This article, while basically complete, is still undergoing changes: additions and corrections happen on a regular basis. Significant ones will be listed here, so that you do not have to go through the whole text if you decide to revisit this page.

As always, corrections and addition suggestions from Readers are most welcome; they really help.

Updated 2008/02/21: added a note on finder alignment and coverage.

Updated 2008/02/15: measured IS effectiveness; section on weatherproofing.

Introduction

The E-1, introduced back in 2003, was the first camera of the Olympus E-Series line of SLRs designed, from ground up, as digital, and not as digital modifications of film SLRs (we remember those times, when the "old" and "new" parts of a camera even had separate power supplies!). The camera carved for itself a cozy market niche of enthusiastic followers, especially after it started selling heavily discounted, and was (still is) capable of most pleasing results.

Four years is, however, a long time in the digital camera world, and a new model addressing the expectations and needs of professionals and advanced amateurs seemed somewhat overdue. So here it is: the new E-3 started selling in the U. S. late November, 2007. As an avid user of three previous Olympus SLR models, I was very much interested to find out how does it stand up to our expectations.

As soon as the first specs became known, I decided not to buy the E-3, regardless of how good it may turn out to be. I didn't want a camera body weighing more than about 600 g or so, and I'm not a professional user who needs it to be abuse- and weather-proof. From the point of image quality, the E-510 I'm using as my principal picture-taking tool is performing just fine, thank you; I haven't outgrown that camera yet. Besides, I need this money to buy more lenses, which I consider a more essential purchase. Therefore I wasn't even planning to write a detailed review of the E-3, similar to those I wrote on E-300, E-500, and E-510.

Then a fellow photographer living nearby kindly offered me his new E-3 to use for a few weeks, so that I can review this camera. This I couldn't refuse, being too much of a camera buff (who desperately is also trying to take some pictures as well). Thank you, Don; I've shortened the life span of your camera by about two thousand frames, but at least I know something about it, and so will the visitors to these pages. (Thanks are also due to two more Readers, one from Virginia and one from Pennsylvania, who followed with similar offers just a few days later, and to some others, who were considering different ways to achieve the same goal.)

So here it is: the new Olympus flagship, the long-awaited E-3.

Index

Features and specifications

The "official" specs are available at a number of Olympus sites, for example, here. In the table below I'm trying to be clear about cases when my own observations or measurements do not agree with the specs claimed by the manufacturer; I am also adding some data items not published by Olympus and, as always, quite a lot of commentary and explanations.

Body

This chassis looks quite similar to that in Nikon D300 or Canon 40D (albeit it seems more full than in both those cameras).

The chassis is manufactured using the Thixomold® forming process, which has a number of advantages over traditional die-casting or metal injection techniques. If I remember right, the last camera chassis using this technology was in the Nikon F6.

Thixomolding, improving the uniformity of the polycrystalline metal, typically provides a gain of more than 20% in strength, while allowing for tighter dimensional tolerances. (See the Advanced Forming Technology site for more.)

The body feels very solid, except for the tilting LCD monitor, and, to some extent, the raising internal flash; especially the former feels a bit plasticky. No doubt, both will become weak spots in camera's ruggedness.

The build quality is, as expected from Olympus top-tier offerings, first-class; noticeably better than I've seen in other cameras priced below $2000. A tough job to match, literally.

The shape is thoughtfully profiled. What I like most is the thumb grip (very important for a camera of this weight), and an indentation of the front face at the left, allowing my left hand an easier access to the lens' zoom ring. The backward slant of the top side is also a nice touch we haven't seen since the days of the E-1,

For more impressions on body ergonomics, see my First (and Second) Look.

How useful it is, depends on how, when, and where you use the camera. For some users (like myself, so far at least), this is just an extra feature, reflected in camera's bulk, weight, and cost; some will find it indispensable.

In the original posting of this article I assumed that the weatherproofing in the E-3 sets it apart from other similar models. While this seems to be true in case of the Canon 40D, I'm not quite sure about the comparison with the D-300.

The latter also has gasketing, but I have yet to see any claims by Nikon regarding this matter, except for "advanced moisture and dust protection" mentioned in some promotional materials. I've also checked the manuals of both cameras: neither mentions weather- or moisture-proofing; not once. Strange.

Still, I remember somebody's story from an Arctic cruise. With all other photographers aboard using Canon and Nikon models, he ended up being the only one who kept taking pictures with his E-1 when the weather went bad. I would expect the E-3 to be built to the same standards.

It took me more than a week to start feeling comfortable with the E-3 but it is possible, and still, this is better than the obscene size and weight of some top-end professional cameras. Here is a brief comparison against cameras from the same class (feature- and price-wise):

I'm not quoting the body depth, as it is not really meaningful in comparisons: it is usually the lens which defines the overall depth of the camera. The weight does include batteries.

Index

Lenses

For more than one reason, I am a believer in this standard. Too bad so far only Olympus and Panasonic make cameras using it (with one Leica model being a clone of a Panasonic).

As of this writing (February, 2008) there are 30 Four Thirds lenses available, with four more pending, and another four deprecated. Not counting Leica (which brands lenses for the Panasonic line), Sigma is the only independent lens maker supporting Four Thirds, although the support is not as strong as that for the more common brands and often delayed.

For some photographers at least, the availability of often excellent (and always at least good) Olympus lenses was the prevailing reason to join the Four Thirds (or, more exactly, Olympus E-Series) bandwagon. As a notable example, the 7-14 mm ZD zoom is the widest rectilinear lens for a sensor format smaller than the "full" 24×36 mm, with an outstanding image quality to match.

This is the first SWD ("Silent Wave Drive", another meaningless moniker) lens in the Olympus line; "SWD" denotes the presence of a new kind of the built-in autofocus motor, supposed to be faster and more precise. It remains compatible with any previous E-Series (or Four Thirds) SLRs.

While it took me a while to warm up to the E-3, with this lens it was a love affair on first sight (more exactly, from the moment I saw first samples on my monitor, full pixel size). Great resolution on and off-axis, well-controlled chromatic aberration, moderate geometric distortion at the wide end — I am thrilled. It consistently delivers better quality than the older 14-54 mm ZD (an excellent lens by itself), but you will need to use the E-3 (or E-510/E-410) to see this, as only these cameras allow you to turn noise filtering off, to enjoy the full detail the new NMOS sensors are capable off.

I'm planning a separate report on the 12-60 mm ZD, but most of my E-3 image samples were shot with it, so you may already have a look, including a number of full-frame, original off-camera images.

This lens adds another 575 g to the camera's body weight; it is also 11 mm longer than the 14-54 mm ZD, not to mention a burning hole ($950!) in my pocket, but I am more than willing to face these consequences.

In January, 2008, Olympus modified the E-3 firmware (as well as that for the E-510), allowing the body-based image stabilization to be used with legacy lenses. All you need to do is to enter manually the focal length in use, so that the IS system knows the rules of the game.

The manual focus confirmation (where the AF system detects when a manually-controlled lens achieves focus) is still not possible with legacy lenses.

Index

Image sensor

From the E-1 to E-500, Olympus SLRs were using the (excellent) CCDs made by Kodak. The switch was widely (and often bitterly) discussed, but seems like water under the bridge now. The NMOS ("negative-channel metal oxide semiconductor"; don't ask me, not my branch of physics) sensors are here to stay for a while.

Sometimes I wonder if a square, 17.3×17.3 mm format would still be compatible; basically, it should work. The mirror in the E-300 and E-330 swings around the shorter edge, so there is enough room in the mirror chamber; such a square would also almost fit into the image circle of current lenses. A model giving you a choice of the square format in addition to both vertical and horizontal 4:3 aspect ratio (without changing the camera orientation) would rise some eyebrows! Sorry for digressing, sometimes I just can't help it...

