Olympus SP-500
December 12th, 2005 | by David Elrich
 |
Average user rating from 3 users |
Shock & Awe
by Tom on Jan 16th, 2006 at 9:33 PM:
Before I took the plunge, I read several reviews, noted pros and cons and decided the little Oly was worth the investment. I’m somewhat partial to Olympus from the glory days of the OM system. Anyway I knew this latest and greatest offering had a strong telephoto lens (10x-28-380mm SLR) and no image stabilizer. I would just have to revert to some degree of photographic competency and use a tri-pod. Compared to my old Canon PowerShot S20 (point and shoot) this baby is completely amazing. Packed with shutter priority, aperture priority, full manual, full auto, flash intensity, 10x optical zoom, spot and area metering, 6mp ...and 30 minutes of video using a 512mg xd card???... I'm in digital heaven and I haven't even taken a picture yet. The best thing...its $300 cheaper than the 3mp Canon of 7 years ago...I guess the moral of the story is.... If you haven't looked at what’s being offered in today's digital camera market you’re in for a shock
SP-500 UZ is a good place to start
by P. Shields on Dec 17th, 2005 at 7:42 AM:
I bought my SP-500 three days ago. If it were a film camera I would be broke by now. I am taking shots of everything. This is how I know that the author's review is dead on.
The first thing I noticed when I took it out of the box is the cheap feel of the camera body. This might be due to having previously worked with only metal-body cameras, especially 35-mm SLRs. The next thing I noticed was the inconsistent focusing. The next thing was the tendency of the camera to look for the point of focus. The most annoying thing was the fact that there is NO IMAGE STABILIZATION. (I suppose if I were a better photographer that wouldn't be so much of an issue.) If I can press that shutter button just right there is no problem, but it seems to me that it takes way too much pressure to get off a decent shot, and with no image stabilization, that just throws everything out of focus. Another thing that is annoying is that dangling lens cap.
All that being said, I am taking the best shots I have ever taken in my life, and I am a digital-camera virgin, knowing nothing about these things. I got the rust on a water tower an eighth of a mile away on a cloudy, windy day (10x optical zoom is fantastic). I got the pores and blackheads in the face skin of a friend from across the living room. I got closeups of my little plastic dolls, 2 inches high, that show details I cannot see with the naked eye.
Using a tripod eliminated much of the image stabilization problem; now I have to get a better tripod to eliminate it totally. The button is just hard enough to push that it knocks the focus out by a few pixelwidths and shakes everything. Small prints look in focus, but the blurriness is apparent in the larger images because that slight pressure causes the plastic parts of the tripod to flex. I am certain there has to be a "correct" angle to press that button, because sometimes the action is smooth and easy and does not jar the camera.
There is a focus function in which the camera predicts the next point of a moving object and places the focus at that point. If the dog's tail is wagging, the camera just will not focus on the place that I want.
All of this is in what I will call "snapshot" mode, without using the many powerful features that I am sure will enhance my experience with this camera, so I am willing to consider that much of the annoyance is due to my lack of familiarity of what's available. For example, the "portrait" mode automatically sets the f-stop so that the foreground is sharp and the background is softer, and "landscape" mode sets the f-stop and shutter speed so that from the lens to infinity is in focus. I haven't done any of that yet.
Why did I choose the SP-500 camera? A few times I have used the camera the boss at work has,an elderly Olympus Camedia C-700 UZ 2MP, and decided that for right now I couldn't live without the zoom. I would have just bought a used C-700, but I also lusted after the increased megapixel content because some of the shots I take go on the cover of the little tabloid newspaper (that's the business) and I want them to look better. They're good at 2 MP, they'll be better at 6 MP.
I am already shopping for my next digital camera. The hunt might take me to an expensive digital SLR, and it might just take me to a camera like the SP-500 but that has image stabilization. But I am going to learn this camera inside and out so that I will know what it is I want and don't want. The SP-500 has enough of the good stuff that it's a keeper, especially with that 10x zoom. It's just not a camera you could hand to a stranger at the zoo and get him to take a snapshot of you and the kids in front of the tiger. But you could get a fine, magazine-quality shot of the tiger yourself.
Write Your Review
Your review should be relevant to this item. An email address is required for verification purposes only and will not be displayed. HTML is not allowed in comments. If you want to discuss the product rather than write your own review, visit the forums.
RSS Feed
Don't waste the money!!!
by Thomas on Jan 18th, 2006 at 7:17 PM:
This camera is not even a good point and shoot! No image stabilization and a shutter speed of 1/1000. Even in the sport mode in full daylight there will be blurred images.
Getting clear, sharp images without a tripod is nearly impossible even for a still life.
Do not believe the postive reviews! They are lies planted by salesman who sell this camera.
I no longer buy Olympus or from Best Buy.