THE CAMERA HAS BEEN DEFECTIVE! IT HAS BEEN REPLACED BY AN OLYMPUS REPRESENTATIVE!

The replacement camera has been on a press conference with me and provided me with lovely images in all kinds of suroundings. I will post samples of these later on(as soon as the DDOS attack by
some a$$ ends)!

Sample images from the new Olympus E520 can be found here…

A friendly photography shop close to my house sold me an Olympus E520 today – yes, not an E510, but the newly-announced E520. I currently work on a complete review of the camera – meanwhile, here are a few indoor sample shots.

Our Olympus EVOLT E520 is running the 1.0 version of the firmware; the included German manual seems to be the production one(the whole camera seems to be a production-grade model).

EZ 1442
The EZ1442 kit lens is a F3.5 lens that has a focal range of 14-42mm. Here are five small sample shots ranging from ISO 100 to ISO 1600(on the right). click on the shots to see the full JPEG as it was produced by the E520(sharpening and noise reduction disabled):
i100 Olympus E520 sample images i200 Olympus E520 sample images i400 Olympus E520 sample images i800 Olympus E520 sample images i1600 Olympus E520 sample images

Here are a few crops(1:1) resolution – once again, the images are from all ISO settings available. I see slight noise starting to pop up at ISO 400; however, even the ISO1600 shot seems to be somewhat usable. However, the completely fuxated focusing voids further discussion – the images are unacceptable with out-of-the-box settings:
i100 Olympus E520 sample images
i200 Olympus E520 sample images
i400 Olympus E520 sample images
i800 Olympus E520 sample images
i1600 Olympus E520 sample images

Zooming in didn’t do much in regards to sharpness(detail shots below, click thumbnails for native picture)):
i100 Olympus E520 sample images i200 Olympus E520 sample images i400 Olympus E520 sample images i800 Olympus E520 sample images i1600 Olympus E520 sample images

i100 Olympus E520 sample images
i200 Olympus E520 sample images
i400 Olympus E520 sample images
i800 Olympus E520 sample images
i1600 Olympus E520 sample images

EZ 4015-2
The second kit lens is a mediocre-ranged zoom – its focal length is from 40mm to 150mm. I tortured it with a few night shots of a closeby railway station(on a stand) – none of the shots was focused properly:
i100 Olympus E520 sample images i200 Olympus E520 sample images i400 Olympus E520 sample images i800 Olympus E520 sample images i1600 Olympus E520 sample images

These detail shots show the true extent of the focus catastrophy:
i100 Olympus E520 sample images
i200 Olympus E520 sample images
i400 Olympus E520 sample images
i800 Olympus E520 sample images
i1600 Olympus E520 sample images

Zooming in made the situation even worse – the images turned out completely unusable.
i100 Olympus E520 sample images i200 Olympus E520 sample images i400 Olympus E520 sample images i800 Olympus E520 sample images i1600 Olympus E520 sample images

The detail shots can be considered Pixel Soup at the very best – a 100€ camera can produce significantly better results than the E520.
i100 Olympus E520 sample images
i200 Olympus E520 sample images
i400 Olympus E520 sample images
i800 Olympus E520 sample images
i1600 Olympus E520 sample images

THIS CAMERA HAS BEEN DEFECTIVE! THE CONCLUSION BELOW IS VOID! A FULL REVIEW IS UPCOMING!!

Olympus aimed for the moon while designing the E520 – unfortunately, the actual projectile went into outer space. The autofocus system of the E520 is the worst I have ever seen on a digital camera: if you value sharp and well-focused shots, look at the sample images above and stay FAR away from the Olympus EVOLT E520.

My camera heads back to the shop tomorrow(for further analysis) – stay tuned.

P.S. This is one of the cases where purchasing a device at a specialist store helps. I am pretty sure that the folks will either find a solution for me(which I hope) or take the camera back tomorrow…

Related posts:

  1. Olympus E520 sample images – the real deal
  2. Olympus E3-A1 becomes Olympus E-30
  3. Olympus: SLR’s are an engandered species
  4. Olympus E30 – first review
  5. Nokia N95 8GB vs Palm Centro – photography in the Euro 2008 fan zone

47 Responses to “Olympus E520 sample images”

  1. Did you turn off the Noise Reduction or the Noise Filter?

    Noise Reduction only affects exposures that are longer the about 8 seconds.

