RRJackson: I wonder how much DxO got paid to ignore the multi-sample noise reduction of the RED sensor? Or are they going to start testing everyone's camera based on multiple exposure HDR imagery?
They didn't ignore it; they mentioned it as an explanation of the high sensor score.With other cameras, you have access to single-shot raw files, so there would be no point in testing them based on multi-shot techniques. In this particular case, though, you don't get such raw files from the camera, only a proprietary file format with the multi-shot processing "baked in".
Francis Carver: No camera company in the world today is as completely clueless about where things are and where things are going than Canon-san. These poor people are truly completely clueless. One almost starts to feel sorry for the Canon people. Notice the word "almost."
In what way are they clueless? As long as they defend their market position and sell more cameras than any other company, it seems they know exactly where things are. They may not know where things are going, but they probably have a better idea than you or I.
vadims: "DSLRs can capture the moment better than mirrorless, because you're viewing directly, not through an LCD."
This reminds me those medieval scientists who refused to follow Galileo and use telescope because they believed that lenses were "distorting reality" and therefore insisted on observing with naked eye.
They weren't talking about viewing the final image, but about capturing it in the first place. With the lag of an EVF/LCD, it's harder to "capture the moment" than with an OVF. Many people have no problem with EVFs, though, so it's highly individual.
Anastigmat: Canon is an electronics company. You wonder why they haven't made a smartphone yet.
Because there isn't room for more major players in that market. They are in a better position right where they are, and should try to make cameras that can coexist with smartphones, rather than trying to make smartphones themselves.
photonius: well, the sensor is only 16 bit. "This new sensor is a 19-Mpix, 30.7 x 15.8mm Bayer pattern 16-bit CMOS sensor ... ", so obviously some processing.
No, the DR and color depth scores are the highest measured values, i.e. at base ISO. They are not based on the complete ISO range. Their graphs report the values from the entire range.
Steen Bay: Well, if something sounds too good to be true... As far I can tell the QE of the Red Dragon must be quite a bit higher than 100% in order to get such a high SNR, and that's hardly the case.
DxO does note that the results seem to be above the technical capabilities of current CMOS sensors, which is one of the reasons why they suspect that the camera employs temporal NR (combining multiple shots to achieve lower noise).
photonius: I thought they use a trick to have multiple exposures at different sensitivities?
I don't know if you read the entire DxO review, but they write that the camera almost certainly use temporal noise reduction, i.e. combining multiple shots to reduce noise.
Donnie G: 2015 will be the "death" year for at least one of the current crop of camera manufacturers. Who will be the one to quit the camera business? Hint! It won't be any of the DSLR makers. Heh Heh Heh
I think Eleson's point was that Pentax is already extinct. They no longer exist as an independent camera manufacturer, having been bought by Ricoh. I don't think Pentax is maintained as a separate division, like they were within Hoya. There is just Ricoh now, making cameras under two brand names.
Because they are almost never reviewed by any of the large review sites, it's easy to forget that there are several smaller manufacturers in the market, companies that mostly make compact cameras, usually of the very cheap sort. I'm thinking of companies like AgfaPhoto, Benq, Casio, HP, JK Imaging, Rollei and Sakar. Kodak was also a manufacturer of cheap compacts and bridge cameras before they left the camera market, and I'll bet that the next one to "die" is another of those low-end compact camera makers. I definitely think that Olympus will be around making cameras a year from now.
fuxicek: great camera but the lenses are somehow expensive, there is no budget 50mm or better 25mm f1.8 lens... for 100 euro you can get only toy lenses...:( ...and I wonder, if there is any small external flash, like Nikon´s SB400?
Yabokkie thinks that the physical aperture is the only information you need about a lens to know its performance. Companies that make lenses for crop sensor cameras are 'F-stop cheaters', because they try to disguise their low-performance, small aperture lenses behind seemingly impressive F-stop numbers. At least this is my understanding of his/her teachings.
RichRMA: Does this mean these cameras are better off without the 5-axis IBIS?
