almost only positive

I can anticipate the same, that there was no technical errors or failures in this time and everything works perfectly.

Apart from a small waterproof Knipse this is my first camera from Olympus. Had always SLR cameras used (Minolta and Nikon) and have affordable than DSLR was bought myself 4-5.6 / 17-85 IS USM 2005 Canon EOS 350D with EF-S. The camera was there on a circumnavigation and ended up with more than 20,000 trips. Satisfied I was not with the camera, and particularly to the objective however. From the outset, the autofocus in wide angle to 24mm in landscape has always blurred instead adjusted infinitely to approx 3m. The Canon Service could not fix that. After one year, I had a total failure, the diaphragm mechanism in the lens was broken and the camera were only error code. A friend sent me then a standard kit lens 18-55, and that was actually rather better.
With sensor contamination I had permanently significant problems until I got the idea the camera with auto iris to operate and never to close the diaphragm below 5.6, then you see the crap barely. Properly crisp images never made this combo and in wide-angle the quality was downright disappointing.
Only available light I had properly tuned joy. And who on small format SLR was fast lenses usual and has often used the shallow depth of field of a 50mm 1.4 came here not to his account.

A year ago I decided it was time to create something new and I still wanted to keep the lens neither the old camera, I was free again every brand should be considered. My son borrowed me his Nikon D80 with 18-135 zoom for a trip and I found really great after the Canon. Wonderful contrast images and a very different quality feel. And so it would have been almost a Nikon.

I did however become clear that as with analog SLRS the lenses are far more important than the cameras make a few years and then go out of date or just finished. And since I came to the conclusion that quality at tolerable prices you get at 4/3 Top. I wanted to see the Zuiko 12-60mm and the 50mm 2.0 Macro and then times. As a camera, I thought at first because robust, looked specifically at sailing trips, but then I have the 620 and seemed qualitatively quite well and I wanted to do not so use for longer than three years at an E-3. The important thing was to clean sensor and image stabilization.

So I let my 620s kit with standard and telephoto zoom pay. Now a kit lens I wanted as a substitute for the bad experience with the Canon lens and the charge for the Tele was so small that you simply carrying away.

Now a year later I still have no 12-60mm, but rather the 50mm 2.0 Macro. The problem is that the kit lens 14-42mm is so incredibly good, and the camera with the lens so incredibly handy, I still hesitate me to 'Broken' before the camera strap. Sure, the 12-60 has a larger zoom range and is also brighter and so expectant I buy it well, but if it then remains on the camera, I do not know yet.

The image quality of the E-620 with kit lens I am very satisfied and that is especially at wide angle significantly better than the Canon combo. A comparison with the Nikon combo of my son is more difficult, both make it right contrast and off nicely and both everything is sharp when you zoom in. Again one notch better it is if you take the 2.0 Zuiko 50m which is simply enormous and so clinically sharp that it almost no longer suitable for portraits. This lens can also be quite a blurred background create, but for normal lacked the focal length is really a bit too long.

I was concerned that the camera could cut slightly worse in low light than the old Canon, but this is definitely not the case. I still have some pictures comparing the noise and the dark areas in the same conditions has become rather less. The stabilizer also helps tremendously here.

Nevertheless, the lack of light strength is my only complaint about the standard kit lens.

The problem of too high minimum depth of not even can be, but unfortunately with the 50mm 2.0 Macro perfectly correct, and therefore also not sure that I'll probably buy 12-60mm anyway with the. It's just a problem of the small sensor and I was already at the same APS-C format an eyesore. It seems to me as you would need at least small image sensor size and to a fast lens to come to where you were with the old times SLRS. This is then but a little too much money and for this feature.

Now there's a telephoto zoom with 40-150mm in the kit and that is certainly worth 100 euros, and in line with expectations. In the open countryside, it makes acceptable images, the room is too dim. When it turns on 50mm and then does the same photo with the 50mm 2.0, the difference is almost shocking. But that is not surprising that only one, but huge surprise is the great performance of 14-42mm.

The camera itself is great: Fits comfortably in your hand, never has sensor contamination, has pretty much all the settings one can imagine, and also an excellent live view display. Exposure is very accurate and in my opinion better than the Nikon and Canon I know. The autofocus (phase) is almost always quickly and accurately, only in low light's may take. Here the Nikon was emotionally better. In Live View AF is slow but very accurate with kit lens. Although the 50mm 2.0 does not contrast AF is capable of the camera in Live View quite accurately sharp, only to then again the phases AF to be about it then sometimes beside it. The problem I have had for macro shots and there is then advisable but manual focusing, the extremely doing well and accurately with Live View magnification.

The automatic white balance had not initially convinced me and I often had a slight magenta cast in the images. The can be as many other parameters trim accurately and after a few attempts I had pretty much perfect balance.

Battery does so almost 500 images, the Canon there were 700. For me, no problem, always have a second here.

I give the kit with E-620 and two lenses 4 stars, on the one hand because the telephoto zoom is rather weak and secondly because I miss The system requires the ability to customize depth of field. This is perhaps unfair because the telephoto zoom at the price already is next to nothing, the value for money is just great and you never can get such a compact DSLR with a sensationally good, small and lightweight lens otherwise.