    Noise Filter works on every shot.

    If you leave the Noise Filter on, you’ll get aggressive noise reduction on the image, and, with sharpening off, it won’t look good.

    Try cranking up the sharpness, or, better yet, turning off the Noise Filter.

  2. I’d suggest a few things before you condem what is, in fact a rather clever camera.

    Firstly, read the manual (RTFM), the E520 has many levels of control regarding focus and other settings, and it may well be you have your settings wrong.

    Secondly, if you are going to test the focus ability of a camera – ANY camera- it is much better to do so in daylight, not at nightime by streetlight.

    Thirdly, despite saying you used a stand, some of your picture clearly show blurring from movement – which is really pretty poor on your part. Maybe get a tripod, and do it properly.

    Your evaluation of the lens is just plain dumb.

    I am sure you are well intentioned, but really you should try to gain a more in depth understanding of the camera and photographic technique before ridiculing it.

    You use the phrase “if you value sharp and well-focused shots, look at the sample images above and stay FAR away from the Olympus EVOLT E52″, to which I would add, if you want any meaningful information on the capabilities of the Olympus E520, look elsewhere.

    A very silly article, with nonsense assumptions.

  3. sorry, but your camera has nothing wrong with it, its just that you can not use it correctly.

    the AF is working but your hands are not steady.

    use a tripod, turn IS off and then you shall see that it is focused and the problem was camera movement.

    mind you, if you want a real review why not check other websites which only review digital cameras and accesories.

  4. one can clearly see, that you are shaking the camera on the first railway station pic.

  5. This is downright ridiculous. Olympus kit lenses are the sharpest available and the E-5xx autofocus system is widely recognised as being very accurate and reliable. So, either you got a lemon, or the above is just a demonstration of operator error. My bets are on the latter.

  6. Clearly it is camera shake and not poor auto focus maybe you should take it back and start again with a 100€ camera to match your skill level.

  7. Based on a multitude of other E-520 user experiences, it appears that you either have a camera with some manufacturing defects or you are not competent with the camera feature set just yet.

    You also have several grammatical issues in the content you published. You might want to have someone proof read your text before you publish it to the web.

    I would advise you to go back to the store and have the camera checked out by one of the veteran staff members to see if the camera is defective or if they can help you with the use of the camera to get the results the model is actually capable of producing.

    Dan

  8. If you aren’t a halfway decent photographer, don’t review a camera. You’re doing so many things wrong here that it’s just misleading.

    1) You need to use a tripod, don’t use IS
    2) If you are testing lens sharpness, you should do so in a studio situation, or at least during the day where low shutter speeds aren’t going to cause camera shake
    3) If you don’t know this stuff, don’t post it on the internet for Engadget to wast people’s time with.

  9. Hmm, some valid comments, some not. Thing is, he did state that the focusing was unacceptable *with out of the box settings*. Keep that in mind. Also “My camera heads back to the shop tomorrow(for further analysis) – stay tuned.” Perhaps a new acronym, RTFA, with A for article?

    IS is supposed to help hand-held shots, so that you don’t *need* a tripod all the time. If it don’t work (with the same results from lowest to highest ISO, mind), then it’s quite weird.

    It’s obvious that the indoor shots are not blurred from camera shake but rather are out of focus, and the fact that some are in focus while others are not, is not good.

    Hey, it’s not his fault that it was posted on engadget. He’s just posting his own experiences. Grammatical excellence is also not very common on the net, so let’s not get picky here.

    RTFM? You actually need to RTFM to take normal, half-decent, focused pictures these days? Wow.

    Yep, this particular camera may be a lemon, but I’ve seen quite a few poorly designed Olympus products. The xD card comes to mind, along with the mJu SW series. Their customer support is quite uninterested, too.

  10. I’d try again in good lighting before making assumptions about the camera’s focusing abilities.
    The hot pixel in the center of the frame might be reason to return it, though.

