DSLR'S, very disappointed

My background is Olympus PenFT system, Olympus OM2n system, Olympus XA,
CanonA4o, Nikon4500, PanasonicFZ15, so I have no bias. I had never seen
DSLR's in the flesh, but when today the OlympusE1 came up for sale at a
knockdown price, I thought it time to consider a DSLR.
I went to look at the E1, but was appalled by it's bulk. A fallback was
the Olympus E3oo (I have OM prime lenses). This was the ugliest camera
I have ever seen, though I'm a believer in 'form follows function',
this was gross, no wonder the price is tumbling! And the touted
'compact Zuiko lenses designed for DSLR' looked the same size as all
the others to me. The Minolta was enormous. D70 still large.
This left 2 reasonable cameras, Canon D350, and Pentax *istDS. The
Canon looks cheap, but otherwise ok, except new on the market and
costing twice the price of the E1!....definitely poor value just now.
Pentax was quite appealing, but reports say you must shoot in RAW to
get good images, and the files take 9 seconds to write....oh dear!
When I got home, I looked at my beautiful OM2n, and wondered what the
hell has gone wrong. Guess I'll wait for the digital designers to catch
up......
DonB

wrote:
My background is Olympus PenFT system, Olympus OM2n system, Olympus XA,
CanonA4o, Nikon4500, PanasonicFZ15, so I have no bias. I had never seen
DSLR's in the flesh, but when today the OlympusE1 came up for sale at a
knockdown price, I thought it time to consider a DSLR.
I went to look at the E1, but was appalled by it's bulk. A fallback was
the Olympus E3oo (I have OM prime lenses). This was the ugliest camera
I have ever seen, though I'm a believer in 'form follows function',
this was gross, no wonder the price is tumbling! And the touted
'compact Zuiko lenses designed for DSLR' looked the same size as all
the others to me. The Minolta was enormous. D70 still large.
This left 2 reasonable cameras, Canon D350, and Pentax *istDS. The
Canon looks cheap, but otherwise ok, except new on the market and
costing twice the price of the E1!....definitely poor value just now.
Pentax was quite appealing, but reports say you must shoot in RAW to
get good images, and the files take 9 seconds to write....oh dear!
When I got home, I looked at my beautiful OM2n, and wondered what the
hell has gone wrong. Guess I'll wait for the digital designers to catch
up......
DonB


You have fun with that.

--
It Came From C. L. Smith's Unclaimed Mysteries.
http://www.unclaimedmysteries.net

wrote:
My background is Olympus PenFT system, Olympus OM2n system, Olympus XA,
CanonA4o, Nikon4500, PanasonicFZ15, so I have no bias. I had never seen
DSLR's in the flesh, but when today the OlympusE1 came up for sale at a
knockdown price, I thought it time to consider a DSLR.
I went to look at the E1, but was appalled by it's bulk. A fallback was
the Olympus E3oo (I have OM prime lenses). This was the ugliest camera
I have ever seen, though I'm a believer in 'form follows function',
this was gross, no wonder the price is tumbling! And the touted
'compact Zuiko lenses designed for DSLR' looked the same size as all
the others to me. The Minolta was enormous. D70 still large.
This left 2 reasonable cameras, Canon D350, and Pentax *istDS. The
Canon looks cheap, but otherwise ok, except new on the market and
costing twice the price of the E1!....definitely poor value just now.
Pentax was quite appealing, but reports say you must shoot in RAW to
get good images, and the files take 9 seconds to write....oh dear!
When I got home, I looked at my beautiful OM2n, and wondered what the
hell has gone wrong. Guess I'll wait for the digital designers to catch
up......
DonB


You have fun with that.

--
It Came From C. L. Smith's Unclaimed Mysteries.
http://www.unclaimedmysteries.net

wrote in message
oups.com...
My background is Olympus PenFT system, Olympus OM2n system, Olympus XA,
CanonA4o, Nikon4500, PanasonicFZ15, so I have no bias. I had never seen
DSLR's in the flesh, but when today the OlympusE1 came up for sale at a
knockdown price, I thought it time to consider a DSLR.
I went to look at the E1, but was appalled by it's bulk. A fallback was
the Olympus E3oo (I have OM prime lenses). This was the ugliest camera
I have ever seen, though I'm a believer in 'form follows function',
this was gross, no wonder the price is tumbling! And the touted
'compact Zuiko lenses designed for DSLR' looked the same size as all
the others to me. The Minolta was enormous. D70 still large.
This left 2 reasonable cameras, Canon D350, and Pentax *istDS. The
Canon looks cheap, but otherwise ok, except new on the market and
costing twice the price of the E1!....definitely poor value just now.
Pentax was quite appealing, but reports say you must shoot in RAW to
get good images, and the files take 9 seconds to write....oh dear!
When I got home, I looked at my beautiful OM2n, and wondered what the
hell has gone wrong. Guess I'll wait for the digital designers to catch
up......
DonB


