Comments on: Olympus E-620 DSLR Review

By: erythrocyte

erythrocyte — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 11:31:01 +0000

One of the biggest downsides to a 4/3 format system is that the crop factor becomes something like 2X. You need extremely wide angled lenses to shoot wide angle shots and in the Olympus system these lenses cost a fortune. On the other hand, a 2X system would be great for wildlife shooting. The only reason Olympus and Panasonic, etc. have gone for a 4/3 system is that it’s cheaper to manufacture sensor chips that way. A smaller sensor chip often has a higher pixel density (no. of pixel sensitive microsensors per unit area on the CMOS/CCD chip). And this can translate into a limited ISO range in order to get quality photographs.

Not sure about this but I’ve heard that the E-620 and it’s congeners don’t autofocus very well in low light. You might need to carry a flash-light along with the camera.

By: amthysthrt

amthysthrt — Thu, 21 Jan 2010 05:09:36 +0000

I just bought the slightly scaled down version of this camera, the E-600. Not sure of everything they took out of it for the 600, I only know for sure it is shy just a couple of the art scene features, and it has a lower price point (I believe it’s $749, though I spent $699 for body plus 2 lenses). But it’s definitely an awesome camera! I’d been wanting to get back into SLR, but didn’t want to go back to 35mm film, so kept my old Pentax K-1000 in the closet and bought the E-600. And though there’s a much bigger learning curve to figure out how all of my old SLR skills translate into the DSLR world than I anticipated, I’m LOVING what I’m able to do with it! And the optics are awesome, something I’ve always been disappointed with in even the best digital point & shoot cameras.

By: Aprile Patton

Aprile Patton — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 15:32:29 +0000

What’s your opinion on the Sony DSC-H9? Is it a DSLR? By the way I LOOOOOOOVE your website. It is beyond perfection. I am a wife/student/mother-of-three/emplyoee.. Needless to say I have no extra money to spend on expensive books. You website is precisely what I need and love. Thank you so much.

By: DM|ZE

DM|ZE — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 20:23:59 +0000

I am considering buy either the e-620 or a Canon XSI in the next few months. Under the advice of Jeff Kontur (above) I recently went on a hunt to find and hold an e-620. It has a similar grip to the e-420 from what I understand and Jeff mentioned to me before that he felt the e-420 grip was too small. I must say that when I finally found a local store (about an hour away) that carried the e-620 I was surprised at how small the grip really is. I kind of felt like I could drop it. I have fairly small hands so I didn’t think it would be a huge issue, but it is more noticeable than I thought. I’m not saying this will stop me from buying this model but it does go in the con list. I am surprised how many reviews never mention this.

By: jeux 3d

jeux 3d — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 06:23:23 +0000

This Handycam looks amazing in photos. I was looking a new camera having best picture quality. I am very impressed by design of E-620 announced by Olympus. I am very happy to know features like, broad feature set, strong photo capabilities, smooth automatic operation and easiest to use when running automatically.

By: Don Charles Nebeker

Don Charles Nebeker — Mon, 14 Sep 2009 10:00:40 +0000

The camera (Olympus E-620) weighs just 475 grams (without battery). Light.

Rather useless is it not? Heavy enough for a paperweight, not for a door stop. Definitely useless as a photographic instrument! Unless it also operates on built in photovoltaic cells or external power, which may bring in the question of low light photography. Seems it is not a camera, just the wonderful technological corpse of one; it is only a latent camera. With out power it is an expensive paperweight, And the type and number of batteries varies so much! So, why not list the weight with the recommended battery. That would come closer to truth in advertising. It would give a useful and honest weight to the instrument.

Why ever list the weight of a digital camera without batteries? Or the weight of external power source. It is a dead chunk of glass, plastics and metals plus a few other things that is totally incapable of taking a picture. At least my old PRAKTICA SUPER TL would still be able to take a picture without a battery. Yes, just the pressure of a thumb to wind it and it was ready to go clunk and take a picture. The meter did not work of course, but it would work! It still does after 40 years. Will the Olympus, Canon, Nikon etc of today still be operational in 40 years without surgery to supply battery power, or will the batteries still be available then? Perhaps it will not matter. Progress may make them worth $2.00 – $10.00 in a Salvation Army thrift store like the last few generations of great expensive 35MM and other film cameras of the recent past are.

By: Karen Muska

Karen Muska — Sat, 12 Sep 2009 23:47:08 +0000

I’ve had a E-330 , the first camera with live view (and my first dslr) since it came out. I loved it, but it was time to finally get something newer as there were certain situations, such as low light or sports that I could not easily get the shots I wanted. I just bought the 620 a few weeks ago. The first few days the camera felt odd in my hands, considerably lighter than the 330 and with a smaller (almost too small) grip; however after a bit of getting used to the design and “feel” I can say it is well thought-out and packed with features. The auto-focus is much faster, the noise is much improved, and the IS has really come in handy. The camera is very customizable and gives the user a lot of control over settings. I am still playing around and experimenting, but I am satisfied with my purchase. I will eventually upgrade to a semi-pro camera, but for now this camera gives a lot of bang for the buck.- good image quality and a lot of features that are usually found on more expensive cameras.

By: summaries

summaries — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 17:27:14 +0000

I also wondered about this line in the review above:
” found the camera very easy to use but it may be a little too basic for the more experienced.”

There are a whole bunch of fine tuning features, that do no appear in the menu by default,
until you turn that option on to display in menu. When you add them to the menu, I would say that the
camera is not too basic.

Perhaps the camera was reviewed without turning these features on in the display menu ?

By: Dave

Dave — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 12:31:44 +0000

Maybe it is “too basic for the more experienced” because the menus are easy and intuitive?

Still don’t understand the conclusion to the review.

By: Eric Bouler

Eric Bouler — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 02:48:44 +0000

I have had mine for about 2 months. The only issue I have is I cannot get the right light in overcast conditions shooting in auto mode. Great camera so far. Use it in real estate everyday.