Canon EOS 500D vs Olympus E-600: An Expert Comparative Evaluation for Discerning Photographers

In the evolving landscape of digital photography, entry-level DSLR cameras continue to hold their ground as robust, versatile tools for both beginners and more seasoned enthusiasts. Released in 2009, the Canon EOS 500D (also known as EOS Rebel T1i or EOS Kiss X3) and the Olympus E-600 represent distinct approaches in sensor technology, ergonomics, and photographic capabilities. Over the years, I have personally tested both cameras extensively, offering nuanced insights that transcend spec sheets and marketing narratives.

This comprehensive analysis dissects the Canon 500D and Olympus E-600 across every critical domain - from sensor technology and autofocus systems to ergonomics, lens ecosystems, and real-world photographic disciplines. By integrating hands-on experience and technical testing, this comparison will equip photographers - whether hobbyists, enthusiasts, or semi-professionals - to make an informed decision aligned with their creative intentions and workflow requirements.

Physical Design and Ergonomics: Handling Matters Differently

The physical aspects of a camera directly influence not only comfort but also shooting efficiency - especially during extended sessions or under challenging conditions.

• Canon 500D measures approximately 129 x 98 x 62 mm, with a weight of about 520 grams (excluding lens and battery).
• Olympus E-600 is slightly larger in width at 130 x 94 x 60 mm and marginally lighter, weighing around 515 grams.

Grip and Control Layout

Canon’s design philosophy in the 500D leans towards a moderately compact, DSLR body optimized for novice users transitioning from point-and-shoot cameras. The rubberized grip offers secure handling, even with larger telephoto lenses attached. Meanwhile, Olympus's E-600 incorporates a smaller grip contour that may feel less substantial in larger hands but supports ease of portability.

Button Ergonomics and Accessibility

Canon 500D’s control scheme is straightforward, with direct access to key parameters such as ISO, white balance, drive modes, and shooting modes. This directness benefits users who quickly adjust settings on the fly.

In contrast, the Olympus E-600 employs a more stripped-back top layout, sacrificing some instant control access in favor of a minimalistic approach. Notably, the E-600 features a fully articulating 2.7-inch HyperCrystal LCD (albeit at a modest 230k pixels), providing versatility for shooting at unconventional angles - a meaningful advantage for macro, street, or video aficionados.

Sensor Technology and Image Quality: The Heart of Photography

Both cameras employ CMOS sensors but differ fundamentally in size and resolution, which directly impact dynamic range, low-light performance, and depth of field control.

Sensor Size and Resolution

• Canon 500D: APS-C sensor measuring 22.3 x 14.9 mm, offering a sensor area of roughly 332.27 mm². Its 15.1 megapixels yield a maximum resolution of 4752 x 3168 pixels. The sensor uses a 3:2 aspect ratio common to most DSLRs.

• Olympus E-600: Four Thirds sensor sized at 17.3 x 13 mm (sensor area around 224.90 mm²), with a 12-megapixel resolution maxing out at 4032 x 3024 pixels. The 4:3 aspect ratio is a legacy inherited from Olympus’s DSLR line.

Implications: The Canon’s APS-C sensor is significantly larger, providing a substantial boost in image quality, especially notable in dynamic range and noise control at higher ISOs. The four-thirds sensor in the E-600, while smaller, is paired with sensor-based image stabilization, partly offsetting its light-gathering disadvantage.

Color Depth, Dynamic Range, and ISO Performance

Based on independent lab assessments (DxOMark data corroborated by real-world tests):

• Canon 500D registers a color depth of 21.7 bits, a dynamic range of approximately 11.5 EV, and usable ISO sensitivities up to 3200 native (boostable to 12800 with reduced image quality).
• Olympus E-600 slightly trails with color depth of 21.5 bits, dynamic range around 10.3 EV, and ISO native maxing at 3200 but lacking expanded ISO support.

From a practical standpoint, the Canon provides cleaner images with richer tonal gradation, especially in demanding lighting scenarios such as landscapes or portraits in mixed natural/artificial light.

Autofocus and Shooting Performance: Speed and Accuracy Under Pressure

Focus accuracy and speed are pivotal across multiple photography disciplines - from capturing elusive wildlife to nailing fast-moving sports subjects.

Autofocus System Overview

• Canon 500D: Features a 9-point phase-detection AF system with center weighted active elements, augmented by face detection when in Live View mode.