Don, what reports?

jpeg is just fine by the way and the Ds shoots 2.8 frames per second just
fine.

wrote in message
oups.com...
My background is Olympus PenFT system, Olympus OM2n system, Olympus XA,
CanonA4o, Nikon4500, PanasonicFZ15, so I have no bias. I had never seen
DSLR's in the flesh, but when today the OlympusE1 came up for sale at a
knockdown price, I thought it time to consider a DSLR.
I went to look at the E1, but was appalled by it's bulk. A fallback was
the Olympus E3oo (I have OM prime lenses). This was the ugliest camera
I have ever seen, though I'm a believer in 'form follows function',
this was gross, no wonder the price is tumbling! And the touted
'compact Zuiko lenses designed for DSLR' looked the same size as all
the others to me. The Minolta was enormous. D70 still large.
This left 2 reasonable cameras, Canon D350, and Pentax *istDS. The
Canon looks cheap, but otherwise ok, except new on the market and
costing twice the price of the E1!....definitely poor value just now.
Pentax was quite appealing, but reports say you must shoot in RAW to
get good images, and the files take 9 seconds to write....oh dear!
When I got home, I looked at my beautiful OM2n, and wondered what the
hell has gone wrong. Guess I'll wait for the digital designers to catch
up......
DonB


Don, what reports?

jpeg is just fine by the way and the Ds shoots 2.8 frames per second just
fine.

wrote in message
oups.com...
My background is Olympus PenFT system, Olympus OM2n system, Olympus XA,
CanonA4o, Nikon4500, PanasonicFZ15, so I have no bias. I had never seen
DSLR's in the flesh, but when today the OlympusE1 came up for sale at a
knockdown price, I thought it time to consider a DSLR.
I went to look at the E1, but was appalled by it's bulk. A fallback was
the Olympus E3oo (I have OM prime lenses). This was the ugliest camera
I have ever seen, though I'm a believer in 'form follows function',
this was gross, no wonder the price is tumbling! And the touted
'compact Zuiko lenses designed for DSLR' looked the same size as all
the others to me. The Minolta was enormous. D70 still large.
This left 2 reasonable cameras, Canon D350, and Pentax *istDS. The
Canon looks cheap, but otherwise ok, except new on the market and
costing twice the price of the E1!....definitely poor value just now.
Pentax was quite appealing, but reports say you must shoot in RAW to
get good images, and the files take 9 seconds to write....oh dear!
When I got home, I looked at my beautiful OM2n, and wondered what the
hell has gone wrong. Guess I'll wait for the digital designers to catch
up......
DonB


I think you are making a mistake. I have recently switched from a nice,
slim, all metal SLR - Nikon FE - to the Nikon D70. The shape and feel of the
camera is quite different, but after a few weeks use, I am now very
comfortable with it.

Don't just complain about DSLRs as being big and bulky. All the modern
Autofocus Film SLRs are the same sort of design, and size, and have been for
some time. Olympus E range are certainly bigger, bulkier, and dare I say it
uglier, than most.

I have not handled the new Canon D350 yet, but from expeience with Canon EOS
Film cameras, which felt and looked very light, flimsy and plasticy, I can
assure you that they were actually quite tough. I know of one, complete
with 300mm lens, which was dropped 80 feet from an Access Platform, and
still worked. If it had landed on the Metal Deck of the Platform, rather
than on the ground, things might have been different, but I don't think any
Camera would have survived that.

Have another look, and perhaps borrow a Digital SLR from a friend, and see
if you still think the same after you have been handling one for a few
hours. I will be surprised if you still think the same.

Roy G

wrote in message
oups.com...
My background is Olympus PenFT system, Olympus OM2n system, Olympus XA,
CanonA4o, Nikon4500, PanasonicFZ15, so I have no bias. I had never seen
DSLR's in the flesh, but when today the OlympusE1 came up for sale at a
knockdown price, I thought it time to consider a DSLR.
I went to look at the E1, but was appalled by it's bulk. A fallback was
the Olympus E3oo (I have OM prime lenses). This was the ugliest camera
I have ever seen, though I'm a believer in 'form follows function',
this was gross, no wonder the price is tumbling! And the touted
'compact Zuiko lenses designed for DSLR' looked the same size as all
the others to me. The Minolta was enormous. D70 still large.
This left 2 reasonable cameras, Canon D350, and Pentax *istDS. The
Canon looks cheap, but otherwise ok, except new on the market and
costing twice the price of the E1!....definitely poor value just now.
Pentax was quite appealing, but reports say you must shoot in RAW to
get good images, and the files take 9 seconds to write....oh dear!
When I got home, I looked at my beautiful OM2n, and wondered what the
hell has gone wrong. Guess I'll wait for the digital designers to catch
up......
DonB


I think you are making a mistake. I have recently switched from a nice,
slim, all metal SLR - Nikon FE - to the Nikon D70. The shape and feel of the
camera is quite different, but after a few weeks use, I am now very
comfortable with it.

Don't just complain about DSLRs as being big and bulky. All the modern
Autofocus Film SLRs are the same sort of design, and size, and have been for
some time. Olympus E range are certainly bigger, bulkier, and dare I say it
uglier, than most.

I have not handled the new Canon D350 yet, but from expeience with Canon EOS
Film cameras, which felt and looked very light, flimsy and plasticy, I can
assure you that they were actually quite tough. I know of one, complete
with 300mm lens, which was dropped 80 feet from an Access Platform, and
still worked. If it had landed on the Metal Deck of the Platform, rather
than on the ground, things might have been different, but I don't think any
Camera would have survived that.

Have another look, and perhaps borrow a Digital SLR from a friend, and see
if you still think the same after you have been handling one for a few
hours. I will be surprised if you still think the same.

Roy G

o...writes:
This left 2 reasonable cameras, Canon D350, and Pentax *istDS. The
Canon looks cheap, but otherwise ok, except new on the market and
costing twice the price of the E1!....definitely poor value just now.
Pentax was quite appealing, but reports say you must shoot in RAW to
get good images, and the files take 9 seconds to write....oh dear!

I've had a *istD for long enough to run nearly 4000 images through it,
only about 200 of which were in RAW. The ones I didn't screw up came
out fine in JPEG and TIFF, depending on my needs. Nine seconds? It may,
in TIFF, with a slow card, but for normal stuff, a second or less
suffices. The buffer holds nearly three shots.

I don't know where you're getting your "reports" but I'd strongly
suggest you move to DPreview or Steve's for info.

I've had more fun and gotten better results with the Pentax than I've
had with any camera going back to my original mechanical Canon F1. If
you want more than that from any digital SLR, then wait. Five or ten,
maybe 15 or 20, years and you'll get one the size of a fifty cent piece
that works up 25 MP photos.

o...writes:
This left 2 reasonable cameras, Canon D350, and Pentax *istDS. The
Canon looks cheap, but otherwise ok, except new on the market and
costing twice the price of the E1!....definitely poor value just now.
Pentax was quite appealing, but reports say you must shoot in RAW to
get good images, and the files take 9 seconds to write....oh dear!

I've had a *istD for long enough to run nearly 4000 images through it,
only about 200 of which were in RAW. The ones I didn't screw up came
out fine in JPEG and TIFF, depending on my needs. Nine seconds? It may,
in TIFF, with a slow card, but for normal stuff, a second or less
suffices. The buffer holds nearly three shots.

I don't know where you're getting your "reports" but I'd strongly
suggest you move to DPreview or Steve's for info.

I've had more fun and gotten better results with the Pentax than I've
had with any camera going back to my original mechanical Canon F1. If
you want more than that from any digital SLR, then wait. Five or ten,
maybe 15 or 20, years and you'll get one the size of a fifty cent piece
that works up 25 MP photos.

wrote in message
oups.com...
My background is Olympus PenFT system, Olympus OM2n system, Olympus XA,
CanonA4o, Nikon4500, PanasonicFZ15, so I have no bias. I had never seen
DSLR's in the flesh, but when today the OlympusE1 came up for sale at a
knockdown price, I thought it time to consider a DSLR.
I went to look at the E1, but was appalled by it's bulk. A fallback was
the Olympus E3oo (I have OM prime lenses). This was the ugliest camera
I have ever seen, though I'm a believer in 'form follows function',
this was gross, no wonder the price is tumbling! And the touted
'compact Zuiko lenses designed for DSLR' looked the same size as all
the others to me. The Minolta was enormous. D70 still large.
This left 2 reasonable cameras, Canon D350, and Pentax *istDS. The
Canon looks cheap, but otherwise ok, except new on the market and
costing twice the price of the E1!....definitely poor value just now.
Pentax was quite appealing, but reports say you must shoot in RAW to
get good images, and the files take 9 seconds to write....oh dear!
When I got home, I looked at my beautiful OM2n, and wondered what the
hell has gone wrong. Guess I'll wait for the digital designers to catch
up......
DonB

Keep in mind that the 9 seconds to write does not stop you from shooting.
The cameras have an internal buffer so that you can keep shooting until the
buffer is full. When shooting raw, the buffer obviously can't hold as much.
Dpreveiw tests cameras with their defult settings. Adjusting settings, such
as sharpness, may get the image looking the way you want. I have the Rebel
(300D). I made my own parameter by dropping sharpness a notch down from
defualt.
bg