Previous page Next page

Compared to...

Studio scene comparison (JPEG vs. RAW)

Below are 100% crops from a JPEG straight from the camera and a RAW file converted in Olympus Studio 1.2 in 'High Function' mode, all other RAW conversion settings left as default.

JPEG straight from the camera
RAW via. Olympus Studio 1.2,
High Function
5,420 KB JPEG (3264 x 2448)
2,086 KB JPEG (3264 x 2448)

As you can see from these crops it is possible to squeeze a little more detail out of the E-300, it's also possible to get accurate reds too, but it did require shooting in RAW and converting using Olympus Studio (or some equally good third party RAW converter).

Previous page Next page
41
I own it
2
I want it
70
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 2
User0883473259

Dispongo de esta camara entre otras y puedo asegurar que como eel sensor CCD no hay de igual, tengo camaras con sensores C-MOS, pero el resultado final es diferente, disparar con la E-300, es como hacerlo con pelicula/negativo, mucha mas fidelidad a lo rel, aunque la resolucion no sea la de que se dispone hoy en dia en camaras de gama media, aconsejo hacer las pruebas.

0 upvotes
reanim888

Amazing!
The Olympus E-300 functions far more like a DSLR in terms of shot to shot recording rate, but still a bit slow when contrasted with Canon and Nikon’s sub-$1,000 offerings. The E-300 will capture subsequent images with just .59 seconds between. This remains slightly behind the XT’s .33 seconds and the D70’s .35 seconds recording rate, but still far beyond most compact models.

1 upvote
Total comments: 2