NMOS v CCD - my experience.

I've long got the feeling that CCD was nicer than CMOS, and by extension NMOS, but not by much.

Bearing this in mind, I expected the E330 to produce marginally less attractive RAWs than the E500.

It doesn't. After three weeks of use, I'm confident the E330 produces better images than the E500 (yet another reason to read the E330 review on this site for a good laugh).

So, score one for NMOS.

By the way, this isn't about high ISO noise. I've no idea (nor do I care) which camera has better or worse high ISO noise.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/acam

that most Olympus DSLR's get underrated initially (except the E500). And only after folks have tried the cameras involved, does the word get out that the cameras are actually very, very good. Such is the case with the E330 which I've found to be a great camera. And when I re-read the DPReview review on this model, I was dumbfounded as to how they came to that conclusion. This baby rocks! I too was speculative about the NMOS sensor - after all, the Kodak CCD's have proven themselves to do color very nicely. But I was not prepared to like the E330 as much as I did. This only bodes well for things to come.
--
Have a great day!

. . . have to do with the RAW processor/jpeg engine (pick your poison here) and the lens . . the sensor definitely plays a part as well, but the other two are far more likely to alter your images. I am thinking of writing a sigma color correction script for ACR/CS2 just to deal with the way that lens handles reds.

As far as the rest, NMOS is actualyl like a hybrid CCD/CMOS, it really has the well size advantages of CCD, with the single pixel read/cost benefit of CMOS. I too would like to see this technolgoy get pushed in the mount. Simply because have seen what subtracting the read noise after the read can do in other CMOS cameras, and after it matures a bit it may well improve ISO performance on the whole. As it stands it looks to be a draw from the FFTCCD and LMOS.

I wouldn't be suprised to find that the E3 whatever-cam is going to be NMOS, and perhaps that is part of the reason the entire project was derailed.

As far as claiming one is better than the other, I really remain skeptical.

I would like to hear more Louis, about why you make this statement, and some more deeply fleshed out reasons.

--



--
Zach Bellino
'I prefer my lo-mein of the veggie variety.'
--ZJB
'There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.'
Benjamin Disraeli (1804-1881)

. . .Panny/Oly/Leica are in bed so deep together they are reinventing the manage-a-trois . . . so it suprises me very little to see their out of camera pics look very similar.

That said, I would have no problem buying a Panny.

Have you tried the DMC-L1? I can't tkae my hands off it in the shop . . .the Leica version is worth some sinful clink but the control scheme is somethin I could really see you catching on to Louis.

There is a dedicated nob, with digts and numbering for shutter speed.

A dedicated aperture ring, which is the bomb. And the wheel on the back controls ISO . . . all analogue all the time . . . and I would imagine it has that NMOS-y feel to it that you like.

You never, ever have to muck around in the menus . . EVER.

Oh, yeah, it comes with a very nice lens.

If I weren't on a college budget I would definitely have one to go beside my E500.

--



--
Zach Bellino
'I prefer my lo-mein of the veggie variety.'
--ZJB
'There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.'
Benjamin Disraeli (1804-1881)

thebard37 said:

I would like to hear more Louis, about why you make this statement,
and some more deeply fleshed out reasons.

Click to expand...

No reasons, that's the point. After shooting with it for three weeks, I like the pictures it produces. On average, I find the shots look better than ones taken beside it with the E500.

thebard37 said:

. . . have to do with the RAW processor/jpeg engine (pick your
poison here) and the lens . . the sensor definitely plays a part as
well, but the other two are far more likely to alter your images.

Click to expand...

I do a lot of colour fiddling anyway. It isn't colour I'm talking about (both are fine) but how much I can manipulate the image before it comes apart.

thebard37 said:

As far as the rest, NMOS is actualyl like a hybrid CCD/CMOS, it
really has the well size advantages of CCD, with the single pixel
read/cost benefit of CMOS. I too would like to see this technolgoy
get pushed in the mount. Simply because have seen what subtracting
the read noise after the read can do in other CMOS cameras, and
after it matures a bit it may well improve ISO performance on the
whole. As it stands it looks to be a draw from the FFTCCD and LMOS.