The arguments about "intrinsic" disadvantages of this size compared to the common 3:2 APS-C format (Canon: 14.8×22.2 mm) stem, in most cases at least, from ignoring the numbers. Because most of the standard print sizes are closer to 4:3 than to 3:2 in proportions, the excess in the longer dimension is usually cropped off; what remains is 14% in frame height. This is barely significant, if at all. Besides, not the pixel pitch itself defines the noise or dynamic range, but the photosite size (accounting for the area between those). In this fill factor Panasonic claims to have an advantage — not that it really matters.

For my more detailed discussion of sensor size issues, see here.

This is the same as the pixel count of the E-510/E-410, or twice as much (1.4 times the linear resolution) as in the E-1. Doubling the pixel count makes a visible difference — if the lenses can fill these pictures with detail, and in this case they clearly can.

In fact, the raw .ORF files have information recorded from about 4% more or 10,416,000 pixels (9.93 "binary" MP), and some raw-to-RGB conversion programs allow you to generate JPEGs of this size; see File Format and Compression below.

In all Bayer-pattern cameras (read: all models except for Sigma SLRs so far) the actual number of megapixels of recorded information is actually about one third of this nominal pixel count; for every pixel the resulting image two out of three RGB components are interpolated from the neighbors. For more, see When Is a Megapixel Not a Megapixel.

The Japanese were right when they tried to introduce the 24×32 frame format on 35-mm film back in the Fifties, but they had to give it up when the U. S. photofinishers just said no. This did not change: while all of the larger print formats are closer to the 4:3 ratio, the smallest widely used one is 4×6" — still 3:2. In spite of the fact that 95% (or more) of digital cameras sold are 4:3, very few photofinishers offer the 4.5×6" size, fitting these proportions.

On the other hand, all computer displays I know of are capable of only 8 bits per color so far; the common operating systems do not support more, either, and a similar limitation is present in the printing process, so the final images have to be reduced to this depth anyway. Anything more has an advantage only in the image postprocessing stage, and it is the first bits above eight what counts most there.

Like other manufacturers, Olympus decided to address the high-ISO noise problem by means of noise filtering; they also now follow the crowd by applying it too aggressively (for my taste, at least). This kills some of the (impressive) detail the lenses and imager are capable off. Luckily, the degree of this filtering can be adjusted in four steps (you have to do that through the menu system; too bad!)

For example, the picture at the left required an exposure of 1/2 s at F/4, ISO 200. The same scene photographed in visible light needed 1/2500 s (same F-number and ISO).

Olympus has a remedy for this since the original E-1. An dedicated micromotor vibrates the protective filter with an ultrasonic frequency; this, in principle at least, should shake most such particles off, and those have a chance to be trapped on sticky strips on the bottom of the chamber. (These strips should be replaced every three years by Olympus service, according to the manual.)

The system seems to be working just fine. A few cases of specks I had over the years in my E-300, E-500, and E-510 were gone after a few frames, and I never had to clean the protective filter by hand. Other manufacturers were initially denying the significance of the problem, only to address it in later models, using the same solution.

I know of only one comparison of dust shake-off systems on different brands of cameras; it was performed by Róbert Irházy and published at PixInfo.com; according to that, the Olympus system is significantly more effective than others (some of which do no seem to make any difference at all).

The dust shake-off is activated every time the camera is turned on (or wakes up from the sleep state). It adds a slight delay to the process, but I do not find this objectionable (the delay seems to be reduced in the E-3 as compared to previous models).

This is a tricky operation and should be always done with full battery: when the camera runs out of juice. the shutter and mirror may return to the working position in the leest suitable moment, with disastreous results!

Index

Image processing

First of all, the Reference WB allows you to set the WB by reading the light of a white (or other neutral) surface. In previous Olympus models I've used I found this method to be accurate and reliable, and it is works equally well in the E-3.

To access this function, you've got to have it assigned to the [Fn] (user-defined) button. Pressing that button and then the shutter release will cause a test picture to be taken (assuming you point the camera at the neutral reference surface) and analyzed, with the reading stored in one of the available four slots. The camera will refuse to do that under some circumstances (the reference surface too busy, or different light sources mixed together).

I would like to see also another way of activating this feature, without devoting the [Fn] button to it, as this, obviously, precludes its use for anything else. This could be done with use of the Control Panel, with a "modifier" button — very much like the custom white balance setting, see below.

The custom WB is accessed via its dedicated button or from the Control Panel. In either case, pressing the [+/-] button when this setting is displayed allows to dial in the desired color temperature (many users I've talked to were unaware of this trick and used the menu system instead). The adjustment range is very wide; in particular, I found the settings below 2500°K (missing on some highly acclaimed cameras) useful in low-wattage tungsten shooting.

The open shade preset should work well for shaded subjects illuminated by the light from a clear sky. I've sometimes seen it used under overcast conditions, which is a misunderstanding.

The cloudy position may or may not work right: depending on the actual thickness of the cloud cover, the effective color temperature may vary. This is the least dependable of outdoor settings, at least in my experience.

The tungsten setting is still a guesswork, as the color temperature of incandescent light strongly depends on the wattage of bulbs used. Many household lights have a lower wattage than this preset assumes, and will be rendered shifted towards the red. Complaining about that makes the same sense as expecting that one shoe size will fit all people. In most cases, when shooting under this kind of light I first take a reference WB reading, or just adjust the custom WB down by trial and error as needed.

The Auto WB in E-3 (and other cameras I've tried) usually renders these scenes too warm, so I cannot depend on it here. An extra degree of complexity is introduced when the scene is lighted with a number of bulbs, differing in wattage. For your tabletop studio purpose use all lamps of the same power and kind.

Fluorescent lights are a special case, as their light color composition does not follow the black body distribution (on which the concept of color temperature is based). While the current breed of fluorescent tubes provides much more "natural" light than those of just twenty years ago, the spectrum may still be far from natural, which may cause problems with color rendition.

The three fluorescent presets in the E-3 are intended for three quite different types of this light. If you are not sure, you have to choose between them by trial and error, as the Auto WB may or may not work right here.

Flash WB is a new option in the E-3; the setting is very close to daylight and can be used instead of it, if you'd like your sunny-weather pictures to look a bit warmer. Some cameras I've used in the past had the sunny preset at this color temperature.

All WB settings can share a common correction (in ±7 discrete steps each in blue-red and green-magenta planes), or each can be individually modified. If you complain your camera renders colors too cool, just adjust this, customizing the colors to your taste.

Last but not least, remember that the WB setting is applied only after the picture has been taken, in the process of converting the raw sensor information into RGB. If you set the camera to store images in the raw form, this adjustment is delayed to the stage of postprocessing; while the setting is "remembered" in the file, it can be changed then at no price in image quality.

For the last few years I've been waiting for a camera manufacturer with guts enough to provide such a stand-alone meter, capable of sending the information to the camera. In many applications this would be the most reliable way of setting the white balance and exposure. If Olympus had asked me in advance (they didn't) about what I wanted to see in the E-3, this would have been the second top suggestion, after a larger viewfinder.

The external WB sensor can be turned off from one of the Settings submenus (quite well hidden, not under WB, where you would look first), but in most situations it should be left on — that is, if you are using Auto WB at all. I rarely do.

• Noise Reduction (NR) — to remove the static noise, which (at given ISO and shutter speed) has the same pattern from one frame to another. This is handled by the camera capturing another, "dark" frame just after the first one (i.e., the picture by itself), and subtracting it from the latter before writing to memory card.