  11. Well Tam,
    That really is a whole heap of poo!
    All I can say is don’t quit the day job! Unless reviewing cameras is your day job, in which case, ever thought of a career change?

  12. Ha ha!
    Were you holding it one handed, and standing on one leg while listening to ‘Difficult Jazz!’

  13. Wow. A lazy, lazy review.

    Tam, do you even know HOW to use a DSLR?

  14. You have to be friking kidding me. This is an example of internet garbage at best. It’s pretty clear you don’t even know how to use a DSLR. The fact you think the 2nd kit lens is a bad lens shows that you have absolutely no idea of what is going on. Not only that’s one of the very best kit lenses of the market- you are blaming it when zooming in on a low light shot. Gee, I wonder what the real explanation is.

    Why don’t you take a camera course before writing garbage like this. This would go for any camera you are going to “review.”

  15. I have had a E-520 for over a week now, I cant use it at the moment it has stomach pains from laughing ar this review!

  16. PLEASE DONT EVER ATTEMPT TO REVIEW ANYTHING EVER AGAIN. YOU ARE COMPLETELY CLUELESS. SAMPLE SHOTS IN THE DARK , OOH IT CANT FOCUS , HE SAYS WAVING THE CAMERA ABOUT . IF YOU ARE DOING TEST SHOTS IN POOR LIGHT THEN AT LEAST USE A TRIPOD , IF YOU KNOW WHAT THAT IS. WHAT ARE YOUR SHUTTER SPEEDS ON YOUR TEST SHOTS , YOU HAVE MOTION BLUR ON SOME OF THEM FOR GOODNESS SAKE. 40 – 150 IS MEDIOCRE. THAT IS AGAINST EVERY OTHER PROFFESSIONAL REVIEW ON THE INTERNET !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! HELLO , HELLO IS THERE ANYONE THERE !!!!!!!!!!! NO I DIDNT THINK SO. PLEASE LEAVE REVIEWING TO PEOPLE WHO KNOW WHAT THEY ARE DOING .

    REGARDS

    TIM HUGHES

  17. Indeed, this review is pure garbage.
    Camera shake doesn’t make it any better. Also as somebody already mentioned, 40-150 is one of the best kit lenses on the market. About the noise at ISO 1600, if you think that’s noise, you have seen nothing yet, I suggest taking a look at other cameras.
    The Olympus AF system works just fine, using it myself.
    In fact, the only valid point of the review seems to be blurry(faulty?) 14-42mm lens.

    I suggest you stay away from reviewing cameras in the future, as you’re only making yourself look bad.

  18. I also conducted a complete review of the 520 and the 510 last year. I found that the 520 is worst than the 510 which I told readers to avoid last year due to poor image quality. I would only suggest buying APS sized sensor bodies and better yet FF bodies from Canon or Nikon. Oly is gasping for market air at this point as their ship sinks. Stick with the winners and you will be much better off.

  19. Oh for Gods sake why are people still thinking about OlyCrap cameras. IMHO Oly makes junk! Buy Nikon or Canon only!

  20. I have an E510 that I never could get a good image out of. I recently took it to the rifle range and let a group of shooters destroy it with a variety of calibers. Now it’s more or less OlyDust lol.

  21. Danial Dobbson, last year there was no 520. So you are saying crap. The review is crap also.

  22. To ‘notwow’ who said this:

    “IS is supposed to help hand-held shots, so that you don’t *need* a tripod all the time. If it don’t work (with the same results from lowest to highest ISO, mind), then it’s quite weir.”

    The first night shot was an 8 second exposure. The best IS systems out there will only net you 4 stops of shutter speed if you’re a really steady hand. If you assume the 520 has a 4 stop IS system (and you can take advantage of all 4 stops), it gets you down around a 1/2 to 1 second exposure.

    The generalization most folks make with shutter speed is your minimum target shutter speed for hand holding should be the reciprocal of your focal length. The focal length on that shot was 40mm, which means that 1/40 would be the lowest you would want to hand hold.

    I personally don’t like to hold anything under 1/60, even with IS turned on in my lenses. To me, that looks like someone hand-holding a 1s exposure at night, so the IS system is doing its job, but it’s still way too slow of a shutter speed to even dream of getting a sharp shot.

