I would like to know your opinion on The Olympus E-330. For those who don't know, this is a live view SLR camera and also the first of its kind.

Would you consider buying this camera or do you prefer shooting picture, the traditional way?

http://www.smh.com.au/ffximage/2006/04/13/icon14_oly_wideweb__470x445,0.jpg

CANON RULEZ!

This camera still allows you to shoot the "traditional" way, so why worry about it?

My opinion:

Olympus has fallen far behind Nikon and Canon. They are desperate so they come out with a gimmick. I dont know any serious DSLR shooter who would shoot through the live viewer.

To be honest I don't have this camera and I don't have plans of buying it. I just wanted to hear people's opinions on it because it's a live view DSLR. I own a Canon Digital Rebel XT and I'm more used to taking pictures the traditional way.

If framing accuracy and battery life are good, and also optical qualities (like bokeh, perspective, etc) are reproduced correctly, I would like to use this system.

i almost bought one its a nice camera the reson why i did not was the price for the pentax ist dl2 with 2 lens was cheaper then it

My opinion:

Olympus has fallen far behind Nikon and Canon. They are desperate so they come out with a gimmick. I dont know any serious DSLR shooter who would shoot through the live viewer.

In an episode of Dexter, you can see him use this exact camera's live view function to photograph a crime scene. So yes there are serious applications for live view.

Of course there is also macros, underwater photos, or any situation where precise focus is needed.

There is a good reason why right-angle finder attachments are available for all SLRs. Are are also LCD attachments too. There just some situations where a traditional viewfinder is difficult or impossible to use.

Point being perhaps Olympus should increase the quality of their E-systems DSLRs instead of offering gimmicks. At the present day I would not purchase an Olympus DSLR.

Maybe you should read the reviews before you make claims of the lower-quality of Olympus cameras.

Well lets starty with the 4/3 format, small sensors, limited lens selection for the E system and the basic fact that commercially the E system is failing. Anyone investing in it has to consider the fact that the whole system could be scrapped eventually.

Be careful of this camera Wanch. The live view is an interesting development, but it doesn't really match up in reality.

Basically, there are two settings.
Setting A) only gives you 92% frame coverage, this is less than the viewfinder at 94%. The live view in low light is also terribly grainy and you have to manually shut the viewfinder otherwise metering will be off.

Setting B) Originally this had no auto focus! But since then a software update has provided some, but not as fast or accurate as from the viewfinder. This is serious as you cannot judge sharpness from the live view screen and would hate to find your photos unsharp after shooting. You get 100% coverage. There is no metering in this mode until you take the actual shot! There is also a noticeable shutter delay in mode B.

In both, the viewfinder is darker than usual (dual to splitting the light to the 2nd view finder sensor, and the viewfinder is very small.

Personally I don't see any real advantage. When I shot with a consumer camera, I still preferred to use the viewfinder. It blanks out the rest of the world so you can concentrate on the composition (a very very important part of good photography). Using the screen to compose, your eye catches colours and shapes in the real world and this distracts you from perceiving the final result.

There are some advantages. Once I placed my camera on a monopod, and walking through a demonstration, I shot the crowd from above, using the screen flipped down so I could get some idea of the composition. Still, this is not a common situation in photography.

Personally, I think this is a novelty, but of no real use to a camera. When you look through the traditional viewfinder, you can see much more clearly what composition you wish to get. The world around you is lost, and your entire concentration is on the photo. Afterall, your final result and concern should be for the photo itself.

Just my 2 cents.

I use the Olympus E-20 (2001 model), which also has 'live preview' (in that case it works with a permanent prism). Almost always use the TTL viewfinder. But the screen preview can be handy in those few occasions for making pictures low at the ground or high above the head.

The live preview is nothing but a gimmick to entice amateur photographers into picking up a DSLR. While amateurs would appreciate having a 'live' view of what they are taking, I cannot fathom others using it. For one, a 'live' view would take a considerable toll on the battery; I can manage nearly 1,500 shots on my Nikon D70 without changing the battery. On my old Nikon 4500 that had a 'live' feature, that was down to ~300 shots.

Yes but amateurs are the target here. No self respecting pro uses an Olympus digital DSLR anyway

^ I would say then, if you don't mind picking up extra batteries for it, then go for it if it would improve your shot. It's a bonus if it can be turned off if you become accustomed to not using it as well -- saving battery life later.

Be careful of this camera Wanch. The live view is an interesting development, but it doesn't really match up in reality.

Basically, there are two settings.
Setting A) only gives you 92% frame coverage, this is less than the viewfinder at 94%. The live view in low light is also terribly grainy and you have to manually shut the viewfinder otherwise metering will be off.

Setting B) Originally this had no auto focus! But since then a software update has provided some, but not as fast or accurate as from the viewfinder. This is serious as you cannot judge sharpness from the live view screen and would hate to find your photos unsharp after shooting. You get 100% coverage. There is no metering in this mode until you take the actual shot! There is also a noticeable shutter delay in mode B.

In both, the viewfinder is darker than usual (dual to splitting the light to the 2nd view finder sensor, and the viewfinder is very small.

Personally I don't see any real advantage. When I shot with a consumer camera, I still preferred to use the viewfinder. It blanks out the rest of the world so you can concentrate on the composition (a very very important part of good photography). Using the screen to compose, your eye catches colours and shapes in the real world and this distracts you from perceiving the final result.

There are some advantages. Once I placed my camera on a monopod, and walking through a demonstration, I shot the crowd from above, using the screen flipped down so I could get some idea of the composition. Still, this is not a common situation in photography.

Personally, I think this is a novelty, but of no real use to a camera. When you look through the traditional viewfinder, you can see much more clearly what composition you wish to get. The world around you is lost, and your entire concentration is on the photo. Afterall, your final result and concern should be for the photo itself.

Just my 2 cents.

Again I don't have plans of buying this camera. But I do plan of upgrading my EOS 350-D to a 30-D

you can buy a live view for any Nikon DSLR at B&H video...like 300$ at the most and in the end you still have a Nikon. :)