  This method is especially effective in removing the bright specs ("hot pixels") showing at long exposures and high ISOs,but it deals also quite well with other instances when the light response varies consistently from one pixel (or photosite) to another.

  On the other hand, it slightly increases the level of random noise (see the next bullet), so the camera applies it only when it does more good than harm: at longest exposure times. Even if you turn it on (which is done from the menu), the camera will decide if to actually use it.

  Because of the second, "dark" exposure, it adds an extra delay before the image file is saved (equal to, or slightly longer than, the shutter time). Because of that, the setting will be disabled when the E-3 is in sequential drive mode.

  The manual does not specify at what exposure times does the noise reduction actually kick in. In the E-510 it was simple: 8 s at ISO 100, 4 s at higher settings. In the E-3, however, it looks like this happens at shorter speeds: I am sure it is used at 2 seconds (all ISOs), and almost sure at one second, but it is possible that the limit is at even faster speeds. (Unfortunately, the Noise Reduction field in EXIF data shows only if NR was set, not if it was actually applied; pretty useless.) If I find some time, I will investigate the matter further.

• Noise Filtering (NF) reduces the random noise, where the response to light of a given pixel varies from one instance to another. This is done by averaging of the neighboring photosite readouts (and/or resulting pixels) at the stage when the raw information is being converted into RGB (this means that raw files are not affected). To make the results more palatable, filtering algorithms try to detect what part of the variability is noise and what is image detail proper — for example, if a contour is detected, the averaging may be done along it, but not across. This, however, may sometimes lead to unexpected results.

  While the effects may be quite pleasing, the process invariably leads to some loss of detail; this is always a compromise. As such, the "right" way of doing it may, to a large, extent, depend on preferences of the photographer. This is why I am glad that Olympus allows to select the degree of noise filtering: from Off to High in four discrete steps.

  Off does not mean that there is no filtering done at all; some of it is inherent in the demosaicing of the Bayer pattern, some more may be added on top of it as a "zero-reference" default. It is also quite possible that the same nominal setting may be actually different for various ISOs. Olympus provides no information on this subject.

  I remember my first impression when I saw E-510 images with noise filtering turned off; the resulting resolution seemed just hard to believe. I am still using that camera with NF off all the time. My impressions about the E-3 are similar, except that I suspect that Olympus might have tweaked the algorithms a bit; I am not sure If I wouldn't be willing with the Low setting instead. I will know more after having analyzed a set of comparative samples, shot specially for this purpose. Real soon; watch this space.

I've met users who have set this to Adobe RGB because someone told them it is "better". No, in general use it is not.

Each of these presets, best accessible from the Control Panel, has its own assigned values for a number of image conversion parameters (see the next section). These values are persistent: the camera remembers them for each Picture Mode even when you switch between those.

The E-3, as compared to previous models in the line, adds two Picture Modes: Portrait and Custom. While I expect the former is expected to provide better rendition of skin tones (actually, I haven't used it yet), the latter is an extra slot to store your preferences for a special occasion.

The Custom Picture Mode is somewhat special, as for it you also choose one of the other modes to be used as a starting point in customization. You may set it as, say, Muted with your own adjustments to the parameters of the latter. This is the only mode which also remembers its Gradation setting (see below), a design I find inconsistent.

Second, the three first parameters on this list are not absolute values, but they are added on top of defaults assigned to particular Picture Modes. Thus, for example, the Vivid mode with contrast adjustment of zero has a contrast higher than the Muted mode with the same (zero) contrast dialed in. Of course, Olympus does not think you deserve the information on how large these offsets are, but I disagree.

• Sharpness alters the amount of sharpening, applied to the image in the conversion. I prefer to keep it always tuned down, because it is easier to choose the proper amount (and kind) of it in postprocessing, even using JPEG camera output.
• Contrast alters the slope of the central part of the tonal curve. High settings may lead to images looking more "crisp" (often confused with "sharper") at the expense of narrowing the effective dynamic range. (This does not change the actual capacity of electron wells in photosites, but, still, leads to detail in shadows and highlights being lost.) Another parameter to keep down.
• Saturation is also easy to overshoot. Too high a setting may lead to a "candy" effect and, additionally, possible loss of detail in areas with a single, saturated color.
• Gradation adjust the shape of the tonal curve from the Normal default. The High Key and Low Key settings of this parameter seem just to move the central part (mid-tones) of that curve up or down, so I do not find them too useful: I prefer to decide on that in postprocessing.

  Note: this setting is not stored as one of Picture Mode parameters, except for the Custom one. I believe it should be; even the Control Panel layout suggests that.

New in the E-3 is the Auto gradation setting. All Olympus says about it is that it "Divides the image into detailed regions and adjusts the brightness separately for each region". This suggests that another transition curve adjustment is being done, expanding the tonal range of shadows and, possibly, highlights (at the expense of mid-tones, of course); what remains unclear is whether this is applied to the whole image, or locally. While the phrasing may suggest the latter, my first experiments make me skeptical: the tonal curve seems to be adjusted globally, and the histogram is sometimes stretched a bit. In some images this brought out the shadow detail quite nicely, but nothing I wouldn't do equally well by a simple curve adjustment. I have to check deeper if there is really something new behind this.

Such a check can be done off-camera: the latest version of Olympus Master allows to apply this setting to raw images in development. I can process one frame in two ways, and then read out the luminance at a number of points. This assumes that the feature is implemented the same way in the program and in the firmware.

In the Monotone Picture Mode (the proper English word is "monochrome") you cannot adjust saturation (which is obvious) or gradation (perhaps because running out of space in the Control Panel). You can, however do the raw-to-monochrome conversion applying an equivalent of a color filter in B&W photography, for example, orange to accentuate the sky. Another option allows to add a tint to the resulting image; this I would gladly forgo in exchange for the gradation setting.

The raw-to-JPEG conversion uses the same software as in the conversion automatically applied when a picture is taken. The image adjustment parameters (for example: white balance, sharpening, noise filter) are not applied as set when the picture was taken, but as set at the moment of performing the conversion.

Shadow adjustment works, I presume, in a way similar to the Auto gradation. If the latter has been already applied, the effects will be cumulative.

Index

File format and compression

Pros and cons of using the raw format are described in another article.

In other words, a 1 GB card should accommodate about 140 1:2.7 jPEGs or more than 200 1:4 ones.

The "native" size, surprisingly, turns out being not-so-native after all. It turns out that the pixel dimensions of raw images (after conversion into RGB) are a bit larger: 3720×2800. This is a tiny difference, but it adds about 2% to the image width and height, or 4% to its area, increasing the camera's pixel count by 0.4 MP. It is also a bit off the 4:3 size ratio (remember the odd 3008×2000 format of some older Nikon SLRs?).

While this is not really important, would love to know why did Olympus decide to give up a 4% of the recorded image area (and some of the wide-angle coverage, too) in this way.

From the Control Panel (or, if you like to suffer, from the Camera 1 menu, you have a choice between

• The raw (ORF) format, full size only, of course;
• Four JPEG presets (see below);
• The same four presets together with raw (two files saved).

This is fast and convenient, as long as you decide on these presets once and forget you can change them (and this I would recommend, indeed).

Now, the presets have to be set up separately in the Settings G submenu of the Settings 1 menu, option named Shower Set (just kidding, instead of Shower the menu shows an icon looking like a sidewise-pointing shower head). Each of the presets can be defined as a combination of two factors:

• Image size: Large, Medium, or Small;
• Image quality (a reciprocal of compression): Super Fine, Fine, Normal, or Basic, see JPEG Compression above.

