Geeez, with the Oly 2x factor, how do you keep that thing steady enough even with the IS?

Not wanting to strike sparks, but I noted that money was an issue. In that case, a 510 might be the better choice. I, too, prefer the 520. For one thing its live view is superior to the last generation. Another is a brighter LCD, easier to see in bright light. Face recognition and contrast focusing make live view superior to the last generation. Focusing in general, and particularly low-light performance is enhanced. By the way, for close range, you can use flash-assist for focusing and I think metering too. Note that the 420 & 520 won't be offered with two lenses as were the 410 & 510. Bummer; cost of the 40-150 doubles. If you can scrounge the cash, I'd recommend the 510 + 14-54. Saving on the 510 (sales are sure to blossom when the 520 hits the shelves), you surely can manage (somehow) the pro lens which is coming down from a former $500. I saw it somewhere for just $400 (may have been a time-limited deal), but unfortunately can't recall where that was. Anyhow either way, I am confident you will enjoy your Oly. Not to say that others aren't swift too. The Pentax K200 is waterproofed. That might sway you, though I have no idea about their lenses. You are like me in favoring the lens array over the body. I have owned both Canon and Nikon SLRs, plus another now defunct brand I can't recall; and a Mamiya-press medium format camera. I became most interested in Olympus' glassware, and in particular the breath-takingly expensive f/2 zooms. But their optical quality even wide open is amazing and then some! Apparently image quality wasn't sacrificed to achieve the fast aperture. I too am poor, but last December paused before buying the E-510 2-lens kit. Finally I decided the E-3 with 12-60mm lens was my heart's desire and I'm patiently waiting for funds to accrue (probably about Thanksgiving time). But I wager it's worth it all since I am serious about moving over into the digital world.

Yes, you have choices to make. Just don't make yourself miserable with "might-have-been"s. Use what you have to the fullest and get pleased with your results. Another day you might be able to afford more. Don't give short shrift to a good flash, though. I understand Metz is now fully compatible to Olympus cameras (might be just one model of Metz, I don't know). Still the FL36 is around $200 (I think a bit less). A note on "(R)"; The E-3, 420, & 520 can trigger an "R" flash remotely; the earlier models cannot. So you might want to spring for and "R" model looking ahead to new bodies...or save your cash. After all you'll need a couple of more items such as a lens cleaning kit.

I've seen the gosh-awfulest stuff infesting lens cleaning kits (whoo-ee!). I've tried that bulb on a brush and it's about as useless as... (you think of something). My pet kit was a baby's ear syringe, a camel's hair lipstick brush, proper cleaning fluid, and the right kind of paper--and a baggie to keep the paper clean.

There is an unresolvable argument as to whether to put a UV filter on front for a "clear lens cap". All I want to say is that if you go for it, make it a good quality one, since every piece of glass along the lens axis degrades the image. The trick is to use good glass with good coating on the glass. That's how dozen-plus element zooms come off nicely. And if you go for a polarizer, make sure it's the circular variety, since the planar (less expensive) variety plays hob with in-body sensors on most cameras. If you know you have one of the lucky few, okay, but otherwise, beware.

Happy shooting!

Leonard Durrenberger

I over-analyse constantly and I take forever for the bigger decisions. If I did not, I'd probably have bought an E-500 2 lens kit when they were so cheap at Sam's Club. Thankfully, I waited.

In my opinion (humble or not), Olympus' lenses are the reason to be with Olympus. They're basically a high end optics company that happens to make camera equipment, at least, that's the way I see it.

I don't own any standard level lenses, but the reviews always seem to mention that Olympus has the best kit lenses. Even now, a couple of the standard lenses come with ED elements for superior clarity. I believe it's more difficult to find budget conscious lenses from any other company that reach higher.

Thank you for the input...I know this is a very common (and abused) topic ("what camera should I buy" but it is good to get input from users.

I will most likely go with my gut feel and probably will wind up with the Olympus 510/520, although more over-analysis is not out of the question.

I read in another forum that the camera body is now becoming the accessory and that the lens is the key element in DSLRs. The Olympus 510/520 route gives me the option of purchasing a better lens given my budget.

