Olympus needs new sensors and new cameras...

roberthd12 said:

Not certain why everyone is attacking this poster. We have to stop trashing anyone who offers an opinion that suggests that Canon is a bit ahead of Oly in terms of DSLR development.

We love Oly, but trashing those who point out some Canon benefits certainly doesn't make us look very objective.
--
Roberthd12

Click to expand...

I don't see anyone "trashing" the poster so much as pointing out that singling out a situational advantage by saying that Olympus is behind the times demonstrates either a lack of in depth understanding of cameras and photography, or a failure to communicate in a balanced way.

I could ask why Canon is so hopelessly behind Olympus when it comes to .jpeg quality (including why, comparatively speaking they get much less quality from an 18MP aps-c sensor than Olympus gets from a 10MP 4/3 sensore). Or why Canon still can't seem to get dust reduction to work well. Or why they not only have poor LV, but seem to think that articulating lcds are only for "amateur" cameras like the SX20.

Works both ways.

--

Some people operate cameras. Others use them to create images. There is a difference.

http://ikkens.zenfolio.com/

http://sarob-w.deviantart.com/

Everdog said:

So the new Canon T2i sensor has a 5.4 MP/cm² pixel density. My old E-620 has a 5.1 MP/cm² pixel density (better right?). Which one does better in low light and performs better at high ISOs? It's not even close. The tests I have done so far with the Canon at ISO 6400 look much better than my E-620 at ISO 3200. Amazingly too, it can resolve those 18MP sharply with a good lens.

I was really hoping that Olympus was trying to catch up, and they may stilll be, but the bar keeps getting higher. I love the Olympus glass and the features on cameras like the E-620 can't be beat, but in the world of technology you can't get a couple years behind.

Click to expand...

if you think that then you should probably switch systems

Also with your 7D and 5D Mark 2, with their 18 and 21 megapixel 'advantage', you'd get higher resolution and better low light chromatic aberration, so beware of the lenses you match your camera with, and beware all the more, mate!

Better low light capability does not mean better photos, of course you'd get a more exposed photo, but without a defined light source or shadows, you'd have a coloured version of an infrared shot, flat, lifeless and featureless.

Remember photography is all about "Painting with Light" so for goodness sakes, paint with light and not with high ISO.

I can't believe how many ignorant posts went by before someone ELSE said something. Sometimes I think the biggest problem with Olympus is the blatant arrogance and ignorance of a large portion of it's users. It's almost as if being one-sided, narrow-minded, overly-defensive and just blatantly rude are prerequisites for Olympus ownership.

RLPruitt, Ansel Adams, Helmut, Newton, etc., would still not be able to take photographs in a less than ideally lit church without some objectionable levels of noise and/or motion blur caused by a moving subject, which is something that IS for some strange reason just doesn't seem to eliminate. I'm sure they could have taken equally good photos with a cardboard throw away camera from Quicktrip but that fact didn't stop you from spending money on Olympus gear. That tends to make that argument slightly hypocritical. If the gear is NOT important, why is this an OLY 4/3's dslr forum rather than simply a general photography one?

To those touting the performance of the pen cameras: You make the point that there are legitimate situations that call for higher ISO and then you mention that you have to change from your weatherproof, ruggedly built, "professional" E-3 to a camera that is different enough from the one you've previously invested your hard-earned cash in, that it warrants a separate forum. Basically you help substantiate the OP's argument, only instead of a Canon, it's a completely different Olympus camera. I guess it's ok to admit that Olympus has some shortcomings as long as there is another Olympus product that you can switch to to rectify them.

If Olympus somehow found a way to stuff 30mp in its 4/3's sensor and at the same time raise the usable ISO to 12800 or better with the tonal quality of the sensor that was in the old e-1 and 500, and then offer the resulting camera at the same price that you can buy an e-3 for now, I wonder many people would come out of the closet and purchase one? I'm quite sure that a whole lot of the ignorant folks that seem to be the first ones to respond to threads such as this one would be over in the Canon forums doing everything they despise when it happens here.

For the record, I have 2 Oly bodies, a lowly 410, and a very slightly less lowly 510. The 410 has a 12-60 more or less permanently mounted to it, and the 510, a 50-200 classic. I have 2 sets of the kit lenses, including one old-school 40-150. I will soon have a used 150mm f2. Every single Oly piece I own I've gotten for an incredible price, most notably the 12-60, $300 brand new, when Circuit City went out of business. The enjoyment I've gotten from it all in itself is worth many times what I paid, not to mention the the actual money I've made with my mediocre photography skill. I can never say enough good about what I have. But with all that said, I still recognize that there are shortcomings that at times limit what I try to accomplish with my photography.Talking about these deficiencies in no way negates the good aspects, nor does it stop me from improving my skills.

There is a well-known member here that over the course of a year or so, posted numerous photos of a FENCE! I don't recall too many people complaining that they had seen that fence before, 9458595281 F'ing2imes. It's a gear forum, expect to hear the good, and expect to hear the bad, over and over and over. It's the rudeness that should be banned.

