E 500 stability

Joined: 22 Sep 2006 Posts: 9 Location: Hermiston Oregon USA

I have been comparing the entry level cameras from Canon, Nikon and Olympus. One of the factors I have used to discount chosing the E 500 is the lack of image stabilization. Yet, when I read what users of this camera say, it does not seem to be a factor.

Another area of interest to me is the kit lens issue. The other two do not seem to offer a good quality lens out of the box. How good are the two lenses that Olympus is offering in their package?

What I hope to accomplish is being able to take cityscapes at night, good macro, and scenic panoramas, in that order. Can it be done out of the box with the E 500 and the "kit" lenses?

What major drawbacks am I not seeing?

Posted: Sun Sep 24, 2006 8:18 pm

"What I hope to accomplish is being able to take cityscapes at night, good macro, and scenic panoramas, in that order. Can it be done out of the box with the E 500 and the "kit" lenses?"

Yes it can be done. The E-500 produces fine images and with the kit lenses it is a very good value for the $. I have owned and shot the E-500 and it is a good and capable camera.
The 14-45mm kit a good lense. Of course the 14-54mm ED is a better one but you pay for that too.
I did not have the 40-150mm but do know those who have and it is a good kit lense.

Realize of course that night shots, macros and as far as it goes any imaging can be improved with a tri-pod, etc.

Joined: 10 Oct 2006 Posts: 26 Location: Jacksonville, FL

I use the Evolt E-500 and I bought it with the lense kit about 1 year ago. However, I am a novice photographer trying to learn all that I can. I have had no problems with this camera or lenses but I have been told by pro-photographers that if I plan on becoming a professional photographer that I need to use a Nikon or Cannon. I hope this helps in some way. For the price I do not think it gets much better.

Posted: Sat Oct 14, 2006 4:53 pm

Memory Wrights wrote:

I have had no problems with this camera or lenses but I have been told by pro-photographers that if I plan on becoming a professional photographer that I need to use a Nikon or Cannon.

Would you believe everything this pro-photographer would tell you? LOL
When I read that statement I started laughing out loud. I guess there must be no professional photographers who shoot anything but a Nikon of Cannon then.

Nikon and Cannon are no doubt good cameras and probably the best known Name Brands. However they have their pros and cons just as any mfg. does. There are several other good cameras out there too that are made by other manufactures and I assure you there are some pro-photogs who shoot them and shoot them well.
I believe that it is not the camera brand that it going to make someone a pro as much as the person behind the camera and what they do.

Joined: 19 Nov 2006 Posts: 6

You've probably made your decision by now, but I don't think the average person can see significant differences between the major brands at particular price points. Tthe photo mags and manufacturers would like you to think otherwise. I think pros are looking for quality, but also durability. Before going digital I used a couple of Pentax spotmatics and a bunch of prime lenses for about 30 years. Dropped one in Spain and had to have the meter connection repaired...that's it, except for the odd tune-up. But I didn't shoot hundreds of shots each day and wear them out. Before I bought my E 500 I had a C 5060 that produced terrific pictures but the shutter lag was too annoying. A good photographer can get great results from any camera; good equipment just makes it easier. If you don't understand the features on your DSLR, the automation can get you nice results, but you don't need to spend so much money. I have smallish hands so I liked how the D500 felt to handle. Want sharp pictures? master depth of field, and the relationship of Iso to aperture and shutter speed...and hold that camera still! Hope you made a good decision.