prosumer bodies & lenses, where real costs and weight are major issues, and 1.5 stops is worth having while another stop will only increase your proportion of sharp shots a little more. Professionals are willing to pay for that because it might make the difference between a saleable shot and zilch.

We also shouldn't forget "We are your friendly photo community..."

[Raist3d]

Originally Posted by D50&d70freak

i could just make a flaw remark that it is not a Nikon .

Why is that a flaw?

I find it not interesting , i think olympus can do way better than this.. too small , wrong format , why is in the body and not like vr in the lens?

Small is a big part of the appeal. Not all photographers want to carry big. Why have IS on the lens when you can have IS in *all* lenses. Where's an f1.4 prime with IS? The e-620 can handle it. The IS system of Olympus has been proven in reviews to be ballpark effective of those with dedicated lenses so I don't see why this is a bad thing.

i like te Nikon d90 better but it also costs a lot more ..

don't shoot me i own a oly fe-210 as well..

Weird comment after all you have said (on the Nikon D90).

- Raist

[cman78]

I am buying one for sure. It will be quite the upgrade from the e510.