Click to expand...

Yes, I'm very impressed.

thebard37 said:

I wouldn't be suprised to find that the E3 whatever-cam is going to
be NMOS, and perhaps that is part of the reason the entire project
was derailed.

Click to expand...

It would also explain why the E330 was initially expensive and Oly are saying they missed sales because they couldn't get parts (NMOS sensors?) and why the E400 was rushed out without LV.

thebard37 said:

As far as claiming one is better than the other, I really remain
skeptical.

Click to expand...

Not me. I really like the RAW files the E330 produces. And I think much of that is the sensor technology.

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/acam

thebard37 said:

. . . have to do with the RAW processor/jpeg engine (pick your poison here) and the lens . . the sensor definitely plays a part as well, but ...

Click to expand...

I agree, and will add that the only way I can see the sensor affecting color is the design of the color filters (CFA) over the photo-sites. After that, the photo-sites themselves are color-blind: they simply count the photons that arrive.

So maybe some credit for nice color in Kodak's 4/3" CCD's should go to Kodak's expertise in digital color and design of CFA's (Kodak has been providing sensors to fussy high end digital back users for a long time). But more likely credit belongs to Olympus for choosing and specifying a certain color balance, in the CFA and/or in the subsequent processing algorithms like interpolation algorithms.

If there is little or no color difference between Kodak FF CCD's and Panasonic nMOS sensors, I suppose that color is mostly controlled by choices of the camera maker.

Olympus thinks a little too far outside the box. They don't want you to have to hear "you can shop out of that little error right there." every time you have a color issue.

The E-330 is a color making machine. We blew the 30D out of the parking lot in a shootout with the Canon rep last September.

Mind you it went direct to print but that's kind of the point. There was no post-processing needed to get an exquisite print out of the E-330. The Canon rep said, well, put it through photoshop and our response was that we shouldn't HAVE TO.

The E-330 won camera of the year from American Photo for the entry level D-SLR. And they are one seriously picky bunch.

I honestly could care less about High ISO noise myself. If people want grain free images that badly, then perhaps, ultimately, a universal sensitivity will need to be established, wherein we get our 1/500 shutter speeds at EV 0, at f/4.0.

Of course it'll have to be a new format with new lenses built specifically for it and blah blah blah....

3 new SLRS this summer, people. 3. Count 'em. Olympus marches forward.

--
there are no better companies, only better images.

I couldn't agree more -- the 330 is an absolutely remarkable camera in several ways. Good AF (though not with the predictive C-AF of the E-1), great images, and the absolutely wonderful liveview. I have the E-1 and the E-330, and they are wonderful complements to one another. They do different things well, so together they are a great pair.

My only quibble is , with my large hands, the fleshy part under my right thumb sometimes inadvertently presses the right arrow button. But that's a nuisance, not a problem.

With all due respect to Phil, his review really missed the mark. It's as if he wanted to pigeonhole the 330 as one more DSLR on the market. He missed the point, and takes (rightly) a conservative view to new features. It doesn't help that Olympus can't market worth a darn, so the 330 gets lost in the marketplace to the other junk out there.

Have you looked at what's on sale in the big-box stores as DSLR's? Pretty junky by any objective comparison.

Jeff

--
Jeff

you mean 3 BEFORE the Summer, or are they all delayed to the Summer?

I assumed E410 now.

Ex Summer.

E510 when?

Any idea (because I think you have...)?
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/acam

thebard37 said:

There is a dedicated nob, with digts and numbering for shutter speed.

Click to expand...

