Digital Cameras 2013

Sort by:

All Cameras
Olympus E-410
Olympus E-410

Hey! You should know that Olympus has released a newer version of this product: the Olympus Evolt E-420.

Olympus E-410

We've given the E-410 a grade of C+.

Editor's Review

This has since been replaced by the E-420. Here's what we had to say when the E-410 was originally released in March 2007:

Olympus introduces another Live View digital SLR, putting the E-410 in a select class of professional-level cameras capable of presenting accurate and helpful previews of your subject on the LCD. In addition to the Live View technology, the E-410 features what Olympus calls a "Supersonic Wave Filter," which reduces the effects of dust and other debris on image quality. The Olympus E-410 is a compact, comfortable SLR that puts an emphasis on mobility and ease-of-use.


  • 10 megapixels
  • TruePic III image processor
  • RAW and JPEG file formats
  • 4/3 standard lens mount
  • Auto and manual focus
  • Auto and manual exposure
  • ISO 100-1600
  • 2.5-inch LCD
  • Compact Flash and xD-Picture card storage
  • Lithium-ion battery
  • Release Date: Mar 07, 2007

Shop for E-410 Accessories

Olympus E-410 Reviews

Olympus E-410 Reviews by Digital Camera-HQ Users

  • 4.0 out of 5
Olympus E410 080607 (Derril Jones — 06/08/2008)

I am a semi pro, that is I took a 3 yr course, not a university degree course. I have owned a number of 35mm cameras, my favorite 35mm was the Nikon FM, but used, borrowed, and owned many others.
Med format I have owned Hasselblad, Rollie, Minolta, and Fuji. My favorite to use was the Hasselblad, my favorite for image quality, Minolta (a pig to use).
Digitally I have owned Kodak, Nikon, and Olympus. The Nikon D70, Nikon Coolpix 3200 (drowned)
My favorite to use was the D70, best image quality is the Olympus. But not totally, the standard image is quite un-sharp unless modified in setup. Then the sharpness still does not match the Nikon even though the Olympus is 10 mpixles and the D70 6 mpixles.
The color rendition is a different matter. The Olympus, both in the E410, and Stylus 790 SW have excellent color.
Yes! as has been said before, the pre flash is annoying for studio lighting, but you do have manual setup. A straight flash position for all point and shoot would be great for advanced amateurs and pros. We all need a small camera at times, and could benefit from
Perhaps two manual settings of say one f5.6 @ 1/125th and two F11 @1/250th, keeping the ISO as a manual variable.
The pre-flash understandably is for accuracy, due to the limited dynamic range of digital sensors, compared to film.
I am not sure why the image sharpness on both Olympus cameras is less sharp and natural than Nikon, Kodak or Canon, perhaps Olympus would like to respond on this.
I will keep this camera for its fine color, but I still miss the D70.
Also digital camera manufacturers could I believe, find a good balance by remembering the options and controls on manual and semi auto cameras. I still tend to fight the menu’s
Attempting to operate it like a manual camera. Manual focus on these lenses leaves a lot to be desired, and auto focus is a problem under some conditions. For those sunny days maybe two fixed focus positions 5’ and 20’ this would cover for most times on the beech
Or basic scenic’s.

  • 4.0 out of 5
Olympus E-410 (Mark — 02/02/2008)

I am a retired photographer who has used most everything upto and including 8x10 cameras in the studio and the field. Having been extremely disapointed when Minolta got out of the camera business (I have in excess of $10,000 worth of Minolta autofocus lenses and flashes) I was considering making the move to Canon. I saw one of these in a two lens kit and the price was very reasonable. I decided to give it a try given my past very positive experience with Olympus optics (was never overwelmed with their 35mm bodies, the exception being the OM4Ti).

I have three minor complaints about the camera:
*Lack of a PC outlet for studio lighting (corrected with a hotshoe to PC adapter and a radio slave)
*It is a little too small for my hands
*I really hate the TTL "Pre-Flash" ALL digital cameras I have encountered seem to do for TTL. I guess I don't inderstand why 35mm cameras didn't need to do this but digital cameras do (advanced technology taking a step backwards). One advantage you have with the Olympus brand flash unit is the ability to use it in a Non-TTL Auto mode but you could do that with a Vivitar 283 of which I have about a dozen. One nice touch with the Olympus shoe mount flash is the zoom coverage down to 24mm equivalant in 35mm.

On to the positive; The lenses packaged with the camera were Olympus Zuiko zooms, 14mm~45mm (28~90 35mm equiv.) and 40mm~150 (80~300mm equiv.) that were representative of todays state of the art zoom lenses giving decent contrast, color rendition and minimal distortion unless critically tested. Olympus Zuiko made some really fine fixed focal length lenses for 35mm and they offer some nice looking fixed focal length pieces for digital which I will soon be exploring. The Olympus software allows conversion from Olympus RAW file format to tif, jpg, bmp and a variety of other formats while allowing you to choose 8 or 16 bit color depth. In 16 bit, gradation changes very suttely from pixel to pixel, vastly superior to any point-n-shoot digital I have played with to date. I have had the chance to have some 11x14's printed (while shooting at ISO400) and find it hard to believe the quality. Digital has bested film by a considerable margin (given the imaging area) in terms of sharpness and the color is completely acceptable. I could get a better picture using my 8x10 Sinar C with ISO50 Velvia but even I have a difficult time seeing the difference on a 11x14 or 16x20 print. I think the real difference there is the glass used to make that 8x10 transpearancy (very German, VERY expensive).

My positive experience with this camera is drawing me to their system. They make a very advanced pro-level body and have a full complement of pro-level lenses which will meet any need I have of a 35mm size system.

  • 5.0 out of 5
E-410 an excellent camera (Victor — 10/09/2007)

I have had several mid to high end cameras over the years. Though not a pro I have been very much into photography including color and black and white darkroom (when it was still used) as a result I tend to look for certain things in a camera and I believe I have found most of them in the E-410. I purchased my E-410 in June 07 just prior to a vacation to Cancun. After initially comparing the E-410 againts the Nikon D-40 and the Cannon Rebel with the initial intention of buying the Nikon, I bought the E-410. After reading many reviews I went to the store and held and played with the features on all three cameras and really liked the feel of the E-410. After reading many reviews I found several features missing on the Cannon and the Nikon that I found on the E-410 that were important to me so I bought it. In Cancun the camera performed great in the heat and humidity. Prior to buying the camerea I had read many reviews and found that a common complaint was the battery life, well I purchased an extended life extra battery to take with me. Once I really started using the camera I found that I really didn't need to buy an extra battery but it was handy when I forgot to charge the battery the night before. For the most part I found that if you keep the use of the LCD screen down and use the view finder to shoot instead the battery will last all day. The most difficult thing I found about the camera was that it has so many features and setting variables it is difficult to remember how to change them. However on the auto program settings (which it has several for different types of shots) it takes very crisp, clear photos. The small size is also a plus when your carrying the camera around all day. I did find that the photos are sharper if you turn the noise filter off. I would strongly recommend a high capacity, high speed memory card for this camera to get the most out of it. The photo quality I thought was fantastic, never having owned a 10 MP camera previously, I had in the past found digital cameras limited for enlarging photos and instead relied on film. I was very surprised at how much I could enlarge a photo without giving the grainy appearence.