Olympus DSLRs

[milkyjoe]

Hi.

Does anyone own one of these as I'm thinking of buying one for xmas? I know they are probably not as well catered for astronomy as Canon are, but I like the look of them and the E420 and E500 models in particular have received very good reviews indeed; the E420 has 'Live View', and they are much cheaper than their Canon equivalents.

Also, can you buy all the neccessary adapters to attach them to a scope?

Thanks.

Richard.

[russ]

I suppose the main concern will be the extra noise the 4/3rd chip produces in long exposures.

I had one of the E400/410/420/450 on my shopping list when trying to find a cheap DSLR on Ebay. But even the older E400 went for £200+ most of the time. Compared to the Canon 350D which i could have bought for £130+ with some luck. I bought a 300D for £72 in the end.

[jgs001]

I did look at the Oly (along with Sony, Nikon, Canon and others) SLR's for use for astro... the 2x crop factor of the sensor isn't so much of an issue, but it will reduce the FOV. I found that the reports of noise control in the Oly's were not as good as the Canon for low light work (which is near enough for the noise comparison purposes here). So I chose a Canon.

That doesn't make the Oly, in any way, a bad camera, and I can't speak from personal experience with anything other than a Canon.

[geoff_k]

One of the places you can get the adapter is here:

Olympus Four Thirds T-Mount Adapter at UK's Best Price

A relevant question might be whether you can get it modded in the same way as Canon cameras.

I know someone who has an Olympus DSLR and he has got some pretty good results out of it for 'everyday' photography.

Geoff

[andrew63]

Hi Richard

I have a olympus e410, one think you may want to consider is that it a small camera due to the different sensor and it is very compact when attached to equipment so it is good from a balance point of view.

Regards, andrew

[barkis]

I own an Olympus E-500, and I love it. It takes great pics.

I have to confess that the only Astro pics I took with it, was a Lunar eclipse sequence, won me POTW too, although another members was better than mine, but he posted it too late to qualify..

There is a Polish chap called Wrotniak, who is a whizz on the Olympus cameras, the 4/3rds models. It worth a search for his name.

I don't remember his Christian name unfortunately, but Wrotniak will find him.

I did several lens capped exposures at different ISO's and exposures, and didn't think the camera was too noisy.

Ron.

[Astro_Baby]

I still have one of their early DSLR s- the Fabulous E20 and its built like a tank and still takes great pictures. Came out at the same time as the Canon D30. I doubt you'd ever see a D30 still in use cos they were very fragile babies. The E20 (The Olympus built ones as oppose to the Fuji built ones) is superb.

I had three as a pro years ago (actually 2x E20 and 1x E10 - the earlier version) and one busted about a year outside its warranty. I asked Olympus UK to take a look and they just replaced it with a brand new one by return of post- now thats service.

You never seem to see the maintstream dealrers flogging Olympus anymore though. I have always had a soft spot for them since my firts serious camera was an OM-1.

[keithatrochdale]

I have an E-400 and am happy with it and it is nice and light. No problem with adapters, just look on flea bay, infra-red remote is useful too, also on flea-bay - cheap too.

[astrokat]

save the extra and get the 1000d bud you wont regret it

[David Rayment]

I have an E400 and an E620 which I use with the Olympus Studio 2 software to do astrophotography. The Studio 2 enables you to take a break whilst the computer presses the shutter. I have done images using Oly lenses up to 600mm and although I am a complete novice I am managing to push back the envelope! Using an 'EQ2' (with wooden legs - must be 30+ years old) with a modern EQ RA drive I can manage 60s at 500mm with only slight 'elipsing' of the stars. My first image was the double cluster which I am sure has many faults but at least I know I can image a star or two with an Olympus E400

David

[E621Keith]

I don't know much about the Oly 4/3 DSLR, other than they generally have more noise than the APS-C cameras from the same generation. However, looking at the recent E-5, it looks like Oly is going to abandon their 4/3 DSLR and focus their effort on their m4/3 mirrorless. If you are already a 4/3 user, then by all mean go for it, but if this is your first DSLR you should consider other companies such as Canon, Nikon, Sony and Pentax.