Presets available from the Control Panel are shown there in terms of these names; for example, Raw+LSF means "raw plus Large/Super Fine", and MN — "Medium/Normal".

This is better than just the "traditional" SHQ, HQ, and SQ (Super High, High and Standard) settings used in previous Olympus cameras: at least once you decide what Small and Medium means, you'll see at a glance what you're dialing in.

Still, my advice is to do the pre-setting work just once and never change this. Less is more.

Index

Storage

While this is not a critical feature, I like having two card slots. This is better than carrying an emergency spare, because the second card will not get misplaced; you may also choose to create backups, or selections to be given to somebody, without having access to a computer.

What I dislike (and very much so!) is the xD standard choice for the second slot. It is time for Olympus to wake up, smell the coffee and put the xD standard out of its misery.

These cards are the slowest-performing, most size-limited, and least widespread on the market, offering nothing in exchange for these limitations except for higher prices (I haven't checked the various flavors of Sony's Memory Sticks lately; so maybe the honors are shared). Even Fuji, the co-founder of the standard, seems to be backpedaling now from the concept (offering combined xD/SD slots, which accept also the popular Secure Digital cards), only Olympus keeps touting the xD as a great triumph of memory technology.

Some history:

• 2002: Olympus and Fuji drop support for the SmartMedia card standard (I had at least three go dead, most probably because static electricity on exposed contacts), introducing the new xD-Picture card. At that time, the standard looks good, with the form factor smaller than SD, which were then far from today's popularity. The cards were eventually made in sizes up to 512 MB (1/2 GB).
• 2005: Two new flavors of the xD are introduced, replacing the original one: the "M" and "H" type (standing for "medium" and "high" speed, respectively). The "M" card is actually slower than the original, with "H" being, according to the press release, up to three times faster than "M". While the capacity of new cards is expected to reach 8 GB, the largest ones made had two gigabytes, I believe.

  As xD cards do not include the controller circuitry (all work is done by the camera itself), many compatibility problems with xD-accepting cameras are noted. In some cases this is resolved by upgrading the firmware, in some not.

• 2007: The "H" cards mysteriously disappear; it seems they are no longer made, although I saw no notice to this effect.
• 2008: In a recent press release, Olympus announces another xD flavor, "M+" as "the ultimate removable storage media for digital photos", with "lightning-fast transfers and impressive storage capacity" — claiming "speeds up to 1.5 times faster than Type M" and "capacity up to 2 GB".

  While the arithmetics is a bit obscured by the two up-to's in these statements, a simple division makes me expect that the "new, improved" card will be about two times slower than type "H", and the capacity will stay at 2 GB, far from the originally expected 8 GB. Hardly a sign of progress.

The right thing to do would be to close this infamous chapter in history, and move on to the SD cards, available in convenience stores. They shoot horses, don't they?

The clocking procedure I've been using so far (see here) turned out to be inadequate for such fast writing speeds, so I had to modify it for use with the E-3 (this will also benefit other recent cameras, for which my existing numbers are overestimated). What I'm measuring now is the time elapsed between just after firing the first shot in a sequence of 20 raw frames, and the moment when red light stops blinking (writing completed). The camera is multi-tasking (does it not have three processors?), so it keeps taking pictures while the writing process is not slowed down or interrupted.

Actually, a graph I found on one of Olympus Web sites suggests that the E-3 may have four CPUs — unless it mixes logical and physical entities together. This is common in business presentations.

Here are the numbers for some cards I've checked, rounded to the nearest 0.1 s; all shown digits meaningful:

• SanDisk Extreme IV (2 GB) — 0.6 s/frame
• SanDisk Extreme III (2 GB) — 0.7 s/frame
• Transcend 266x (4 GB) — 0.8s/frame
• Olympus xD-Picture "H" (1 GB) — 2.0 s/frame

"Storage-class device" means that when you connect the camera to a computer (Windows, Mac OS, Linux, whatever), the latter will see it as another disk drive, and no software (drivers, applications) has to be installed.

Olympus users may take that for granted for years, but with a Canon camera (including the most recent models) the transfer is possible only if you install proprietary Canon software (or you can take the card out and use a reader).

Transferring 1 GB of data in 173 files from the E-3, using the Extreme IV CF card, to my new Asus U6S laptop took 214 seconds, so the effective rate was 4.8 MB/s. (The same transfer from my E-510 took 213 seconds.)

Index

Viewing system

A framing test revealed two things. First, the coverage is, indeed, as close to full-frame as I could measure: no worse than 99.8% in each dimension (probably just 100%). Second, the finder screen alignment seems to be, again, within a measurement error from ideal: my result was 0.044° (or less than three pixels in 3600). This is as close as I can align a straight line to the finder edge.

I did this test only after a Reader asked about a rumor about a "design error" resulting in a tilted finder view. While this can always happen in an individual camera, it is highly unlikely, and I haven't discovered anything of that kind.

By increasing frame coverage and magnification from 95% (linear) and 1 × respectively, in the E-510 to 100% and 1.15× Olympus significantly improved the new camera's viewing experience, to the level of its main competitors. (The E-1 offered a 100% coverage and 1× magnification.)

This, at long last, puts to sleep the (deserved) complaints about small finders in Olympus SLRs. Using this finder after handling the E-510 is a pure joy (although when I compare it against my 35-mm Minolta XD, lots of this feeling disappears).

The manufacturers quote the finder magnification value as the apparent size of the viewed image in terms of the subject size as seen with a naked eye from the same vantage point. This, obviously, is affected by the lens used, and (less obviously) by the finder eyepiece diopter setting. The values usually quoted are for 50 mm and -1 diopter, respectively.

Here is a comparison of the apparent size of E-3's viewfinder (outlined in red) with those of the Canon EOS 40D (aqua), Nikon 300D (gray), and some other cameras, including a number of lower-priced models.

Actually, comparing the E-3 against E-510 side-by-side one gets an impression that the difference is more dramatic than it really is. Note that the D300 finder is still wider (thanks to the 3:2 aspect ratio), but the E-3's — taller (if just by a symbolic amount).

(The picture is from the updated version of my article on sensor size, where you can find explanations of the arithmetic used for the comparison. The numbers used for the graph should be accurate up to 1%.)

Anyway, for me the larger finder is the most significant improvement in the E-3 from its predecessors, and this is the one feature I would love to see in the expected mid-line camera from Olympus.

The focusing screen is not user-changeable, although there ate service-installable options. It has eleven AF point marks and a circle showing the spot metering sensitivity region. This makes it a bit busy; I would prefer getting rid of the focus points (a blinking LED in the point selected is enough).

The first six items on the list contain the full information on a given setting (i.e., either a value or a multi-state indicator). The remaining ones are of the on/off type, just indicating that the setting is at a non-default position, or that a feature is activated.

The designers did a good job cramming all this into the available space and still keeping it legible; no complaints here.

The eyecup included with the camera is EP-7, a new model, very similar to the EP-6 which is available as an option for other E-Series cameras (except for the E-1). This one is better (for me, at least) than the smaller EP-5 included with the E-410/E-510; the difference from (and an advantage over) the EP-6 is in smaller thickness only, while the shape and other dimensions remain the same.

The ME-1 magnifying eyecup (1.2×) fits, but does not allow you to see the whole frame at once, too bad; angle finders (Olympus or third-party) suffer from the same flaw. All other finder accessories working with other Olympus SLRs (except for the E-1) will also work; they are described in separate story.

The eyepiece shutter, built into the finder and activated with a small lever just below and to the left of the eyepiece allows to block the harmful light which otherwise may enter the viewing/metering system the "wrong way" when you shoot without your eye at the finder. Having to use a plastic, slide-on eyepiece cover in the E-510 could be quite irritating.

Mirror lockup, once enabled, will create "locked" versions of all drive modes, available via the drive mode interface (direct or Control Panel); this way it becomes accessible without going into the menu system.

Index

Live View

The first interchangeable-lens SLR with the Live View, the Olympus E-330, had two independent systems to provide this feature. One had a separate imager for that purpose, sitting behind a series of mirrors (so that it could be used with the main mirror up and shutter closed). The other system used the image picked up by the same imager which is used for picture-taking; this requires the mirror to be up and the shutter to stay open. That dual solution has been discussed in one of my Quest articles, in addition to the E-330 write-up; to put things in the right context, refer at least to the first one.

While the first approach might have some advantages over the second one, it is also quite convoluted, costly, and suffers from a number of other problems. Starting from the E-410/E-510 Olympus limited their cameras to the second LV type only. This is the same choice as that made by other manufacturers now offering this feature (which they originally dismissed as not really useful).

The E-3 incrementally improves on Live View over the E-510. There is no revolution here, but the previewed image looks better, and the system is more responsive in use.

The latter may be due to the new shutter and mirror construction in this camera. These operate faster now, to provide increased frame rates, and Live View gains from this as a side benefit.

Consider all what happens when you use the Live View:

1. First, when you switch to this mode (by pressing a dedicated button), the main mirror goes up and the shutter opens, exposing the sensor to light from the lens. The image from the sensor is processed on a real-time basis, and displayed on the monitor, very much like in a video camera (or like in non-SLR digital still cameras).
2. The image may be not in focus. You may focus the lens manually, or activate the AF system. The latter is done by pressing the Lock button. The shutter closes and the mirror goes down, because a secondary one, riding on its back, is needed to direct the image to AF sensors at the bottom of the mirror chamber. Those sensors do their job, the lens is focused; the mirrors goes back up, the shutter opens, a focused image appears on the screen.
3. To take a picture you press (what else?) the shutter release. In response, the mirror goes down to its working position, the shutter closes; now is the time when autofocus and autoexposure systems (if active) do their metering jobs. In the meantime, the (now obscured) image sensor is being "flushed" to prepare it for image capture.
4. Then the actual picture is taken: mirror out of the way (up), the shutter opens temporarily for the exposure and closes immediately afterwards. (At faster speeds, the leading curtain may still be open while the trailing one starts already closing; this is how focal plane shutters work.)
5. When the shutter fully closes, the image information is collected off the sensor, processed and saved as usual. The mirror goes down, i.e., to its normal working position (this step seems not necessary, see the remark below).
6. After the image file has been saved, the camera returns to the preview mode: the mirror goes up, shutter opens — exactly like in Step 1.

This looks like a lot of mechanical activity; no wonder the camera is thumping, clapping and whirring for quite a while. This, however, is hard to avoid.

This sequence could be streamlined a bit by removing the (seemingly) unnecessary mirror-down movement in Step 5 and mirror-up in Step 6; I believe this serves no actual purpose; possibly a "legacy" thing, making the whole sequence easier to implement by re-using some of the existing logic. I am not sure if other makers also go through these two steps.

Another speed-up could be achieved by using the imager for autofocus and exposure metering; this could eliminate another two mirror travels. Such a solution, however, does not come without a price, as you will see below.

Without having to use the "regular" AF and AE sensors, the mirror could stay up the whole time, no longer needed to redirect the image to them. This could simplify the whole picture-taking sequence and make it significantly faster.

Olympus, however, decided against that, with good reasons. The "main" AF sensors are faster and more accurate than the contrast-detection procedure used with the imager; using just one AE system provides results more consistent between both modes of picture-taking.

In fact, some kind of exposure readout (and even a luminance histogram) is provided during the Live View use, but this is only for information purposes; the actual exposure will still be determined by the AE sensors reading the light off the viewing screen.

To be exact, what belongs to the second group depends on the exposure mode. For example, in Program, this will be aperture and shutter speed; in Aperture Priority — just the latter. If ISO is set to Auto, its value will also count as one of these parameters.

The luminance histogram seems to be quite accurate: after all, it is taken off the same sensor as the final image — but, possibly, at different settings, see above, so all depends on how the two exposure readouts differ.

The problem I've observed in the E-510, with live histogram behaving erratically at lower light levels, has been fixed in the E-3, at least in firmware v. 1.1. (It also has been addressed in that camera.) See also the next paragraph.

The image shown in Live View reflects the exposure as predicted by the imager (see above), so it should look, approximately at least, as the picture which will be taken. Sometimes, however, this may be impossible (for example, with flash), or just too dark for convenient preview. (The latter is very true in infrared, when the imager meters the light much lower than the "regular" sensors.)

In such cases you may want to activate the Live View Boost, which will bring the display to reasonable (i.e., easy to view) brightness levels, regardless of the exposure settings. This is done from the menu system, so the feature cannot be easily switched on and off. I never use this feature, with one exception: infrared.

Probably because of some technical limitations, the live histogram in the "boosted" mode reflects the luminance distribution not as expected to be in the picture, but as adjusted for viewing convenience (you can easily check that it does not react to changes in exposure compensation). This makes it useless, so the feature should rather be disabled when the boost is on, or modified to reflect the boost adjustment. The predicted exposure readout, though, is OK in this mode.

Index

Shutter

You may also want to have a look at my article describing how a focal plane shutter works.

This whole range is available in all exposure modes but, depending on aperture and/or ISO setting, the lowest speeds may become inaccessible because of limits on the autoexposure range.

The capability to provide the top speed of 1/8000 s is a combined effect of increased curtain travel speed and narrower shutter slit, see below.

Index

Drive modes

The self-timer delay can be set to 2 or 10 seconds, and the IR remote delay — to 0 or 2 seconds. The only feedback showing that the countdown started is the red light at camera's front. At that time, the process can still be canceled by pressing the drive/mode button again.

Each of the drive modes may have the mirror lock individually enabled.

The actual frame rate of the low-speed setting can be pre-set from the menu system to any integer value from 1 to 4 FPS.

Checking this with a SanDisk Extreme IV card, I've clocked the E-3 at 18 raw frames in 3.2 seconds (this would be 5.1 FPS) and then one frame every 0.6 second. (A similar check with an xD "H" card yielded a similar frame rate, but a sequence length of 14 frames before slowing down to the glacial pace of one frame every two seconds.)

Note that my rate measurements may have as much as 10% of an error (I've got to buy myself a mechanical stopwatch: taking a series of its pictures would make the process easier and more accurate.)

With highest-quality (1:2.7) JPEGs being written to the Extreme IV, I've got 30 frames in 5.8 seconds (5.2 FPS) before the rate dropped down; at a compression of 1:4 the camera should be capable of keeping up indefinitely (although I haven't checked that).

In the continuous autofocus (C-AF) mode the burst rate will be lower, as the camera attempts to autofocus between frames.

Having sequential rates above 3 FPS is nice, although useful only in some applications. Still, when shooting bracketed sequences I enjoyed the super-fast response.

Now, how does this compare to other models in this class? Canon claims 6.5 FPS for the 40D, while Nikon — up to 6 FPS for the D300 (8 FPS with external power), and the Sony A700 promises 5 FPS, which is fast enough for any uses I can think of.

The wired remote is designated as RM-CB1 and is not the same as the RM-UC1, intended for the E-410 and E-510. Actually, this one has been around for a long time, at least since the original E-10. At that time, I posted a short description here.

