-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Olympus will have to go with a bigger sensor
- Thread starter Jonathan Demarais
- Start date
Hello John,
--
Brian
'To quote out of context is the essence of the photographer's craft.' John Szarkowski, The Photographer's Eye
I fully expected to see both the noise and the banding, and that is exactly what I did see. It was you who made the comment that those images had "no noise", not me. Incidentally, perhaps I'm misunderstanding the intent of your 300% viewing comments, but I see the noise and banding easily at 100% on this monitor. (A Samsung SyncMaster 932BW, 2ms, 3000:1 contrast ratio. Not exactly a monitor to write home about, but not a bad one either.) No magnification of the images is necessary.
I was not responding to any comment you made about the G1 and JPEG artifacts or Bayer & JPEG compression artifacts, I was responding to your comment that that those images had "no noise."
I'm not going to try to compare a crop from one camera with a downsized image from another, given that cropping magnifies image deficiencies while downsizing minimizes them by averaging them away, and I don't know anything about the conditions other than the ISO. It's not a useful comparison, and in any event, is completely irrelevant since I wasn't responding to any comparison, I was responding to your specific comment that the G1 ISO3200 images had "no noise".
You had written earlier that there was "no noise" in the G1 ISO3200 shots. Now you're admitting that this is untrue.
See above for why that's not a meaningful comparison. In any event, I will again mention that your original statement to which I responded did not compare to a 5D or any other camera.
Again, the comparison is irrelevant. You stated the G1 images at ISO3200 had no noise. I disagreed, and you respond that yes there is , in fact, visible noise and banding in those images. While it is true that I wrote better ISO performance can be had in other systems, that's an accurate statement despite any particular image you want to show from any particular camera.
--
'To quote out of context is the essence of the photographer's craft.'
to_markus
Well-known member
Maybe after Pana left to 16:9 & µF/T Oly comes back to Kodak & CCD again. The new Kodak sensors (in Leica S2) may not differ that mutch in density - so just crop it & their new 4 channel design produces mutch less noise / cleaner readouts. So if 37,5MP = 45x30mm = 1200mm² and F/T = 17,3X13mm = 225mm² we come back to a 7MP outstanding dynamics 4/3 body & may call it E2 
Where do you come up such opinionated nonsense? A true enthusiast isn't camera shopping based on size, period. Size is simply a consequence of whatever camera body/lens combo is required/desired.
--
'To quote out of context is the essence of the photographer's craft.'
Jonathan Demarais
Senior Member
It's one thing to be loyal, but being oblivious to the problems posed by the sensor size limitations, megapixel "marketing" and the attraction of things like FF sensors won't make them "not real."
--
'I cried because I had no E-3. Then I met a man with no E-510'
Olympus E-410, E-330, Nikon D100 (IR) & Pentax K20D.
57 lenses of various types from most brands.
Olyinaz
Veteran Member
Well honestly the E-420 and the new kit lenses could be considered very real competition. The swivel screen on the back of the G1 eats up some real estate and the grip and hump are rather normal sized so at the end of the day I'm rather stunned that Panasonic didn't ditch the hump and make the G1 even smaller but as you say, we have yet to even see what Oly is going to offer us in this market place.
Panny looks to be offering the consumer high-end stuff that always apes the SLR look. Yuck. For µ4/3rds I hope that Olympus comes out with something more along the lines of a range finder looking model such as the Canon G10 or the late Epson R-D1 and then continues to focus on making 4/3rds proper as tight and compact as possible to set it apart from APS and FF equipment.
Oly
--
http://www.pbase.com/olyinaz
evshrug2
Leading Member
--
Evshrug
Evshrug
evshrug2
Leading Member
Louis_Dobson
Forum Pro
Gearóid Ó Laoi Garry Lee
Veteran Member
I shot my son's wedding with e-3 and 1ds2. Very difficult to tell the difference unless cropping severely.
This was at 200 asa.
50-200 at 200. Fill-in flash.
And before you tell me that the groom's complexion is grey, he's Irish. That's the way he is!
--
Níor bhris focal maith fiacail riamh (Irish Gaelic)
A good word never broke a tooth.
Louis_Dobson
Forum Pro
"true" to enthusiast. OK, let's go the other way, and replace "enthusaist" with "person who buys high end dSLR". Most people who buy high end dSLRs appear to want big, butch impressive looking cameras. I don't care, but they do.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/acam
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/acam
Darrell500
Senior Member
I read the Panny is building a new sensor mfg. facility hmmmm, could this be to mfg. FF? Not that I'm looking for FF just wondering out loud or more accurately through my fingers.