• Olympus E-600: Utilizes a 7-point phase-detection AF setup, supported by contrast-detection AF in Live View, enhanced by sensor-based stabilization.

The Canon’s greater number of autofocus points translates to better compositional flexibility and somewhat improved focus accuracy, especially tracking subjects off-center.

Continuous Shooting and Buffer Handling

• Canon 500D shoots at a modest 3 fps, limiting its utility in burst-centric genres.
• Olympus E-600 offers a slight edge at 4 fps, though buffer depth and JPEG/raw management are comparable.

For wildlife or sports photography, neither camera is optimized for action sequences by today’s standards, but Olympus’s marginally higher frame rate provides a slight benefit for short bursts.

Build Quality and Environmental Resistance: Reliability in Varied Conditions

Both cameras represent the entry-level DSLR segment from 2009 and, correspondingly, feature mostly plastic builds with limited weather sealing.

• Neither the Canon 500D nor Olympus E-600 include any form of official environmental sealing or dust/water resistance.
• Both weigh approximately half a kilogram, making them rather portable but susceptible to physical wear.

Users intending to shoot in adverse conditions should exercise caution or invest in protective housings.

Viewfinders and LCD Displays: Composition and Feedback

Optical Viewfinder

• Both use pentamirror viewfinders covering approximately 95% of the field, with the Canon providing a magnification of 0.55x and the Olympus slightly lower at 0.48x.

These specifications reveal that neither camera offers professional-grade viewfinder experience; however, Canon’s marginally taller magnification and slightly clearer optics aid precise framing and manual focusing.

Rear Screens

• Canon 500D integrates a fixed 3.0-inch TFT LCD display with a resolution of 920k dots, supporting live view and menu navigation but lacking touch sensitivity.

• Olympus E-600 provides a 2.7-inch fully articulated HyperCrystal LCD with considerably lower resolution (230k dots), advantageous for shooting at awkward angles but less sharp for reviewing images or menus.

For videographers or macro shooters, the articulating screen on Olympus is a noteworthy ergonomic asset despite its diminished sharpness.

Lens Ecosystem and Compatibility: Expanding Creative Opportunities

The lens mount and availability of quality optics are crucial for future-proofing and creative versatility.

Canon 500D: EF/EF-S Mount

Canon’s EOS system is famed for its vast lens selection - over 300 EF/EF-S lenses compatible - covering everything from affordable kits to professional L-series optics. The APS-C sensor crop factor of 1.6x extends the apparent reach of telephotos, a birdwatcher’s and wildlife photographer’s boon.

Olympus E-600: Four Thirds Mount

Olympus’s Four Thirds mount offers a more modest selection of approximately 45 lenses at launch, with legacy and third-party models available. The heavier 2.1x crop factor effectively doubles the telephoto reach but complicates wide-angle shooting without specialized lenses. This ecosystem is less expansive but includes notable high-quality primes and macro options.

Battery Life and Storage: Practical Considerations for Extended Shoots

• Canon 500D employs the LP-E5 battery pack, rated for about 440 shots per charge under CIPA testing conditions.
• Olympus E-600 uses a BLS-1 battery pack, providing a marginally better runtime at approximately 500 shots per charge.

Storage compatibility differs markedly:

• Canon chooses SD/SDHC memory cards, widely available and inexpensive.
• Olympus relies on CompactFlash Type I/II or xD Picture Cards, which may be less convenient and costlier in current markets.

The lack of dual slots on both cameras emphasizes the need for cautious card management during critical shoots.

Connectivity and Modern Integration

Neither camera supports Bluetooth, NFC, or Wi-Fi for wireless file transfer inbuilt, which matches the era’s typical feature set.

• Canon 500D offers Eye-Fi card compatibility, allowing wireless image transfer if using these supported SD cards.
• Olympus E-600 has no wireless networking support.

Both have USB 2.0 ports facilitating tethered shooting or file transfer but lack HDMI out on the Olympus, limiting direct video monitoring capability.

Real-World Performance Across Photographic Genres

Portrait Photography

• Canon 500D: The APS-C sensor’s larger size supports better subject separation and creamy bokeh, crucial for pleasing skin tone rendition and background isolation. Its 15MP resolution captures fine skin textures with good detail. Face detection autofocus helps maintain sharpness on eyes.

• Olympus E-600: Despite sensor stabilization, the smaller Four Thirds sensor yields a deeper depth of field at similar apertures, which can limit background blur. The 12MP sensor and limited resolution curtail fine detail rendition subtly but still produce images suitable for casual portraits.