Buying a DSLR is buying into a camera system rather than one camera. You will buy lenses, flash and many accessories that will only work for one. If Oly is going to end their 4/3 DSLR in a few years, you will find yourself stuck a box of Oly 4/3 stuff with no resale value. While m4/3 camera can use 4/3's stuff, 4/3 cameras cannot use m4/3's

[Notsram]

Sorry to hang off thread coat tails but I am also struggling to decide/commit to camera for imaging. Novice to flea bay but it seems from some of you that the Canon 350D is a not a bad piece of kit, one on there at mo but reserve not met at £101, says excellent working condition, Canon EF-S 18-55 lens & BG-E3 battery grip. Looking to capture images from Skywatcher 200, (SynSCan on its way). Anyone insider knowledge on what this should go for ? Thanks SGL again for advice.

[E621Keith]

Sorry to hang off thread coat tails but I am also struggling to decide/commit to camera for imaging. Novice to flea bay but it seems from some of you that the Canon 350D is a not a bad piece of kit, one on there at mo but reserve not met at £101, says excellent working condition, Canon EF-S 18-55 lens & BG-E3 battery grip. Looking to capture images from Skywatcher 200, (SynSCan on its way). Anyone insider knowledge on what this should go for ? Thanks SGL again for advice.

I wouldn't pay more than £200 for a used 350D. In fact I'd go for a 400D which has an intergrated sensor cleaner, and cost about the same. If you don't get it for the price you want, just be patient and go for the next one. There are a lot of 350d and 400d, so you will eventually get one.

[dc509]

I have an E-1 - quite old but a very good camera for normal usage. I'm a novice to astro-imaging but my first attempts to use it for deep sky were not great - my dark frames looked to me to be very noisy - certainly compared to the demo images of dark frames I've seen in books and sites like SGL. Also, obtaining parts, like an external power supply is nigh on impossible, although Green Witch were able to get me a t-adaptor.

There is a Yahoo! group for astro-imaging with Olympus cameras by the way. I subscribed and it gets the odd message through, and there are knowledgeable users on it

d

[Notsram]

Thanks E621Keith will look for a 400D or above

[Notsram]

Sorry additional query, should I go for one with or without lenses, ie just camera body ?

[E621Keith]

Depends whether you have a lens collection already. While I heard Canon's 18-55 weren't very good, they were cheap and a decent place to start. If you want to use the camera for some normal photo as well as astro, and you are on a budget, I'd get it with the lens. If it's astro only, then I will get body only, and add a few primes in the future.

Personally I use Nikon, so I'm not too familiar with Canon's lens line up. However, if I don't already have a collection of lenses, and if the price differences was small, I would go for the one with a lens.

My Nikon's 18-55 Mk1 were very bad for astro, because it couldn't hold manual focus due to the focuser moving under its own weight. However, I used it for normal photos and it was my only lens for 2 years, until I picked up photography as a hobby and started getting better glass.

[paul35]

When i 1st got into photography i started with the e-520 but found the extras to expensive & not many options. After about a year i part exed & got a nikon D90. This has to be a my best move. with the launch of the d7000 this month you will pick up some good deals on the d90 (try here) www.mpbphotographic.co.uk

[E621Keith]

I think for Astrophotography, Canon's DSLR would be the better choice as they seems to be better supported in software and hardware, and at a more advanced level, better RAW files than Nikon.

For example, Astronomik and Hutech makes those in body filter that will fit inside the camera with out modification. They are only available for the Canon EOS system. Hutech has a Nikon version but it is only compatible with a few model and sadly my D50 and IS pro(D200) were not among them.

[milkyjoe]

Does anyone have any experience with any of Sony's DSLRs, I've been reading some reviews of the Alpha A200, A230 and A350, what with the A200 and A230 not being the best in the world and quite cheap looking, the A350 actually seems OK or should I stay away from Sony!? :-\

Thanks.

Richard.