  23. Harry and Daniel are obviously as clueless as the reviewer . Olympus make the best lenses out there. Most of the Olympus E series cameras are fantastic , as are the Nikon and Canon cameras . As you can I am not a biased idiot posting useless comments on a pathetic ‘review’ of a great camera. Check out proper reviews and inform yourself about Olympus .

  24. Harry and Daniel are obviously as clueless as the reviewer . Olympus make the best lenses out there. Most of the Olympus E series cameras are fantastic , as are the Nikon and Canon cameras . As you can I am not a biased idiot posting useless comments on a pathetic ‘review’ of a great camera. Check out proper reviews and inform yourself about Olympus .

  25. I hate how everyone decides they can be as rude as they like on the internet because they never have to meet the people they are being rude to.

    Personal attacks are simply uncalled for, regardless of how bad the article may or may not be.

  26. I hate it when some one reviews something and slates it as an awful product when they have no idea what they are talking about . No wonder people get angry, this is a brand new model camera which is highly rated.

    Hardly a personal attack, when such a ridiculous article is posted from someone who clearly has no idea what they are talking about, there are bound to be a few ‘home truths’ to be told.

    Imagine something you know lots about or really like and enjoy. Someone who doesnt know anything about that thing comes along and rates it as complete rubbish. Would you email him and say oooh what an honest review, even though you know nothing about it , I respect your opinion??

    If someone posts something dumb , Ill tell them its dumb and give them good reasons why I think its dumb.

    Regards

    Tim

  27. How about a comment from the original ‘reviewer’. Anything else to say ??

    Regards

    Tim

  28. This reviewer requires some basic education in photography. It is a real shame seeing someone embarass themselves like this.

  29. Daniel Dobbson the e520 has only just come out it wasnt even announced until a couple of months ago!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    You really are a lucky Guy to have access to a camera 6 months or so before Launch!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    Enjoy cleaning the dust off your APS and FF sensors should keep you busy anyway!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  30. I assume that you are an average user of camera phone.
    I recommend you to keep improve your photography skill and to try later to get a dedicated camera as a point & shoot. When you will be confortable with basic photography technics try some dlsr cameras.
    Perhaps, you will understand how to use them.
    Be patient, practice a lot, and you will get the point.

    But, for your own interest don’t let the shopkeeper read your review when you will get back the olympus e520, or you will be ashamed for the rest of your life and you will lost any interest to learn photography.

  31. My favorite part is how the light from behind the camera disappears in the last (ISO1600) indoor image.

  32. THE CAMERA HAS BEEN DEFECTIVE! IT HAS BEEN REPLACED BY AN OLYMPUS REPRESENTATIVE!

    The camera HAS BEEN on a Tripod for both shot sequences; I performed over 100 further shots with the camera and NONE were focussed.

    The replacement camera has been on a press conference with me and provided me with lovely images in all kinds of suroundings. I will post samples of these later on!

    I wanted to post this before, but some ASSHOLE ddossed my web site. Asshole, be prepared for a lawsuit.

  33. Well, that clears up things.

    And again, folks, RTFA before making rude comments. Really, the fanboys need to chill.

    Also, to the people who kept insisting that the out-of-focus was from camera shake, take a *good* look at the pics. None of them show the type of blur you get from camera shake at long focal lengths/exposures. And you say you’re better at reviewing cameras than the author.

  34. wow you’ve got a really aroused bunch of fanboys…

    I have an e410 and I think it sucks. Bite me.

  35. Hmmm dont you just hate it when people cant use the cameras they buy , Not fanboys at all the fanboys seem to have made themselves quite clear . Good lesson learnt by the OP sadly others still need to learn them .

  36. Come on! In the night shots, you mistake camera shake (which happens because YOU chose an exposure time that was too long) with misfocus! And you don’t even know that if you zoom in you have to use even shorter exposure times…
    Do you know the 1/f (where f is the focal length you chose) rule to determine the longest exposure time you can use to avoid shaking?
    Learn to use a DSLR and to take pictures before doing a review and bash a product just because you made some errors!
    Are you thinking about the consequences? If I were Olympus I would sue you…

  37. Why is everyone in such a hurry to buy/rate a camera that is not even available?
    Just wait for the REAL reviews and then decide.
    I,m sure Olympus won’t market a crappy dslr with so much competition out there.

  38. You say this camera is a POS and yet you explain that there is a problem with the camera itself… You’re the Worst reviewer I’ve had the chance to stumble upon.

    Don’t bitch at a camera that has a defect due to it being released a bit early; Or rushed. It happens and it happened to my Canon 20D, which after a few months of waiting instead of buying the first one is a Great super sharp camera.

    You’re like some game reviewer reviewing an Alpha build.. Learn to Review!
    http://dpreview.com < Has a better review.

  39. http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=28345798
    Even forum members on DPReview have better reviews and a perfectly working camera.

  40. In all product lines there are defected few pieces. Don’t blame a brand or a model because of that. Olympus makes the best and the most affordable cameras today when you get a lot more for your money. I had the e-510 for a year and recently bought the Canon XSi a week ago after reading great reviews about it, I returned it because after tweaking every setting possible I couldn’t get what I easily get by the e-510. Many reviews of top brand cameras are paid.

  41. Asmarlak, credit for you! That’s true as it can be. The reviews are paid. Olympus with it’s 4/3 sensor can achieve almost the same quality as so called high-end DSLRs name it Nikon or Canon. I’ve even read a review where compared e-510 (kit lenses) with Canon 1d Mark III. In a test Oly scores better in matter of sharpness than Canon. As for Nikon I had a chance (or not) of using it. THERE, the results out of the box are inaccaptable. Colors washed out, flat. Yuck.
    HARRY ANUAS & DANIAL DOBBSON think twice, before you post something or try OLY first. I doubt if you ever had one in your hand.

  42. Hi,

    Ah, engarbage fanboys… *sigh* so much fun to listen fight with eachother :-B

    I’ll stick with my $100 Canon powershot a95, thanks. I’ve found that DSLRs only lead to holy wars and the PS takes shots well enough for me.

    @Tam: You’ve spoken with BW regarding the DDOS then?

    @asmarlak, MBiehn: Accusing Tam of getting paid for these reviews is like accusing Tom Brokaw of being Communist. Tam’s a jounarlist (even outside of tamspalm, he writes and photographs for a few Austrian tech mags, iirc) and has values, unlike many of these engadget-referred children apparently do.

    Best regards,
    Ryan Rix
    Coadministrator

  43. I didn’t say Tam was paid for his review, it would be ridiculous, I spoke of other reviewing sites…
    Regards
    MBiehn

  44. Hi Folks,
    there is an easy reason why I cant have been bribed:

    a) The cam was defective

    b) I voted with my money and my feet by buying and still using it

    Best regards
    Tam Hanna

  45. How about binning this review and starting again ?

    Most of the shots show obvious camera shake:
    the first night shot with the zoom at 40mm has horizontal motion blur;
    the second and fourth shots do indeed appear to be poorly-focussed on the part you have blown up – in fact, the first is sharp on the markings on the roadway, as is the fourth, but in a plane slightly closer to the viewer;
    the third shot suffered a brief vertical jolt (motion blur again);
    the final shot (presumably at the highest ISO) appears as good as it gets.

    In the second series, these are all badly-focussed; in addition, the ISO100 appears to have motion blur in both directions, but more horizontal motion during the exposure (bottom left to top right, I’m guessing – it could be the opposite);
    the ISO200 appears to have a strong bottom left-top right movement (the worst of the four);
    the ISO400 has mainly vertical motion; the 800 mainly horizontal motion, possibly a shake in the 800 rather than a poor shutter press.

    Use your tripod, put a lag on the shot, or use a cable release (if you can fit one / have one): try again, and use your tripod on something made of concrete that does not suffer traffic or earthquake vibrations; don’t try to take them from a train, or when you’ve had a large amount of caffeine, like these.

    I am a Canon / Pentax user, BTW.

  46. This review seems to be a joke !!!
    LOL
    Best regards,
    Xavi.

  47. LEARN TO READ

    THE CAMERA WAS DEFECTIVE!

    Comments closed

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

© 2013 TamsPalm - the Palm OS / web OS Blog Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha