PDA

View Full Version : E3 Review in A.P.


yorky
15th March 2008, 02:27 PM
The next issue has a comparison with the E3 and the D300. perhaps it will come as no suprise that the reviewer "La Nicholson":eek: struggles, unsuccesfully to find anything favourable to report:confused:

Haisbro
15th March 2008, 02:50 PM
I have read the review also and was a bit surprised in the difference in score 92% for the Nikon to 82% for the E3. In the past, reading reviews about four thirds i always felt the tone was a bit dismissive. I felt after reading this review that they are starting to see the real benefit of the system and it is up to Olympus to resolve AF and high ISO issues. As the reviewer said viewing an A3 print, the quality was the same from either camera.

David

Ian
15th March 2008, 02:58 PM
I have read the review also and was a bit surprised in the difference in score 92% for the Nikon to 82% for the E3. In the past, reading reviews about four thirds i always felt the tone was a bit dismissive. I felt after reading this review that they are starting to see the real benefit of the system and it is up to Olympus to resolve AF and high ISO issues. As the reviewer said viewing an A3 print, the quality was the same from either camera.

David

I have responded to a similar message on Four Thirds User.

There is no point in denying that the Nikon D300 is an exceptional camera, but that doesn't make the E-3 a bad one by any means. As we all know, there was considerable objection to AP's rating of the E-3 as it was compared with the Nikon D3 flagship (three times the price of an E-3) and the similarly expensive Canon EOS-1D Mark III. I'm disappointed, but not surprised that AP has retained the rather punitive 82% rating - it would be a huge and embarrassing admission of error by the magazine to have done anything else. If, as reports suggest (I haven't read the article yet) suggest that in real terms the cameras are not so different in every day use, that is what counts, not ratings.

Ian

Haisbro
15th March 2008, 03:11 PM
To be fair the point being made at times was that in certain aspects the Nikon was very good, not that the E3 was bad. It was not a one sided review but credit was given where it was deserved.

David

Jim Ford
15th March 2008, 03:22 PM
The next issue has a comparison with the E3 and the D300. perhaps it will come as no suprise that the reviewer "La Nicholson":eek: struggles, unsuccesfully to find anything favourable to report:confused:

I've been looking for a 'so what!' smiley (or 'sneerey') in the new icons, but can't find one!

I've not bought or read an AP since the Minolta SRT101 was the No. 1 camera.

Jim

Haisbro
15th March 2008, 03:25 PM
OK
:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:(

David

knikki
15th March 2008, 03:39 PM
Not read the review yet but must go and have a look. However the reviewer is intitled to his opinion, not matter how wrong or right they maybe.
Myself never really rated AP reviews for a long time.

However Olympus are aiming the E3 at the Pro market. which is bound to throw it up against the likes of the D3 and EOS 1s and not even the D300 etc can compete against the full frame digital machines *nono. Different kettle of fish.

Also it goes to prove that no matter what camera you buy, you should always read more than one review *note

Anyway as we are all here Olympus trumps Nikon and Canon as far as I am concerned *moon

David M
15th March 2008, 03:42 PM
I've not bought or read an AP since the Minolta SRT101 was the No. 1 camera.

Jim

When I was still living in the UK I only bought AP for the classifieds and even they went downhill. I'm surprised it's still being published when you consider the good photo mags that have ceased publication.

Ian
15th March 2008, 03:45 PM
When I was still living in the UK I only bought AP for the classifieds and even they went downhill. I'm surprised it's still being published when you consider the good photo mags that have ceased publication.

In defence of the mag, its general content has in my opinion improved in the last year, since Damien took over as the editor.

Ian

Ian
15th March 2008, 03:52 PM
Not read the review yet but must go and have a look. However the reviewer is intitled to his opinion, not matter how wrong or right they maybe.
Myself never really rated AP reviews for a long time.

However Olympus are aiming the E3 at the Pro market. which is bound to throw it up against the likes of the D3 and EOS 1s and not even the D300 etc can compete against the full frame digital machines *nono. Different kettle of fish.

Also it goes to prove that no matter what camera you buy, you should always read more than one review *note

Anyway as we are all here Olympus trumps Nikon and Canon as far as I am concerned *moon

There is 'pro' and there is 'pro'. I think the E-3 would make a reasonable paparazzi camera, a good wildlife photographer's camera, a good motorsport camera (as I hope Jon Nicholson will demonstrate this seasin in F1 - he will be using an E-3 at the races this season). It could certainly be used for weddings and macro work. It's a good all-rounder.

The Nikon D3 is really a camera to satisfy the needs of photographers who just must have a 'full frame' 135 format DSLR. I categorise these as alternatives to medium format and particularly good for studio work and for applications where extremely large image reproductions are required. The EOS-1D Mark III is a photographic machine gun - again, some photographers feel they really need this performance.

Olympus has never claimed the E-3 is in the same league as these two from Nikon or Canon. The target was the Nikon D200 and I think Olympus delivered. But the D300 has arrived and the target has moved.

Ian

vicb981
15th March 2008, 04:10 PM
In defence of the mag, its general content has in my opinion improved in the last year, since Damien took over as the editor.

Ian

Really??? Well I've only bought two editions since the change of editor, and I had the feeling that both technical and artistic content had declined. The last one I looked at had as 'picture of the week' a concrete wall with loo vent! Another had cute fox pics and floral smudges.

There are far better photomags out there.

knikki
15th March 2008, 04:38 PM
Olympus has never claimed the E-3 is in the same league as these two from Nikon or Canon.Ian

Oh I agree, but that will not stop some magazines comparing it against them. Silly really but hey ho, thats people for you LOL


The target was the Nikon D200 and I think Olympus delivered. But the D300 has arrived and the target has moved.Ian

I think it out performs the D200 in many ways, and as good as the D300 is, I prefer the images that I get from the E3. In fact I think my E20 out performs the D200 and I have beaten them in Local Club competitions. *chr

E-P1 fan
15th March 2008, 04:50 PM
At this rate AP will refuse to ever review Oly stuff again *ywn

OlyPaul
15th March 2008, 04:53 PM
I have responded to a similar message on Four Thirds User.

I'm disappointed, but not surprised that AP has retained the rather punitive 82% rating - it would be a huge and embarrassing admission of error by the magazine to have done anything else. If, as reports suggest (I haven't read the article yet) suggest that in real terms the cameras are not so different in every day use, that is what counts, not ratings.

Ian

Ian has most reveiws of these two cameras by other magazines have been in the 92% against 90% area on these two cameras, then either all the other mag reveiws are way out or Angela's is.

But I think it's more than likely you are correct here, which is a shame as integrity had a chance to shine here rather than saving face.:(

Jim Ford
15th March 2008, 05:22 PM
I think that as it has been pointed out before, probably 9 out of 10 AP readers are Canon or Nikon owners. If a review tells them they've made the wrong choice, they won't like it and sales of the magazine will drop off.

Jim

Ian
15th March 2008, 05:38 PM
I think that as it has been pointed out before, probably 9 out of 10 AP readers are Canon or Nikon owners. If a review tells them they've made the wrong choice, they won't like it and sales of the magazine will drop off.

Jim

For what it's worth, I don't subscribe to that view and I know a good number of photo magazine journalists. Most are fiercely independent and jealously protect their right to be critical, regardless of the adsales guys.

My theory is that they will be better acquainted with the top two brands, so familiarisation with new Canon and Nikon models is always going to be easier.

I do detect that AP took exception to the Olympus marketing of the E-3 as something more than it was really mean to be in 'pro' terms. I disagree with that strategy, but there it is.

Don't forget that Canon and Nikon do get hard reviews when they deserve it and, for example, the EOS-1Ds Mark III AF problems, which eventually lead to a recall of the camera, was covered in depth, critically, by AP.

Ian

E-P1 fan
16th March 2008, 01:06 AM
No need to get hot under the collar chaps. When it comes to it reviews are just one of many sources of information which can be used by anyone choosing what dslr to buy. I actually thought Angela's review was pretty fair myself. :)

But the real point is surely that no matter how much I love Olympus gear - it can't credibly be denied that Nikon and Canon are the brand leaders in the dslr world. Most people like to play safe and be seen to buy the 'right' thing so they stick with the brand leaders.

There are of course those that like to buck the trend - and they are likely to buy something else ie: Olympus. *smug

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/90/206731109_3904750fc1_m.jpg

I'm one of those people. My car is almost fifteen years old and doesn't have all the whistles and bells that modern cars have. But to me - it's worth ten of the latest street brand leader. In my judgement - it's the best car I've ever driven - and frankly - I don't care what anyone else thinks about that. I love it. I love my E-1 too despite its shortcomings. Fifty reviews stating that my car and my E-1 were 82% or 94% wouldn't change what I think of them both.

As has been found on FTU the whole practice of ratings is fatally flawed. Much better IMHO to stick to specifications, opinions, impressions and basic test results rather than dabbling in the murky, less than scientific world of simplistic ratings and percentages.

I enjoyed the review of the D300 and the E-3 - never having used either and never likely to - except when the E-3 is in the 'used' market. I'd use the review (and others) as research info were I to be in the market for a replacement for my E-1. But in the end I'd always make up my own mind.

For the present - I found the AP article informative, interesting and even thought-provoking.

Jim Ford
16th March 2008, 11:00 AM
There are of course those that like to buck the trend - and they are likely to buy something else.


Perhaps we should wait and see what the professionals think of the E3 - they're not usually influenced by trends, image or fashion.

In many major towns, taxi drivers - professionals who earn their living with a car and need a good, well made and reliable one that will do the job day-in day-out with the minimum of problems - what do you often find them driving? Skoda Octavias. Whilst the general public are still influenced by a poor reputation of 20 years ago, the taxi drivers are more pragmatic and are not swayed by fashion or 'image'.

Jim

Scapula Memory
16th March 2008, 12:58 PM
Just think though in the case of the E1 if you only ever read 1 review and it was the dpreview one nobody would have bought E1. AP is just one review of E3 in dozens....seems to me the E3 comes out pretty well across the board.

E-P1 fan
16th March 2008, 01:56 PM
Just think though in the case of the E1 if you only ever read 1 review and it was the dpreview one nobody would have bought E1. AP is just one review of E3 in dozens....seems to me the E3 comes out pretty well across the board.

I'd have still bought my E-1 - at the price I paid for it - bargain of a lifetime :)

Scapula Memory
16th March 2008, 03:49 PM
I'd have still bought my E-1 - at the price I paid for it - bargain of a lifetime :)

Absolutely, same here as I got one of the last ones, but as a review the DPreview one is not that complimentary so I made sure I read plenty of others before pulling the trigger on the mighty E1 *cameraicon

E-P1 fan
16th March 2008, 04:54 PM
Good icon there SM

I got my E-1 right at the end too - what a snip

Barr1e
16th March 2008, 09:37 PM
I have finished wasting my time looking at her reviews and the magazine. t-dwn :W) *ywn

Regards. Barr1e

E-P1 fan
16th March 2008, 10:47 PM
How do you waste your time now then Barrie .... model villages *cameraicon :)

What percentage would you give Bekonscot as compared with say - Bourton on the Water Model Village? 82%, 96% *sarc

Melaka
17th March 2008, 08:26 AM
For what it's worth here are the views of someone who does software reviews for specialist, and formerly, computer magazines. I guess that reviewing cameras is not a lot different in principle.

Firstly I always try to be objective but it is difficult to avoid subjectivity creeping in. Just because I like, or dislike, the interface on a particular program doesn't mean that everyone else will take the same view.

Secondly I dislike magazines which insist on you giving a rating under tightly specified headings. They may not be appropriate to the software you are reviewing and it can be extremely difficult to maintain a consistent standard over a length of time. It is easier to maintain consistency if you are doing a side by side review.

Thirdly I try to explain what the software does and does not do and how it does it. The text should be more important in the great scheme of things than a box at the end with a few figures. People can then make up their own mind as to whether the kit is what they want.

Fourthly, following a contretemps with an author who turned out to know less about the functionality of his program than I had discovered, I always read the review to the author or other suitable person. That's to make sure I have fully understood what the program is supposed to do and have not misinterpreted anything. Changes are only made if I am satisfied I have got my facts wrong.

Finally, my review is just one person's view of the software. I'd be horrified if everyone took it as gospel. We all have some sort of bias, especially with things like cameras. If you've used a Canikon for donkeys years you may be reluctant to give a Sonympus a good review - the logical consequence should be that you change to that brand if you think it really is better. Think of the cost!