Fantastic! I picture that as something like a personal Lord Lichfield-type, paid to follow you round and come out with advice on shutter speeds, and suggest appropriate topics of conversation when dining with the queen.

jack

Jeff said:

I couldn't agree more -- the 330 is an absolutely remarkable camera
in several ways. Good AF (though not with the predictive C-AF of
the E-1), great images, and the absolutely wonderful liveview. I
have the E-1 and the E-330, and they are wonderful complements to
one another. They do different things well, so together they are a
great pair.

Click to expand...

I totally agree. For instance, I love the ability to shoot two images of the same subject and then compare them side by side in the E-330. That little itty bitty capability was sweet. Also, I love the fact that I can take the 50 macro, put the EC14 teleconv on it, pop the built in flash on the E-330, set the aperture for, say, f/16 or so and get amazing AMAZING shots, well lit corner to corner. Can't do that on my E-1! Not without the dang ringlight.

Jeff said:

My only quibble is , with my large hands, the fleshy part under my
right thumb sometimes inadvertently presses the right arrow button.
But that's a nuisance, not a problem.

With all due respect to Phil, his review really missed the mark.
It's as if he wanted to pigeonhole the 330 as one more DSLR on the
market. He missed the point, and takes (rightly) a conservative
view to new features. It doesn't help that Olympus can't market
worth a darn, so the 330 gets lost in the marketplace to the other
junk out there.

Click to expand...

Oly CAN'T market. Blimey, I could just rant about that. If they could they'd be doubly popular. And Phil pigeonholes a LOT of new cameras, but he does appear to pick on Olympus a bit more. I believe it's because he feels, like a lot of people, that the smaller sensor size will inevitably be the end to Olympus. I read an article the other day in some PC magazine where the writer condensed Olympus, Sony and Pentax into one paragraph stating that none of them have a future, that even Nikon's future is uncertain and only Canon will survive.

I'm no pyromaniac but I about had a spontaneous marshmallow roast right there in my store, with a certain magazine as flame fuel.

Jeff said:

Have you looked at what's on sale in the big-box stores as DSLR's?
Pretty junky by any objective comparison.

Click to expand...

Overall, I agree here. Though I am a big fan of the Pentax K10D. Don't own one, not going to, but it is a darn fine camera for the money. I sell it daily over the Rebel and D80. With good cheer.

M
--
there are no better companies, only better images.

. . . I really am reluctant to address sensors and color is because there are so many variables after the fact. I realized that in general I liked the color reproduction from my Olympus camera better than the Canon camera. it could be the sensor. I now use ACR for boht.

But after getting a non Oly, non-Canon lens I have realized that color has much to do with the lens. Then I decided to delve deeper, and went back to studio and realized that RAW processors alter it a lot too. So it is difficult to glean where the color comes from.

So I have really swamped the color thing.

In the end, I use the camera I feel I get better results from, like Louis. In this case it was the E500 over the Rebel Xt.

--



--
Zach Bellino
'I prefer my lo-mein of the veggie variety.'
--ZJB
'There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.'
Benjamin Disraeli (1804-1881)

I have been told that we were to order more E-500's because there will be no new SLR's shipping from Olympus America until June/July. They will be shown at PMA, however.

E-500, E-330, are both to be replaced. This is common knowledge along with the E-1 replacement.

There are rumors of a fourth for much much later this year but those I cannot substantiate.

And these shipping times are for the states of course. Oly UK may have other ideas.

--
there are no better companies, only better images.

Fine for me - I have enough bodies - but bad news for Oly.

They really need some new stuff in the shops. The E500 looks old now.

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/acam

thebard37 said:

But after getting a non Oly, non-Canon lens I have realized that
color has much to do with the lens. Then I decided to delve deeper,
and went back to studio and realized that RAW processors alter it a
lot too. So it is difficult to glean where the color comes from.

So I have really swamped the color thing.

In the end, I use the camera I feel I get better results from, like
Louis. In this case it was the E500 over the Rebel Xt.

Click to expand...