This might not be relevant but if you are UK based, Dixons sell a great UV filter for less than £10. I was looking around on the internet for ages and finding UV/Skylights at £20-£25.

They also sell a circular polariser for ~£12. Both filters are made by Praktika and work perfectly well - especially for the cost.

First of all, I wouldn't suggest the E-510 since the E-520 should be available any time now and it's a better camera.

The Nikon D80 is somewhere in-between the E-510/E-520 and the Canon 40D but you're right, it's older and should be replaced soon. Neither the D80 nor the 40D have much as far as weather proofing. The D300 is more-or-less the competitor to the 40D, but the D300 is a much better camera.

I've been shooting sports (wrestling and lacrosse mostly) with an Olympus E-1 and the original 50-200mm using manual focus. In some ways, the E-520 should be able to stand toe-to-toe with the E-1. The differences for you would be the lenses, the smaller viewfinder, and the newer sensor with Live View.

Since you're coming from a point-and-shoot, I think that you can accomplish anything but you're going to have to re-learn how to use the camera, even if the E-520 would help a lot in the transition. You'd be surprised how much better the photos from the kit lenses would be but even more surprised at how great the professional Olympus lenses can be.

I hope it helps.

OK, I am going nuts over-analyzing my upgrade to a DSLR...I do mainly high sports photography, XC and track & field and some kids assembly line team photos. I have been using (no laughing!) a Kodak 5mp DX 7590 compact.

I have heard all the stories of using either Nikon or Canon as all the other pros use them but I don't have money burning a hole in my pocket to go to a pro level DSLR.

I've looked at the Canon D40 and feel that I would get tired of carrying that beast around. A Nikon D80 is a nice piece but being 2 years old and not having a dust sensor kind of bothers me. The advantage with these two are the fast autofocus, faster fps and have pretty good weather sealing (I live in Buffalo, NY)

HOWEVER....I really like the value of the E510 with the two lens kit and the size is one that I am comfortable with. The viewfinder is smaller than the other two which I don't know if that will be a problem.

Anyways, I'm looking for thoughts as to the E510 will be robust enough for this sports photography. I don't really like the machine gun practice of photography but if I get more into freelancing, I am sure that it will be needed.

Thanks all!

One more thought: you have an E-510 (also applies to the E-410); this does not signal the (R) version of Olympus flash (FL-36; FL-50), however I gather you can still use them as slaves. (not really sure, though). Unless you need to scrimp, do go ahead and get the (R) version, though, because another day you willl upgrade your body. The E-3, E-420, and E-520 do signal the (R) version flashes.

Well, there are some differences. Mind you I have never used a digital camera; but I *have* owned Nikon and Canon SLRs.

You'll have about an f/stop's worth of extra depth of field on the same focal length and f/stop of lens, but by the same token, you will find diffaction softening setting in about an f/stop faster.

If you use magnification on the live view, or somehow magnify the viewfinder, you will see shake through a long lens. But not so the Nikon (or Canon). That is because the IS/VR of a lens counteracts it, but not so that of in-body IS. However the ultimate result (the saved image) will be quite similar between the two cameras. Easiest to talk about the Leica lens which has on-lens IS. (don't use the two ISes together; they conflict with each other. likewise don't use IS with a tripod; it jars the image.)

Look over the lessons and reviews by Andrej Wrotniak and by Tony Spore.

<http://www.wrotniak.net/photo/43/index.html>
<http://www.fourthirdsphoto.com/blog/>

When you come up with more specific questions, write again. This one is too broad. I can't think offhand of any glaring difference between the various brands of cameras and lenses. Oh. This might be of concern: buy a body of one brand (Olympus; Panasonic) and a lens of the other brand and you can't update their software/firmware. Not yet, anyhow. I asked about Sigma, and was told they don't make a practice of updating software/firmware.

I might not pass back this way. If you would like to query me, please use a PM.

The ladies all look quite lovely. Maybe obviously, some angles are better than others. The colours are quite vibrant.

It looks like a remote location to have a beauty contest.