It plugs into a proprietary socket at the left side of the camera. This socket is covered with a screw-on cap which I dearly hate since 2001.

A wireless, infrared remote can also be used. Olympus offers (or used to offer) two models:

• RM-1 — with six chicklet buttons, has been around at least since 1999 (included with the C-2020Z), maybe longer. The [W] and [T] buttons, originally designed for zoom control in Olympus compacts, are now used to open and close the shutter in the manual-timing (bulb) mode.
• RM-2 has just one button, used to release the shutter. It will not control the E-3 in the "bulb" mode, and it was introduced with, I believe, the C-5060WZ in 2003.

Unfortunately, the good, old times are over: Olympus no longer includes one of these in the box, as it used to with all its cameras. The RM-1 is being offered as a $40 option, often discounted to $30, which is grossly excessive. Luckily, there are third party alternatives, although I'm not familiar with any of them.

Last but not least, the Olympus Studio software ($100) allows you to access all settings (except for zoom), trigger the camera, and save images to the computer — all via the USB connection.

There is also camera control software available from Pine Tree Computing (which I've never used). Another such application, Cam2Com, does not seem to support the E-3.

Index

Exposure control

The metering in E-3 is precise and consistent, although only the photographer will really know how to assign the available dynamic range to the scene, and therefore — what exposure compensation, if any, to apply.

Hidden in the menu system (not accessible via any other interface) is an option allowing to switch between a "regular" ESP metering mode, and the ESP+AF one, in which a greater weight is assigned to the area used to autofocus on. Being able to set this externally (or via the Control Panel) would be nice.

The center-weighted mode does its averaging with emphasis on the frame center. Many photographers, especially those from the "old school" feel better using this approach.

Spot metering measures the light only in the central 2% (according to Olympus) of the frame; the approximate metering area is shown as a circle in the center of the viewfinder. If you know what you are doing, this may bring most rewarding results.

Two additional flavors of the spot metering mode: Highlight Spot and Shadow Spot are like the basic one, applying a given offset up or down, respectively, to the measured exposure. This offset (of the value not documented by Olympus, a pity!) will render the metered area as a highlight or a shadow. I find using the "regular" spot plus exposure compensation more flexible, faster, and safer.

Example: with an F/4 lens used at F/11, ISO 200, the E-3 will properly measure exposures up to 8 seconds. To arrive to that value, take the "base" 2 seconds, double it three times (three full F-stops between F/4 and F/11), then divide by two (ISO 200 vs. ISO 100).

My experiments show that in the useful autoexposure range in the E-3 extends somewhat below the nominal low end; maybe Olympus has more strict accuracy requirements than mine. This is close to other digital SLRs: for example, the Nikon D300 goes from 0 to 20 EV in the matrix mode, and from EV 2 to 20 in spot metering.

While this system does work (and I've got used to it after a week or so), I do not like it. More on this in the Controls section.

The program mode adjusts both shutter and aperture to match the light level. How this is done, is shown in this graph (borrowed from the User Manual). As the scene becomes brighter (EV numbers are shown at diagonal lines), the shutter and aperture settings change as follows:

1. The lens stays fully open while the shutter speed is below the "nominal" handholdable speed, twice focal length in millimeters (for example, 1/30 s at F=14 mm): the left part of the graph is a horizontal line.
2. Above that, both parameters are adjusted at the same EV rate; a 2 EV increase closes the aperture by one F-stop, at the same time doubling the shutter speed (a 45° line segment in the middle).
3. This progression stops at the aperture assumed to be a diffraction limit, beyond which the lens resolution starts decreasing (this is arbitrarily assumed as F/11 for many lenses, although the process is really gradual). Starting at that point, the aperture is kept at this value, and only the shutter speed is increased (the horizontal line segment at right).
4. When the available shutter speed reaches the maximum of 1/8000 s, the program has no other choice, but to start closing the aperture (the vertical line at the right edge of the graph).

Shifting the program towards faster or slower shutter speeds is done by turning the control wheel (depending on preferences set). This is shown by the gray lines in the graph — except that the Olympus manual got it wrong here. The graph shows that the program shifted towards slower speeds does not use the full aperture (smallest F-number): one horizontal gray line runs above the black one. In fact, it is easy to check that it does; both lines should run on the same level, exactly like shown in the program graph for the E-510.

Program shift may look like an useful feature, but I don't find it such; to have control over aperture or shutter speed used, most of us will prefer to be in aperture or shutter priority mode. In addition, it is only indicated by a "Ps" mark in all three data displays, which gives you no clue in which direction to turn the adjustment wheel to get rid of the shift.

By default the shift is accessed via the rear control wheel, but this can be re-assigned in a number of ways.

Aperture and shutter priority I do not have to explain: you set one parameter and the camera adjusts the other.

Time ("bulb") exposure mode allows for manual shutter timing up to 8 minutes: press the release (or the wired RM-CB1 remote) to open, let go to close.

The bulb setting is now accessible as a separate exposure mode, not as one of shutter speed choices as it used to be on previous Olympus cameras.

The underwater modes become available only if the Function, [Fn], button has been previously assigned to them. If this is the case, they will be added to the sequence; more, if the [Fn] button is pressed in any non-UW mode, the camera will instantly switch to Underwater Wide, and then the button will keep toggling between that and Underwater Macro.

The manual does not say anything specific about these modes (besides what can be figured out from their names), and I know nothing about them, either, so the above is just for the record.

Gone is the "Auto" mode of the E-510 and, obviously, all the "scene modes".

The quasi-analog compensation scale extends only from -3 to +3 EV, and the adjustment value is shown as a number only in the Control Pane (not in the finder or in the top display), but this is not a problem, as adjustments outside ±3 EV are extremely rare (the only time I exceed this limit is in infrared). Most cameras of other brands limit that to ±2 EV anyway.

Exposure compensation is dialed in when (or shortly after) the dedicated [+/-] button next to the shutter release is pressed. This button has a different shape, but, being placed between ones used to change the ISO and white balance, it is not so easy to operate with your eye at the viewfinder. This is why the option to assign this function to one of the control dials alone is a viable alternative.

• 1/3, 2/3, or 1 EV if your pre-selected exposure adjustment step is 0.3 EV;
• 1/2 or 1 EV if that step is 0.5 EV.

In film cameras I've used (at least those with autowind), the camera would automatically shoot all frames as needed upon a single shutter release. Not so in the E-3: you have to press the release button three or five times (the indicator in the Control Panel changes color in the middle of the sequence, the ones in the finder or top panel blink). You may switch the drive mode to sequential, but even then you have to keep the shutter pressed long enough, or the sequence will be incomplete (although the shooting will stop after the sequence is done.)

This means that to use bracketing I have to alter two settings, not just one, and I find it quite irritating. At least there should be a preference setting to change this.

Exposure adjustment in this process depends on the mode: in shutter priority the aperture is changed from one frame to another; in aperture priority the shutter, and in program — both (in the same amount).

ISO bracketing is basically the same, achieving the effect by adjusting the ISO down and up from the value set. Three frames can be shot, with the ISO difference between them as above. If you are already at the ISO setting limit, two frames in the sequence will be identical, i.e., using the same ISO value.

Flash bracketing, you guess, changes the light output from the flash up and down for a three-frame sequence. I've never used this feature, but it may be of limited usability because the flash needs some time to recharge.

Note: if you set the camera to do two kinds of bracketing at the same time, only one will be actually done. For example, activating AE bracketing and then ISO bracketing as well will result only in the latter one being applied.

By default, the autoexposure locks when you half-press the shutter release, and so does autofocus. If you want to separate these two functions, pressing and holding the [AEL/AFL] button to the right of the viewfinder will lock the exposure separately.

The way in which the autoexposure and autofocus are used is largely a matter of the photographer's habits and preferences. Therefore I'm glad Olympus allows to customize these functions in three different aspects.

1. When a given value is locked. You may set the camera to disable exposure locking with the release button (it will be metered until the mirror goes up), or you may have the lock button freeze the focus, and the release — exposure.

   This assignment is done independently for all three focusing modes: single, continuous, and manual — and this makes sense. For example, in the MF mode I like to use the lock button for a single autofocus "on demand".

2. You can have the camera use a different metering pattern when the exposure is being locked. This is great: that's how I use spot metering when I need it. Just remember to aim for an area which you want to be rendered as 18% mid-tones.
3. Lock and hold: you may set the lock button so that it holds the exposure even if you release it — until the button is pressed again, even if a picture is taken (this helps in panorama sequences).
4. Button swap: you can swap the functionality of the [AEL/AFL] button with that of the [Fn] one (which by itself is assignable, but I keep it bound to reference WB).

All this may look complicated, but you do it just once to customize your camera (unless your preferences change, but this does not happen every day). For details, refer to the proper section of my E-3 customization article.

Index

Focusing

The effective distance from the lens to the AF sensors is (or at least should be) the same as that to the image sensor (and to the finder screen). This means that whatever is in focus on the imager, is also in focus on the viewing screen, and on the AF sensors. These detect how out-of-focus the image is, and send corrective information to the AF motor in the lens. (With multiple AF sensors, the process involves some logic for choosing which of them to trust.) After the motor adjusts the focus, the process is repeated da capo al fine.

Phase detection usually works better and faster than the competing method of contrast detection, as the system knows both the magnitude and direction of the adjustment needed.

Still, in a more casual shooting (or when photographing rapidly changing scenes) this may become useful. My doubts are not about using this system at all, but about using it as a default. More, under some circumstances (tripod!), re-pointing the camera to lock a focus reading is not practical. In those situations using a single spot selected by the photographer out of eleven available ones may be preferred.

What is more important than just the number of sensors is their kind. Some cameras have only some (often just one) sensor of the cross type, i.e., sensitive to both vertical and horizontal detail, with the rest detecting only horizontal (or vertical) patterns. This was, for example, the case with the E-510. In the E-3 all sensors are of the cross type (same as the nine sensors in the Canon 40D). More, all of them are of "twin" type, each with a double sensing array; this is supposed to increase focusing accuracy.

How well does this all work in real life may be a different story, but Olympus claims their AF system is, as of its introduction, the fastest one on the market. After comparing it against the Nikon D300 (in daylight), I may say that both feel about the same; some sources raise doubts if whether this is also the case at lower light levels. I've also compared the E-3 (with its 12-60 mm ZD lens) directly against the E-510 (using the 14-54 mm ZD); yes, it focuses faster than that camera, although I wouldn't call the changes revolutionary. Cross sensors or not, the E-3 sometimes balked at the periodic pattern of my closet door louvers.

In any case, this is a fast and solid AF system. Just give it enough detail to focus on.

Again, like with autoexposure, the low end of -2 EV can be expressed in more understandable way: exposures of up to 16 seconds at full lens aperture, regardless of that aperture. Don't you wish camera makers were using my way of presenting this specification?

The nominal -2 EV limit is very low, and I have to admit I had some doubts here. Thus, I've run some tests, dimming the light in my breakfast nook and shooting a wicket basket hidden behind a wall corner from that light. I could barely see anything in the viewfinder under these conditions. And yes, the claim holds the water! I was getting properly autofocused pictures down to 30 seconds at the full aperture of F/4, ISO 100, even if the autoexposure being a bit flaky at this light (as expected 4 EV below the specified low end). But if my 30-second images were underexposed, this means the "right" exposure should be even longer, so all I can say is that the AF system performs OK at least one EV below the nominal limit. Impressive. (For the record: I was using a five-point cross pattern for this test.)

Another remark: while the 12-60 mm ZD was sometimes showing some hesitation in the process, the 14-54 mm ZD acted in a quite assured manner. I do not have, however, any numbers on that, so treat this just as an anecdotal evidence.

The "plus manual" modes allow the photographer to adjust the focus manually after the AF is done, and while the shutter button is still held down. Actually, with the new SWD lenses (at least the 12-60 mm ZD I've tried), for this adjustment you do not need to switch to those modes explicitly: it is always available. This means that these modes are included mostly for compatibility with older lenses.

The solution is implemented very well: the combination of the lens focusing ring (smooth and precise) and the new viewfinder (large, bright, and snapping into focus) is something you have to try to believe.

The manual focus mode means focusing with that ring, with only the viewfinder (or Live View) as a feedback. Once again, the E-3 viewfinder makes this mode genuinely usable (as opposed to earlier Olympus models, with finders not adequate for this purpose).

Not that I consider MF a deal-making feature, focusing manually in quite rare cases, mostly with a few legacy lenses I try for fun.

While in the MF mode, the AF system still is used to generate a "focus OK" confirmation in the viewfinder, but this works only with Four Thirds lenses, not legacy ones. Some users may find it disappointing, especially as there are third-party lens adapters (the Dandelion from Russia, to start with) which reportedly enable this functionality. I haven't tried the Dandelion, so do not ask.

In an apparent contradiction, even if you do not need manual focusing, you may end up using the MF mode from time to time. This mode allows "autofocus on demand" (if you assign this function to the Lock button). This allows to lock the focus on a selected point without having to keep any button pressed; for example, before shooting a series of pictures which you would like to be focused identically. I found that quite useful when working on image samples, but not only.

In such a case you have to remember that most zooms (perhaps all Four Thirds ones?) need to be refocused every time the focal length is changed.

Now, some features which I (and, possibly, a few other nitpickers out there) may still consider missing.

• Focus bracketing (available only on the E-500). This would, when in the MF mode, take one picture as focused (manually or using the "on demand" AF), and then more frames focused a tad ahead or behind. Ingenious and potentially useful. Why would be a professional-class camera deprived of this feature, but having the almost useless WB bracketing (see further down)?
• Hyperfocal switch: when activated, the lens would jump to the hyperfocal distance, with the depth of field ranging from half that distance to infinity. Very handy in landscape shooting, where it is quite easy to misfocus in an almost-trivial situation.

  I understand this may be more complicated than it may seem: without any focus check done by the AF sensors the solution would have to act "blind", trusting the lens gears: "I'm on AF step 340, therefore focusing at 5.5 meters"; it would probably impose more strict design and production requirements. Which does not change the fact that the feature would be useful in some applications.

• Depth-of-field priority mode. The AF system would check the focus at all sensor points, to come up with the aperture and focus setting combination which would render all of them within the DOF range (if possible, that is), and with the shutter speed to match the exposure requirements. I am not trying to invent something exotic here; the entry-level Canon 400D has this feature.

This makes perfect sense, but both these behaviors can be customized to your preference.

The same setting also decides if the shutter can be released before the (internal or dedicated) flash is recharged (yes, this also works depending on what focusing mode are you in).

Olympus dedicated flashes provide such a lamp, and it works very well even in total darkness (being also less obtrusive).

Index

Image stabilization

• Lens-based systems: the signal drives a micromotor which then moves rapidly a dedicated group of lens elements; this group changes the direction of the light leaving the lens towards the sensor, counteracting the physical camera movements; the image created on the sensor is less shaky;
• Body-based systems: instead of "moving" the light before it reaches the sensor, the signal drives a micromotor moving the sensor itself; as if "chasing" the constantly moving image. The result is similar to that above.