I don't think one indifferent review is a serious matter and you should certainly take advice from more than one quarter before committing large sums of money.

E-P1 fan
17th March 2008, 08:36 AM
Excellent professional summary. Thank you

Barr1e
17th March 2008, 09:46 PM
How do you waste your time now then Barrie .... model villages *cameraicon :)

What percentage would you give Bekonscot as compared with say - Bourton on the Water Model Village? 82%, 96% *sarc


Although we have been to Bouton on the Water we have not as yet visited the water village.

Today we visited Legoland - very expensive. Having said that we spent all day there. Although our granddaughter is only two and a half-ish the attractions for her age were limited. For those with kids of say five plus - brilliant.

Bekonscot although on the small side is well worth a visit especially if you or the children are into trains - boy that is some set up. With luck you could spend four plus hours looking at the village unlike Legoland where I think you need the day and if the sun is out some of the models would be a togs delight.

Regards. Barr1e

Zuiko
18th March 2008, 12:43 AM
For what it's worth, I don't subscribe to that view and I know a good number of photo magazine journalists. Most are fiercely independent and jealously protect their right to be critical, regardless of the adsales guys.

My theory is that they will be better acquainted with the top two brands, so familiarisation with new Canon and Nikon models is always going to be easier.

I do detect that AP took exception to the Olympus marketing of the E-3 as something more than it was really mean to be in 'pro' terms. I disagree with that strategy, but there it is.

Don't forget that Canon and Nikon do get hard reviews when they deserve it and, for example, the EOS-1Ds Mark III AF problems, which eventually lead to a recall of the camera, was covered in depth, critically, by AP.

Ian


Yes, and boy, are they making Olympus pay for it! If Oly have any sense they'll promote the E5 (?) as an "Advanced Bridge Camera." *laugh

Zuiko

Ray Shotter
19th March 2008, 12:51 PM
I have read the review also and was a bit surprised in the difference in score 92% for the Nikon to 82% for the E3. In the past, reading reviews about four thirds i always felt the tone was a bit dismissive. I felt after reading this review that they are starting to see the real benefit of the system and it is up to Olympus to resolve AF and high ISO issues. As the reviewer said viewing an A3 print, the quality was the same from either camera.

David

I agree the "score system" gives quite the wrong impression compared with the content of the Review but, in my opinion, the Review is balanced and fair especially when you look at the ISO resolution of each camera. The focussing problems when using the Sigma 150mm f/2.8 EX IF (in both Nikon and Four Thirds fits) may reflect the concerns raised in the Four Thirds User Group discussion about the Sigma 150mm f/2.8 EX IF and its performance with Olympus DSLRs. I had planned to buy one of these lenses until I read the discussion in that particular thread.

I have been reading AP for every week for the past four or five years and have found the Reviews very helpful but have to admit that there is a tendency to under value the Olympus DSLRs compared to the other Reviews like DP Review etc.. However, having read many reviews in AP and in other magazines and on other sites about both Nikon and Canon DSLRs over the same period there can be no doubt that, whatever shortcomings there may have been from time to time with AF issues, Canon DSLRs appear to have higher quality image resolution than either Nikon or Olympus cameras at the high ISOs.

Nevertheless, from my perspective ISO 1600 and 3200 are currently unlikely to be used very often by me so - as image quality at ISO 100 - 800 are almost identical in all three cameras - I am more than satisfied with my Olympus E-510 and E-3 (also with my E-1 which I have now sold as being surplus to my needs).

As Angela wrote in her justification of her positioning of the E-3 in relation to the Nikon D300 and the Canon EOS-5D - "It's all relative...".

I would suggest that most of us when we buy an expensive camera usually go for the specification which we think will suit us best. In my case Olympus's specific digital camera design, the digital designed compact lenses etc.. and the fact that the Four Thirds Standard is designed such that there is a future upgrade path (without having to change lenses) were very important factors for me. Also, in my case, the quality of build of Olympus Digital Cameras was very important. My previous film cameras were Leica, Canon and Nikon and so I was used to cameras bodies which were built well and in all cases were made mainly of metal (often magnesium alloy) not primarily of plastic. I was very suprised to find that the entry level DSLRs from Canon and Nikon were more often made primarily of plastic despite some of their bridge cameras being made mainly of magnesium alloy.

