Olympus E-520 review
Performance
Menu Navigation
Upon powering up the camera automatically activates the dust-busting Supersonic Wave Filter (SSWF), after which the shooting settings are displayed on the ‘Super Control Panel’. This is basically the LCD’s interface containing all key (and some not so key) settings. Changing these is simple and quick, with the layout allowing you to quickly jump from one setting to the next, though in some cases you need to right-click through all the available options for the selector to zig-zag its way down to the one you want. Why can’t you simply press the ‘down’ button when you want to go down? The Graphic User Interface is also looking rather dated, and something which would benefit from a revamp. Olympus hasn’t deviated too far from its previous implementations and it shows; it’s very much the MS-DOS of menu systems.
Live View
With live view, the addition of the two new
AF modes is most welcome, with the system in itself appearing refined
and capable. Focusing in Hybrid AF mode doesn’t quite match the
benchmark set by Sony’s A350, but for more sedate subjects this type of
system is still impressive and more than usable. It’s a touch noisy,
though in good light the system works swiftly to find focus and the
ability to zoom in to the image tenfold makes distant subjects and very
fine detail easy to home in on.
AF Performance
We didn’t find the three AF points too limiting, though it’s worth noting that the three-point system is a little behind the times. Possibly as a result of the points not being biaxial (sensing focus along both vertical and horizontal axes) and lacking a cross-sensor centre point, it also seems as though they aren’t as sensitive as they could be. This was something we noticed more in impromptu situations. With the 7-14mm f/4 lens we also encountered a couple of false focuses, where the camera claimed to be in focus despite the viewfinder telling a different story.
Disadvantages of Four Thirds
Thankfully, Olympus is slowly kitting its lens range with the faster-focusing Supersonic Wave Drive (SWD) technology, though as of yet only three fairly pricey lenses feature this. This is one of the disadvantages of investing in a relatively new system such as Four Thirds. Olympus needs to catch up with other manufacturers to provide faster AF performance for both the enthusiast and semi-pro end of its market. Other manufacturers have made the piezo-electric based technology more accessible over a variety of more affordable lenses.
We suspect the average Four Thirds consumer may need to wait a while for this technology to filter down to more affordable options. The important point is that this technology is available and with the 12-60mm SWD and 50-200mm SWD lenses, autofocusing shows not just an improvement but an impressive performance.
Burst Speed
With the minimum processing employed
(deactivating noise reduction and so on), we managed to capture an
average of eight Raw frames and six Raw+JPEG frames onto a formatted
133x speed CompactFlash card, before the buffer slowed down. The buffer
also takes a good five seconds or so to clear after this, though JPEGs
are captured at a slower but more consistent pace.
Dust Control
We didn’t notice a single speck of dust on any images depsite frequently changing lenses on both bodies. Olympus has long claimed that its Dust Reduction is the most effective available, and given what we’ve seen we won’t argue otherwise. That said, we would appreciate a better viewfinder as trying to see both the entire frame as well as the exposure information along the right-hand side can be tricky.
Overall
We found the E-520 to be a better performer overall than its smaller Olympus E-420 sibling, largely due to the better handling. We were able to use a variety of lenses with greater ease than on the E-420 and vary the AF point selection a lot quicker thanks to the dedicated button, while the image stabilisation broadened the conditions in which we achieved acceptably sharp images, making it well worth its premium over the Olympus E-420.
Have your say!
Latest comments
October 01 14:49
Stephen Brasure
With the release of the Olympus E-620, the E-520 is now available at some very low prices (at least in the United States). It's hard to find a better deal than the E-520 lens kit, which is a great camera for those purchasing their first digital SLR. Having purchased a dual lens kit for my first SLR, I'm more than pleased with the camera's performance but you do have to be aware of it's limitations, as with any camera. One advantage of the Olympus E-520 is the quality of the JPEG images straight from the camera. They are usually quite excellent, and those who prefer to avoid a lot of post processing should compare JPEG quality of the 520 with images from other entry level SLR cameras. The quality of Olypus Zuiko lenses available for the E-520 is generally considered to be excellent and competitive with comparable offerings from Canon and Nikon. And again, for the average consumer, buying into the 4/3 Olympus system isn't any more or less advantageous than purchasing other systems. That being said, if the purchaser plans to upgrade to a full sensor body, than sticking with Canon or NIkon or other system may be preferable. With the availability of quality lenses, getting started with a 520 system can be a very cost effective means to enter SLR photography. And, there is always the option of upgrading to a newer body i.e. E-620 as prices come down or newer bodies are released. Bottom line..........the Olympus E-520 is a very competent and cost effective camera system for most consumers.
May 26 16:35
Peter Bower
Quite frankly, most photographers would not notice the limitations of the 520, because they would never put the camera to extremes of use. 99% will just shoot on auto with perhaps a few minor adjustments. On the positive side, I have not seen better landscapes than with the Olympus 510/520. Only the Sony 850 equals it but look at the price difference. Olympus kit lenses are supurb for the money and must be class leaders. Fit an Olympus 14 - 54 F 2.8 zoom and you will get pro results that are hard to beat. I still prefer the 510 over the newer 620 because for me the pop art is of very low priority in taking factual pictures. I want real life reproduction and nothing more. Peter