Darrell
Darrell
Louis_Dobson
Forum Pro
There's nothing stupider looking than a fake dSLR (if you want a dSLR, but one, doubly so when the camera costs as much as a dSLR!) and I'll probably have to put a bag over my head when I carry it.
However, with WAs it will be a LOT smaller than a 420. Big difference.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/acam
However, with WAs it will be a LOT smaller than a 420. Big difference.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/acam
fldspringer
Senior Member
--
I hope I've never said the differences weren't real. EVERY camera has limitations. FF 35mm is a much better choice in crappy light, and the ability to push things much farther in post processing before they fall apart is the second hallmark of FF. Fill it out with the ability to farther limit DOF and you have the hat trick.
Oly's not FF and before they would ever be, they would have to announce the third mount in five years. They would have to fill another roadmap. They would need to do this and compete against companies with deep pockets and established, mature products on the shelf. Oly would loose, and Oly would loose HUGE!!!!
Now, before you hang the "Closed" sign on Oly's door, keep in mind a few things. Keep in mind that they do have a lens lineup that is top notch and every lens compares quite well head to head with the competitors. Keep in mind that if the light is within reason, the 4/3 cameras take pics as good as anyone else. (Actually, the same could be said for the 2/3 sensor of the E10/E20) Keep in mind that they have more users now than they ever have and the feature set you get for the buck is astounding.
You keep saying "Oly HAS to....." (fill in the blank).
Oly DOESN'T have to. YOU HAVE TO go some where else if they don't suit your needs.
PLEASE go now. PLEEEASE. I'm tired of your trolling posts Mr Rander.
-
Greg
http://www.spanielsport.com/
to_markus
Well-known member
It´s something completely different, as they need it for full time preview and not to reduce background noise. So this is a video sensor, and not the high IQ sensor everybody waits for. So if Oly doesn´t want to build 16:9 video in future, they should follow Leica & others, and jump on Kodak sensors for their top line again.
Jonathan Demarais
Senior Member
Make a list of the five most important attributes a camera must have in terms of image quality.
Score the 4/3rds, a 1.5 and a FF. Which do you suppose would lose?
Wait till every entry level camera sports a 15+ megapixel 1.5 crop sensor and the top ones have 20. Lose will take on a whole new meaning for Oly.
As good? You are....mistaken. I've tried to do it, I've got two Olympus cameras, I used to have more. They cannot match the best 1.5 sensors out there let alone the FF sensors, under any circumstances. I wish it were different, it would have saved me buying into or testing other systems. I'd LOVE to see the silly 3:2 format die on the vine.
If the image quality of the current 4/3rds offerings is acceptable to someone, terrific. But don't pretend (against dozens of reviews from every source imaginable) that they can match larger sensored cameras when it comes to the elements of image quality.
--
'I cried because I had no E-3. Then I met a man with no E-510'
Olympus E-410, E-330, Nikon D100 (IR) & Pentax K20D.
57 lenses of various types from most brands.
fldspringer
Senior Member
I can't print the detail the 4/3 sensor produces. The bigger sensor won't either. You can look at 100% all you want and obsess, but the fact is that unless you print poster size, you just won't see a difference in good light.
Couple that with you can't take a pic with a camera you won't carry, and the strength of the 4/3 system rises to the top.
What da hell do you need 20mp for anyway? Its a hell of a question. What are you printing?
You may want 3:2 to die on the vine. I differ. I want them to succeed too. They offer something. I really don't understand the mentality that wants a viable system to fail.
I don't want 4/3 to die either. I want the option of the smaller sensor, smaller size camera system. To be honest, I wish they would also put a 2/3 sensor (size, not aspect ratio) into the E-3 body as its own 2x crop system (50-200 having 200-800 equiv FOV). That would fill a void.
Your "follow the rest to be just like them" mentality also perplexes me. Just own their system and the problem is solved.
Again, printing or 100% measurbating. You put too much value on things that mean little. Take pictures with whatever camera you can bear carrying and enjoy the process. Just don't say "Oly HAS to..." . Oly doesn't have to. You HAVE to decide if they fit your need,.... OR not.
I call on you the get rid of your last two remaining Oly DSLR's due to them not performing to your expectations and, don't forget, leave this forum. We deserve a rest.
--
-
Greg
http://www.spanielsport.com/
Louis_Dobson
Forum Pro
but in my view it is not one. It does what a low end dSLR does only... better? Dunno, I'll need to try one.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/acam
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/acam
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum