Reading mode: Light Dark

E-410 Sample available in JAPAN.

Go to last post
Isobedan said:
E-410

Look beneath picture. It's recognize auful white out in hiigh lights.

In same situation, Sony cybershot G1 is looked better. isn't it?
Click to expand...
It's not a highlight, it's a blown picture.

F5.6 against F7.1. ISO 100 against ISO 80. And I can't even guess what shutter speed and metering was used. DSLR is not a point and shoot camera. I can reliably get a highlight whiteout if I use a too big aperture or a too long exposure.

Besides, why E-410 has Flash: 24 and Sony has Flash: 16? Did they use a flash in those conditions? If they did, no wonder everything is blown out.
 
The Sony is a much better camera. Happy? Please move on!
--
Troll Whisperer
Bill Turner

 
ISO 1600 seems to be only slightly worse than in Fujifilm F30.
 
I assume that they want to show details in the shadows and not testing the highlights.... But why did they use 0.3? I can't read the text...
Actually I think that in a shot like that I would use -0.3...

Kind regards Jørgen
http://www.pbase.com/jchriste
 
This is a corner of a rush review by our stuff, with product style, the specification, etc.

Steady point tests.

Test samples are copies of shooted pictures. AF mode set Center, Focus area set Center.
Lens is Zuiko Digital ED 14-42mm F3.5-5.6.

Excuses is Size / ExposureTime / ApertureFNumber / ExposureBias / ISO / Mode / WB / FocalLength

That's all.

Why +0.3EV offset ?
I don't know. There is no statement. I guess tester's bonehead.
 
yeah, perhaps they used the flash as, you know a fill, to soften the shadows. Flash isn't just for inside or low light you know.
 
could it be flash mode
as in wireless ?

--
Riley

not all that counts, can be counted
 
That's review's summary.

Lead paragraph is a typical onerview, so I pic up elements.
All shots is SHQ-JPEG. Thumbnails are by Photoshop CS2's resample and rotated.
No retouch.
Leses are these bellow.
ED 14-42mm F3.5-5.6
ED 18-180mm F3.5-6.3

Each photo have short caption. These are shooting data and tester's comment.
I'll follow them some other day.
 
ft3 said:
yeah, perhaps they used the flash as, you know a fill, to soften
the shadows. Flash isn't just for inside or low light you know.
Click to expand...
You don't say? Really? You live and learn.

Now please show me what exactly warrants the use of fill-in flash on that photo...
 
Isobedan said:
Isobedan said:
Did they use a flash in those conditions?
Click to expand...
That's no flash shot.
I find that any image have some number of flash in Exif, not about
on or off.
That spacification may be about built-in flash.
Click to expand...
Sorry, yes, you're right. It probably refers to Auto mode, not fired as opposed to compulsory mode, not fired.

Still, that photo needed a shorter exposure.
 
Good resolution, low noise. Admittedly there is a bit of noise reduction going on there, but it looks like it's not that heavy. It would suggest there is not much noise to start with.

ISO 100 is simply beautiful. Pin sharp. I can't wait to try the higher grade lenses on it.

David

--
Who needs High ISO when you can have Pure Whey?

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top