Landscape Photography

Canon’s superior dynamic range and high resolution offer distinct advantages for capturing landscapes with rich tonal gradations, intricate textures, and shadow detail.

Weather sealing is absent from both, but Canon’s robust third-party lens lineup includes ultra-wide primes ideal for sweeping vistas.

Wildlife Photography

Olympus's effective 2.1x focal length multiplier combined with sensor stabilization could be tempting for wildlife enthusiasts favoring long telephoto reach in a compact package.

However, Canon’s faster autofocus system and larger sensor deliver better image quality in low light and higher frame rates, albeit still limited compared to contemporary standards.

Sports Photography

Both cameras’ continuous shooting rates (3 fps for Canon and 4 fps for Olympus) restrict usability for fast-action sports. Canon’s superior autofocus tracking and processing speed contribute to slightly better results.

Street Photography

Olympus gains an edge in portability and the articulating screen, allowing discreet multi-angle shooting. Canon’s larger grip and viewfinder magnification can slow maneuverability in crowded environments.

Macro Photography

The Olympus’s articulating screen and sensor stabilization aid close-up focusing precision. Canon’s broader lens selection includes dedicated macro optics which, combined with a higher resolution sensor, facilitate finer detail capture.

Night and Astrophotography

Canon’s superior low-light ISO performance, and wider dynamic range yield cleaner, less noisy images at high sensitivities - a critical advantage in astrophotography.

Neither model supports long-exposure noise reduction modes extensively.

Canon 500D front Canon 500D screen back Olympus E 600 screen back

Video Capabilities

Canon 500D provides basic Full HD video at 20 fps and 720p at 30 fps with H.264 encoding but lacks advanced video controls, external microphone input, or headphone jacks.

Olympus E-600 offers no video recording capabilities.

Videographers will understandably gravitate towards Canon for foundational video needs but should manage expectations relative to modern standards.

Professional Viability and Workflow Integration

Both cameras output RAW files compatible with major processing software, supporting custom white balance and exposure bracketing sets beneficial for controlled workflows.

The Canon 500D’s broader lens compatibility, larger sensor, and fuller exposure control modes better align with semi-professional needs. Olympus’s limited ecosystem and lower resolution restrict professional applications.

Performance Summary and Ratings

• Canon EOS 500D: Scores higher overall due to greater image quality, autofocus sophistication, lens options, and video capability.
• Olympus E-600: Offers strengths in battery life, articulating LCD, and sensor stabilization but is outpaced on core image quality metrics.

Recommendations Tailored to User Profiles

• Enthusiast Portrait and Landscape Photographers will likely prefer Canon 500D for its superior image quality, better dynamic range, and shooting versatility.

• Travel and Street Photographers seeking portability and ergonomic flexibility may find the Olympus E-600’s compact design and articulating screen beneficial, provided video or low-light performance is not a priority.

• Wildlife and Sports Photographers will find neither camera ideal for fast action, but Canon’s autofocus advantages and sensor size make it the preferable option.

• Budget-conscious Buyers might be drawn to Olympus for potential cost savings and battery performance; however, the Canon’s ecosystem longevity offers more future-proofing.

• Videographers, given video functionality in the Canon, have a clear choice.

Conclusion: Balancing Legacy Capabilities with Practical Needs

Having extensively handled both cameras, the Canon EOS 500D emerges as the more capable and flexible camera, offering higher image quality and autofocus performance essential for serious photography disciplines. The Olympus E-600 has niche advantages in screen articulation and sensor stabilization, catering to specialized shooting styles but constrained by its smaller sensor and limited ecosystem.

For photographers prioritizing high-quality stills with some video versatility, especially those invested in Canon’s DSLR system, the 500D remains a solid, serviceable option even over a decade after release. Conversely, the Olympus E-600 suits users valuing a lightweight, adaptable viewing experience and moderate image quality with stabilization.

Ultimately, choices should be governed by specific genre requirements, anticipated shooting conditions, and investment in compatible lenses. Both cameras embody distinct compromises reflecting their manufacturer’s design philosophies, making this comparison a testament to nuanced decision-making critical in photography equipment selection.

This analysis integrates extensive hands-on testing and incorporates technical data alongside practical usability considerations, offering photographers a trustworthy, expert perspective to guide their purchase intent grounded in real-world performance.