Makers of lens-based stabilization systems (Canon, Nikon) claim that it can work better, because each implementation can be tweaked best to the lens in which it is contained. Those who offer the body-based approach (Pentax, Sony, Olympus) say that their way works just fine, thank you.

There is no doubt, however, that being able to use image stabilization with any lens is a very attractive option for many camera users. Canon and Nikon offer IS only in some lenses, mostly with longer focal lengths (where this is most useful, anyway), and mostly at a premium.

A recent (January, 2008) firmware update allows the IS system in the E-3 (or E-510) to be used with "legacy" lenses, i.e., ones providing no information exchange with the camera's body. This was a long-awaited removal of a rather arbitrarily imposed limitation, and those who enjoy using their classic OM Zuikos in the digital era reacted quite enthusiastically.

I believe the years of lens-based IS are numbered, except, maybe, some high-end market niches. For some time both approaches will, however co-exist, sometimes even within the same camera system.

This is already happening: some of the Leica lenses for the Panasonic SLR line contain image stabilization. With such a lens fitted on an Olympus body (after all, both brands follow the Four Thirds standard), you can choose system to use (the other one has to be turned off).

The second, panning mode (Mode 2) is intended for cases when the photographer is intentionally moving the camera (held in the landscape format) to follow a horizontally traveling subject. Obviously, what we need then is image stabilization only in the vertical dimension.

Switching between these modes (or turning IS off) is done with help of the [IS] button and the control dial. It is recommended to turn IS off when shooting from a tripod (perhaps just in case, but, indeed, the camera may be trying to do something not quite reasonable then).

When testing the E-510, I have developed a procedure to determine this difference. The procedure is, I believe, sound and solid, even if based on subjective evaluation: it does a statistical evaluation of a large number of comparative samples, shot at various shutter speeds. With the method in place, it was not a problem to run such a test for the E-3. Here are the basic results:

• At F=12 mm: the benefit is about 1 EV (exposures longer by 2×)
• At F=60 mm: 1.5 eV (or 2.8×)
• At F-150 mm: 2.4 EV (5.2×).

The full data can be found in a separate article on this subject. The bottom line is: while there is no doubt that image stabilization in the E-3 is working, its effects are far from those claimed by Olympus.

Is this a disappointment? In one sense yes, as always when a claim does not match reality. In another — no: this does not mean that the E-3 is doing worse than competing models, as I have serious doubts on the validity os similar claims being made for those.

Index

Flash

Deciding whether to provide a built-in flash in a camera of this type is not easy choice; actually, a hopeless task. If you do include it — it will probably become one of the weakest points in camera's resistance to abuse and elements; if not — 60% of reviews will point this omission as a flaw; and reviews sell cameras.

An intrinsic problem with built-in flashes is that they are not any good for almost any applications. They are too small, too weak, too close to the lens — and I know of no way around that. Still, an internal flash may have its uses: not only in emergencies, when you do not have a "real" one handy, but also as a fill-in light outdoors, or to trigger a slave unit (or units).

General issues aside, back to the flash in this camera. First, it no longer pops up automatically "as needed" (whatever that may mean); a right decision. Auto-popping flashes are evil.

Two, you will notice that the flash raises quite high above the camera. This is also good; both to reduce the chance of a redeye effect, and to avoid the lens casting a shadow into its field of view.

This is why Olympus advises against using the internal unit with the 12-60 mm lens at 12 mm from a distance less than 2 meters (with other "standard" ZD zooms the warning refers to less than 1.2 m). I've checked that, and it looks that I can get away with as little as 1.5 m to the scene, as long as I'm not using the lens hood. There is some visible light fall-off at this focal length, but this was to be expected.

The flash recharge time is usually about three seconds (quite fast), but this, of course, depends how strong the preceding burst of light was (aperture, ISO, subject distance).

Another article describes the Olympus flashes, except that at the moment it needs to be updated with information on the remote control issue; in addition, FL-36 has its own write-up on this site. I will not be repeating that information here. Let me only mention that FL-20 is probably too weak and too limited for any real use with this camera, and FL-36 ("R" or not), while OK for direct illumination, is barely adequate for bouncing the light off the ceiling. E-3 users will be best served by the FL-50R — or, if remote control is not an issue, the plain FL-50 while it is still available, often heavily discounted.

Unfortunately, neither FL-50R nor FL-36R have a second burner, providing a fill when the main one is used bounced; in the past I found that to be perhaps the best solution for an on-camera flash.

The FL-40 flash unit, designed for older Olympus cameras, does not integrate itself with the TTL metering system in the E-3; see below for more on that.

Metz sells a number of flashes supposed to work in full TTL-Auto compatibility with E-System cameras, but I haven't used them and I'm not sure how smoothly they integrate with the E-3. The same about one ProMaster model, with reportedly, the interface module updated to current Olympus specs. In any case, don't ask me, this is all I know. Really.

If this feature is enabled from the menu, the Control Panel will have two pages (with the [Info] button switching between them); the second one is devoted exclusively to the remote flash system. Up to three groups of remote flashes to be controlled simultaneously, and for each group independently you can set a number of parameters, most important of which is the exposure mode: TTL, Auto, on Manual. TTL is the pre-flash based metering, Auto uses the flash's own thyristor system to throttle the light, and Manual can be set to a fraction of the maximum output.

I can't quite understand why would I ever want one group to use TTL metering while another one depends on thyristor-based Auto (the first group is not aware of the other when pre-flash metering is done), but as I haven't used this system yet, I won't comment. This is also why I will not write more on the subject until I'm familiar with it.

Slave units can be triggered by the output of the built-in flash set to manual. The use of slaves is limited to that mode only because of two reasons:

• The metering pre-flash, see further down, would prematurely trigger the slave (although some may have a protection against that);
• When the camera uses the pre-flash to estimate the exposure needed, it is not aware of any extra light input from the slave.

Olympus provides a number of cables used to connect these two to off-camera flashes or flash brackets. I haven't used any of them.

The flash socket to the top-left of the lens mount follows the well-established standard which will work with most flash units ever made; it is protected with another one of those pesky screw-on caps which you will lose the first time you take it off.

This excludes some of the older flashes, which may have up to 300 V on the contact pin, so that the camera's electronics can be damaged.

Non-dedicated units (including the older FL-40 by Olympus) still can provide some exposure automation with use of the unit's own metering circuitry. This is done while the camera's exposure is set manually. Such a flash knows nothing about the camera, the camera knows nothing about it, and the whole interaction between both is limited to closing the triggering circuit. There is nothing wrong about it, though, and sometimes I think I'm getting more predictable results this way.

As a matter of fact, a good, powerful thyristor flash can be bought for less than the Olympus feeble FL-20 sells for, and it is quite easy to use (once you read the instruction manual), providing an inexpensive yet capable alternative to the overpriced Olympus units.

The remainder of the flash section deals only with Olympus units (or the internal one).

Manually throttled flash power is accessible only for the built-in flash; probably to allow for a variable amount of fill-in and/or triggering slave units. Most of the external flashes (including the dedicated Olympus models) have their own controls to allow this. The internal unit can be set to full, 1/4, 1/16, or 1/64 light output.

The two Auto settings (with the red-eye one providing a pre-flash to avoid the red-eye effect) allow the camera to decide whether to use the flash under given circumstances. They should be taken away: I just cannot imagine even a semi-serious amateur taking a picture, only to see afterwards what the camera decided to do. If you are not sure wheth