This, that, right there. That's how to do camera research. That's how to determine if it works for you.

Fabulous! Ahhh. A voice of reason amongst the masses.
--
there are no better companies, only better images.

Louis_Dobson said:

Fine for me - I have enough bodies - but bad news for Oly.

They really need some new stuff in the shops. The E500 looks old now.

Click to expand...

Nah. Still built better than the Rebel, still better interface than the K100D or the D50. Still more built in color capability than a 30D. And now that the two lens kit is sub 700 bucks? It's a STEAL. A STEAL, I tell you.

Only thing it's old on, for real, is speed. It's plenty of resolution and feature mix. Oh and a dust reduction feature that actually works.

I agree that they should have tried to move a bit faster but, well, if the 20D is any indication of things it's that you never ever rush new product to the market when you are looking to make a splash while keeping your technology RELIABLE. The E-1 didn't need no 15 generations of firmware upgrades. And thank goodness.

--
there are no better companies, only better images.

. . .and a profile a little more consistent with the Leica version.

See here . . .

http://www.leica-camera.us/photography/d_system/digilux_3/

Were I British nobility, and I study these guys, I would rather be John Wilmot-- of course, with a camera and without the syphilis.

--



--
Zach Bellino
'I prefer my lo-mein of the veggie variety.'
--ZJB
'There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.'
Benjamin Disraeli (1804-1881)

Taking the E330 as an E500 with LV, which for the user it is, no IS, 3 focus points, lousy speed, resolution now merely adequate as opposed to market leading.

Hmm.

I've got great value out of my E500, but these days I'd be looking for more.

as for the E330, I think it is the best camera you can buy, but that's the LV. The base camera actually irritates me. Three to four shots in RAW and then wait for the card to write? Not in 2007.

I'm very surprised the E410 isn't coming to the US straight away. And I think the announcement will kill E400 / 500 sales stone dead.

Back to the point f the thread - any idea if the Ex will be CCD or NMOS?

I'm hoping NMOS. A splash resistant high performance E330 would be my dream camera (I know we lose the porro mirror etc, that's fine).
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/acam

330 vs. Digiluz 3 vs. Lumix DMC L-1

In this weeks AP magazine, they did an 8-page test and the 330 came out on top by 1%, In the U.K. the price for the 330 with kit lens has now dropped to £600 or lower.

The other two cameras list price is £1,790 and £1,499.99, true they do have the new lens with I.S. function, but again taking this into account the 330 still came out on top.

Given the recent price reduction, this is usually a sign of a new model coming out.

Maybe the next model will have in camera anti-shake + 10MP

Landor

Louis_Dobson said:

No reasons, that's the point. After shooting with it for three
weeks, I like the pictures it produces.

Click to expand...

That's the best reason.

Louis_Dobson said:

I do a lot of colour fiddling anyway. It isn't colour I'm talking
about (both are fine) but how much I can manipulate the image
before it comes apart.

Click to expand...

I know, because your color style is inimitable. It takes a lot to get the kind of photos you take to stand out, and you do just that.

Color, comp, etc, etc.

Head and shoulders.

Louis_Dobson said:

It would also explain why the E330 was initially expensive and Oly
are saying they missed sales because they couldn't get parts (NMOS
sensors?) and why the E400 was rushed out without LV.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I think either way (interline CCD or NMOS) Olympus wanted live view in this beauty . . . they either slowed it to change course on the sensor, or to refine the support chipset/image processing. Perhaps they are making it less noisy. LOL.

Louis_Dobson said:

Not me. I really like the RAW files the E330 produces. And I
think much of that is the sensor technology.

Click to expand...

Cool. Whatever camera works. If you told me you took pics with a shoebox concealing a lomo it would make me think. Your work is really good.

--



--
Zach Bellino
'I prefer my lo-mein of the veggie variety.'
--ZJB
'There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.'
Benjamin Disraeli (1804-1881)