Consequently, my first venture into Digital cameras was a second hand Olympus Camedia 8080 Wide Zoom (a bridge camera). A magnesium alloy body with a superb lens giving the 35mm equivalent of 28-140mm. As my wife uses this camera now I am able to compare photographs from this camera with results from my DSLR cameras. They compare very favourably.

This was followed by the E-1 (a magnesium alloy body) and its performance over the next two years convinced me that Olympus Digital cameras were for me. I then bought an E-510 despite the fact that it is made mainly of plastic but, by this time I had learned that Olympus build quality, image quality and design represented real value for money and, as far as I am concerned, are second to none.

So far, I am very satisfied with my E-3 and its performance using the lenses I bought for my E-1 and my E-510. I still have a lot to learn about this camera and like all tools (especially complex tools) there is a learning curve which has to be experienced before the operation of the camera becomes second nature.

I may be wrong but I imagine that Angela is much more used to Nikon and Canon cameras and finds the Olympus E-3 (and all the Olympus Cameras) unfamiliar and is, therefore, put off to some extent by their unfamiliarity when she has to use them. However, objective one tries to be, it is quite understandable that unfamiliar processes and operational devices are going to affect one's opinion of whether or not a particular design feels ergonomically satisfactory. As someone who used to test prototypes of heavy equipment I know how hard it is to disregard one's personal likes and dislikes about the way a piece of equipment feels when operating it.

So, in conclusion, my only gripe about the comparative review of the E-3 and D300 is the impression which the 92% - 82% indicates in the superiority of the D300 over the E-3. The content of their respective reviews does not reflect that sort of difference in my opinion.

Ray.

theMusicMan
19th March 2008, 07:38 PM
Excellent opinions folks, but I stand by what I have said in alternate posts. There really is nothing wrong with the E-3 @ISO3200 when used in the right conditions. his image hand held, no flash.

Camera modelE-3
Focal length114 mm
Max lens aperturef/4
Exposure1/30 at f/5.2
Exposure modeAuto
Exposure prog.Aperture priority
ISO speedISO 3200


http://www.reflectingme.com/img/v3/p515859593.jpg

E-P1 fan
19th March 2008, 07:44 PM
Great shot of a great guitarist John - beat that Nikon :)

Ray Shotter
19th March 2008, 11:55 PM
John (the Music Man),

Your magnificent photograph of the guitarist at ISO 3200 certainly nullifies the questions about the performance of the E-3 at high ISOs. I don't normally try to take photos in that sort of low light without resorting to flash but your photo convinces me I ought to learn how to.

Thanks for the reminder !

Regrds,

Ray.

250swb
21st March 2008, 09:10 AM
I may be wrong but I imagine that Angela is much more used to Nikon and Canon cameras and finds the Olympus E-3 (and all the Olympus Cameras) unfamiliar and is, therefore, put off to some extent by their unfamiliarity when she has to use them.

I tend to agree with you Ray, she has shown a lack of understanding about the Olympus system before, but she also continues to think she has enough knowledge to rank cameras in headline terms, not in the way they are used or for the things that set them apart. She reviews cameras as if they should all meet some Richardson Criteria for sameness based on the Canikon pattern.

On the other hand Digital Photographer gave the E3 96% and the D300 92%, and while the results are equally prone to misinterpretation, the actual comments are biased far less on what the E3 can't do against an equivalent Canon or Nikon, but what it can do . It may be a subtle change in emphasis and view compared to AP, but the fresher thinking in many other magazines isn't nearly as proscribed when mentioning Olympus (or any other smaller producer) and Canon or Nikon in the same breath.

Steve

E-P1 fan
21st March 2008, 09:25 AM
*sarc Perhaps we need to start alloting imprecise percentages to reviews and magazines!

Ghene
21st March 2008, 05:32 PM
I don't read AP but I do read DSLR User, which is enough for me.
Here's what they say about the E-3 (http://view.vcab.com/showVCAB.aspx?vcabID=4kU0gj0Wc86gl&vcabPage=109)

It's not what made me buy one but it is a good read :)

R MacE
22nd March 2008, 09:46 PM
So how many 'Stops' difference is there between the E-3 and the D300 as far as Image Noise is concerned. What about Dynamic Range? how do the 2 cameras compare?