So, given all of the camera's features, capabilities and limitations, does it allow its user to take good photographs? I think so. I was pleased with the color reproduction and image quality. And I'm willing to let you judge this for yourselves as well. As I mentioned, I took over 3,000 photos with the camera. As I post-process them — and I have a ton more to go through — I'll upload them to my Zooomr photo stream, in this set. Have a look and see what sorts of images you can get with the E-500.
Enough talking, let's wrap things up. Overall, the E-500 is a solid DSLR. It's sturdy, has a good grip, it's got good battery life, and the image quality is great. I like the 4:3 aspect of the photos, and I like the fact that the lenses and body are interchangeable with other brands, although currently only Olympus, Panasonic and Leica make DSLRs and lenses based on the standard. That's about five camera backs altogether, at widely varying prices, so there's not a whole lot of choice, although that could change in the future. The sensor's performance in low light is not up to my expectations, and that could or could not be related to the four-thirds standard. Time will tell. I think that it's a bargain for its class. The current market price hovers around $650 for the body and two lenses, the one I tested and another, the 40-150mm f/3.5-4.5 zoom. I hear that it's a great lens.
Bottom line: if I weren't so bent on being able to use it in low light situations, I'd get one myself.
Article comments
1 - jim
I've been shooting the E-500 since last June both professionally and personally, and I have to say I adore this camera. And then when I started buying Olympus's ED lenses to bolt on, I fell in love all over again, the image quality went from superb to stellar, in my opinion comprable to the Canons and Nikons that cost many hundreds more. I'm with you on the low light performance, though I just consider it not awesome, not bad. It becomes less of an issue when you start ditching the kit lenses for Oly's faster ones, there's a world of difference in low light between f2.0 and the f3.5 of the kit lenses.
Another small note, Sigma is also making lenses for the four-thirds system.
2 - Raoul
Thanks Jim! Took a look at your shots, very nice!
3 - Andy Smith
I concur with your review. Having used it since late summer, I've found very few problems, and none that have kept me from getting the shot I want.
The price is a particular strong point; with the camera out for some time now, one can get the camera and several lenses for the price of the newer models alone.
BTW, I like and recommend the eyeup maginifier.
Most of the photos (since August) at tis url are from the EVOLT:
Andy
4 - Raoul
Thanks Andy! Cool prints you've got there!
5 - Misfit
I have an E-500 and I must be the only one who doesn't have a problem with the eyepiece. I find it very direct, clear and easy to use myself. I agree with two points. One, the cameras low light issue and two, when in that low light, the strobe effect the built in flash gives off. BUT...I purchased the FL-36 flash for the camera and ... let me clear my throat. WOW, BABY! instead of stroking off flashes of light for an assist, the FL-36 throws an infa-red light out and is not annoying, quick, and quite efficient. In fact, i hardly ever use the built in flash now. i use rechargeable batteries and get about 200 shots per charge. There is not tether to a power pack for the FL-36, you have to get its big brother, the FL-50, for that. (and pay twice as much). The camera itself is fun to use. The kit lenses are solid and I chose it over the Canon XTi, the Nikon D80 (too expensive for me), and the Sony Alpha A100. Although if I had the loot, I would have gone with the Pentax K10D. If you have low light issues, buy the flash, you can stop down the light by -7 or up to +7. Makes a world of difference. The 40-150mm lense is awesome too. I was surprised at first by the telescoping zoom, but it is a budget camera and it really does take nice shots.
6 - Gadgetmiser
I love my E500! Apart from the strictly technical specs, I maintain that its ability to use cheap manual lenses opens the door to a world of benefit. Fancy a 400mm (35mm equiv) for $30?:) I reviewed my collection of lenses here Gadget Miser; please pop by if of interest!
7 - Jarl Østergaard
Having used the olympus e-500 for about a year now I must conclude that I am very satisfied. I own the 14-54 zuiko lens and it makes the camera a completely different experience compared to the 14-45. Shots at higher ISOs need some noiseremoval but there are several software tools to do this. I also uses the Canon E400 at work - but prefer my e-500.