1. Welcome to Mu-43.com—a friendly Micro 4/3 camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

Move from E-510 tot mFT?

Discussion in 'Welcomes and introductions' started by andre de brouwer, Dec 5, 2011.

  1. andre de brouwer

    andre de brouwer New to Mu-43

    Dec 5, 2011
    I hesitate to move from E-510 tot PEN P-3.
    Have macro 50 2.0, old 14-54 and 50-200 swd.
    Please advise.
  2. dixeyk

    dixeyk Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 9, 2010
    What are you hesitant about? The E-P3 has the same (albeit tweaked) sensor as the E510. The 50 macro is very useable on the E-P3 with an adapter. You would probably want to sell the 14-54 because its AF performance would not be inspiring on the E-P3 (The macro is slow anyway so likely wouldn't be an issue). I will say in my transition to m43 I have often wished for a lens like the 14-54. There is not currently an equivalent in the m43 world. That said, both Olympus and Panasonic are bringing out fast zooms (in that same range) that appear as though they will compare favorably with the 15-54. The 14-54 mk II apparently works pretty well with m43 bodies (with an adapter) The 50-200SWD is a great lens. The Panasonic 100-300 is also quite good. There is also a Panasonic 45-200 (also very good) but not as fast as the 50-200. Something to consider is the E-P3 has the option of an external EVF that is far superior to the OVF on the E510.

    I went from an E520 with 14-54 mk I and 40-150 and I haven't looked back. The small size and system flexibility has been worth the trade-offs. I like to use legacy glass (and have a lot of it) and adapters to use older glass are both plentiful and cheap.
  3. The only thing that would stop me moving in your situation is that there is not (yet, anyway) an equivalent set of lenses for m4/3. Yes you can still use your existing 4/3 lenses on an E-P3 with an adapter but the poor size/weight relationship between body and lens and the very slow autofocus could get old very quickly.

    The E-P3 does share the same philosophy as the E-510 of having a very light AA filter and so can also record a lot of fine detail, with the added benefit of two more megapixels and a newer image processor.
  4. dixeyk

    dixeyk Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 9, 2010
    That's right...the sensor is the same as the one in the E620...my bad.
  5. Ned

    Ned Mu-43 Legend

    Jul 18, 2010
    Alberta, Canada
    The PEN does everything the E-510 does. Don't get me wrong, the E-510 was an excellent camera for its time. It had the sharpest image quality of all the NMOS sensors up until the E-5, and had a great body build with the full functionality of a pro-grade camera (I used to get frustrated at my buddy's semi-pro 5D because it didn't have the range of functionality of my little entry-level E-510).

    However, the E-P3 is still an upgrade to the E-510 in almost every way. The differences between DSLRs and are getting smaller every day, but there are still a couple inherent advantages of a DSLR. Primarily, the optical clarity of the viewfinder, the autofocus speed with traditional lenses (using PDAF), and in some cases better body build (such as the tank-built, weather sealed E-5) or larger physical controls and grip (though there are mini-DSLR styled mirrorless cameras as well).

    For viewfinder quality, the only DSLR viewfinders which are better than the Electronic Viewfinders available for the Olympus PEN system are the pro-grade DSLRs which have a real crystal pentaprism, not a cheap replication using a series of pentamirrors. Unfortunately, this kind of quality is only available in pro-grade DSLRs, like the Olympus E-5 or a full frame EF Canon or FX Nikon. The Olympus option is only $1600, but the Canon and Nikon options don't start until you reach the $2500 range (body only). Of course, I haven't used any Canikon bodies for a long time, so those figures may have changed by now. For any DSLR bodies under that class however, the viewfinders are dim, small, and low in detail. The EVF of a PEN (in fact, even the LCD in many cases) is easily better in every way. In fact, the high grade EVFs like the VF-2 are comparable to a pro-grade DSLR viewfinder. The DSLR has a slight edge in optical clarity, whereas the EVF has the same view size, brighter display, and shows you true exposure, Depth of Field, and color balance... whereas the DSLR only shows you focus and composition.

    For Autofocus speed, your E-510 will definitely focus the lenses you have faster than the PEN. The 50-200mm SWD will be your fastest focusing lens out of the three (as you've probably noticed is the same on your E-510). However, the difference will not be so great as the E-510 didn't have fantastic autofocus speed in the first place. If you were using those lenses on an E-5 or E-3, then the difference would be profound enough to hinder a move to the PEN, and if AF was that much of a concern to you then I imagine you'd already be in an E-5, E-3, or E-30. ;) 
    With native Micro Four-Thirds lenses however, the PEN will be faster than your E-510 with native Four-Thirds lenses. I would highly suggest though that you keep your Four-Thirds lenses and use them with an Olympus MMF-1, MMF-2, or Panasonic DMW-MA1 adapter. These adapters can be had for as cheap as $150, or I've heard of people getting them for about $90 on the internet.... or a third party brand for as low as $75 on eBay. Yes, native Micro Four-Thirds lenses autofocus faster, but there is no replacement for the optical quality and lens speed of higher grade glass which is not available in Micro Four-Thirds yet except in the form of prime lenses.

    If you get the E-P3 with the 17mm/2.8 pancake kit lens, then you will already have a good start on a small standard lens with half-decent lens speed and very fast autofocus speed. Then you will still have your 50-200mm SWD and 50mm macro for those times you need it, or your 14-54mm if you really want a decent standard zoom. The original 14-54mm focuses quite slowly on the PEN cameras, but is otherwise a perfect fit. It's so compact for its spec range, and balances great on the PEN cameras. The Mark II version however, is the most ideal standard fast zoom available for the PEN so far, due to its better compatibility with CDAF. That is until a standard fast zoom is finally made for the Micro Four-Thirds system, which hasn't happened yet.

    In other words, the PEN line easily replaces any non-pro DSLR body and with native lenses can even replace a pro-grade DSLR, but for use with DSLR lenses it's still a bit of a toss-up which really depends on how reliant you are on your AF. I can manually focus faster than the AF can in tough situations, so I'm comfortable with either type of body.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.