The 3-axis IBIS in E-M10 compensates for rotational movement, i.e. pitch, yaw and roll. 5-axis also corrects for left/right and up/down movements, which are most noticeable in photos taken at close range (or at very long focal lengths). In general, though, those movements don't cover as many pixels as the rotational movements do, and therefore aren't as visible in the final image.
Craig from Nevada: This is pretty good deal. When the price settles down a bit, it will even be a better deal.
I would say the E-P5 and any offspring have run their course and are rendered obsolete by this camera. The EPL and EPM still serve some purpose in the Oly line up.
OMD occupies a nice niche in the camera market. It will be interesting to see if Olympus can make a buck selling these cameras.
Since the E-P5 shutter is capable of 1/8000s, it's probably not the same one as in E-M5 and E-M10.
If the output of this camera at ISO 200 is "not good", "unacceptable", "noisy", blah, blah, blah, as so many posters claim, and there are two stops difference between m43 and FF, does that mean that the output of Nikon FF cameras at ISO 800 is "not good", "unacceptable", and "noisy"?
Exposure is a function of light per unit area, and is independent of total amount of light collected by the sensor. Sensor size does influence other things though.
eivissa1: The testphoto's show that the Panny GM1 shows just a little more detail. Agressive noisereduction in the E-M10?
Depending on where I look, I see (or think that I see) more detail from one camera or the other. The NR is likely not applied globally, but locally depending on the kind of detail in the specific part of the image. In general, Olympus' output pleases me more than Panasonic's, but it's a matter of taste for sure.
Native ISO is a physical property of the sensor. Lowering the native ISO means that the sensor is less sensitive to incoming light, which in turn means that the signal needs more amplification to achieve the higher effective ISOs. And more amplification leads to more noise.Also, with a native ISO as low as 25, photon shot noise will become more visible, so you may not gain as much as you'd wish, even at low ISOs.
_P: I consider myself a long term and loyal Olympus customer. I starter with them back in 2005 with E-1 + 14-54 and 40-150/3.5-4.5 double kit. What a wonderful piece of photographic equipment! Especially the lenses. Then, to be honest, I could hardly find a candidate for upgrade… I got E-PL5 meanwhile for my wife and 25/1.4 and 75/1.8 primes for myself waiting for something like E-M1. Then, when it came out I was hoping to put my 14-54 back to work again…
Sometimes I think that the people frequenting camera gear forums aren't really looking at pictures. They seem to only be interested in the pixel level. Composition and subject are more interesting to me than what I see when looking at photos at 100%. If you zoom in so far that you lose sight of the composition as a whole, then you're looking too closely IMHO.It's different with scientific, industrial and surveillance photos, of course, where the pixel level might be very important, but for artistic photos and everyday snapshots, I think too much is made of very small differences between cameras.
Hubertus Bigend: A waste of time and energy... As much as I like Olympus for stuff like the E-M1, this is just pointless marketing talk. Nothing of substantial interest whatsoever has been said...
And of course you speak for everyone. Personally, I think it's quite interesting to learn how the camera companies see the global and regional markets, what trends they see, what strategies they have, and so on.Talk about specific technological innovations and products in development, are interesting too, but the companies usually don't share much information of that sort. Hence the existence of rumour sites.
Just a Photographer: The s stands for Software update?
Come on Nikon what kind of update is this really?
I agree that it's not an exciting update, in terms of new technology or features, but it still seems like more than just a cosmetic update, like the 700D was.However, if the promised improvements of performance are barely noticeable in practice, then it's certainly not much of an upgrade.
kinglau711: WOW not able to bring a single real innovation in two years !
Even incapable of adding a GPS, WIFI or a viewfinder as large as the 5D Mark III and 1DX.
Having GPS in a camera that is going to be used by reporters is perhaps not a good idea. Some countries prohibit the use of GPS devices.
babalu: ...in five to ten years any camera with a mirror box will be as antiquated as film cameras are today .
Only a gear junkie would say that a certain type of camera is only for gear junkies. People who are interested in taking photographs care more about how they use their camera, than about what type of camera they use. Any camera that allows control of basic photographic parameters can be put to serious photographic use.
cgarrard: ISO 409,600
Yes, this must be a sad day for all those elusive, black cats.