My E-3 is old (2007).

My E-1 is ancient (2003).

The E-620 is neither (March 2009 - just 1 year old).

Either you like your camera or you don't. It's age has nothing to do with it.

--
Good shooting.

• Adam

Equipment in plan

Everdog said:

So the new Canon T2i sensor has a 5.4 MP/cm² pixel density. My old E-620 has a 5.1 MP/cm² pixel density (better right?). Which one does better in low light and performs better at high ISOs? It's not even close. The tests I have done so far with the Canon at ISO 6400 look much better than my E-620 at ISO 3200. Amazingly too, it can resolve those 18MP sharply with a good lens.

Click to expand...

Yes, credit where it's due. I noticed Canon have managed to combine good results with small photosites from the 7D RAW files.

Everdog said:

I was really hoping that Olympus was trying to catch up, and they may stilll be, but the bar keeps getting higher. I love the Olympus glass and the features on cameras like the E-620 can't be beat, but in the world of technology you can't get a couple years behind.

Click to expand...

I think Olympus' problems have stemmed from the fact that the company does not manufacture/design it's own sensors, and is therefore reliant on sub-contractors for supply. That's ok to a point, but with that business model you lose a measure of control and not afford to be as prescriptive as "in-house" design manufacture.

I would suggest they are waiting for the new Panasonic sensor plant to come on-stream for a supply of improved sensors. There have been rumblings of Fuji becomming a supplier, but I think they will stay with Panasonic for other economic reasons. Until a few years ago Nikon were also at a disadvantage against Canon, until their supplier raised the standard. Hopefully we will see gains in performance as the supplier brings new sensors into production later this year.

mrhodges2 said:

There is a well-known member here that over the course of a year or so, posted numerous photos of a FENCE! I don't recall too many people complaining that they had seen that fence before, 9458595281 F'ing2imes.

Click to expand...

it's actually over a two year period and less than 50 photos of the fence have been posted.

The first was this:

mrhodges2 said:

It's a gear forum, expect to hear the good, and expect to hear the bad, over and over and over. It's the rudeness that should be banned.

Click to expand...

Perhaps a look in the mirror might be appropriate.

mrhodges2 said:

mrhodges2 said:

Bill Turner

Click to expand...

Please do not copy or edit my photos without my permission.

Click to expand...

I take that as a simple fact and don't worry too much about it. However, they are up there with the best when it comes to dynamic range, OOC performance, colour and optics. These too, I take as fact and get on with my photography whenever the light and time allows.

--
Regards
J

Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/jasonhindleuk



http://www.flickr.com/photos/jason_hindle

Gear in profile

Pimpleportrait said:

Also with your 7D and 5D Mark 2, with their 18 and 21 megapixel 'advantage', you'd get higher resolution and better low light chromatic aberration, so beware of the lenses you match your camera with, and beware all the more, mate!

Click to expand...

All the more reason that OLYMPUS users would benefit from the megapixel advantage. The lenses that we speak so highly of....

Pimpleportrait said:

Better low light capability does not mean better photos, of course you'd get a more exposed photo, but without a defined light source or shadows, you'd have a coloured version of an infrared shot, flat, lifeless and featureless.

Click to expand...

It genuinely makes US Olympus users look defensive and paranoid when statements like that are made, as if low adding low ISO capability subtracts from a person's ability to distinguish a good photo from a bad one. The two issues are not related, and trying to link them only points out how hard we try to defend our "sacred" camera from any criticism, warranted or not.

Pimpleportrait said:

Remember photography is all about "Painting with Light" so for goodness sakes, paint with light and not with high ISO.

Click to expand...

When I "try" to paint with light in situations where light is at a premium, it doesn't help me much to paint some portions of the portrait black, only do discover that someone has mixed streaks, blotches and BANDS of BLUE in my black paint.

My son's out-of-town girlfriend had a dance recital that her parents invited us to attend. They paid for our accommodations and made sure we were quite comfortable.

Though photography was not allowed at the actual performance, we were there in time for me to shoot the dress rehearsal the evening before. One of the scenes had Alicia dancing with her father, who was to secretly change into a tux and appear onstage. (a total surprise to her mother) During the rehearsal they both fell at the end of the song. They both raised their heads at the same time and looked at the director, laughing! Among everything else, I was able to capture that moment. However, there was the dreaded "you know what" in the darker portions of otherwise very good photos. Fortunately for me, because it was a rehearsal, they practiced most segments more than once, which allowed me to capture That night, I worked like heck to sort through and PP approximately 800 photos (the 3 hour recital involved some 30 different scenes with over 500 participants) and have them ready to print the next morning. The parents and their daughter were in tears when we presented them with the 12x16 prints (along with the customary roses) the next evening after the actual performance. Though the results were far from totally unacceptable, a few more stops of clean, usable ISO would have been a BIG help.

Robert

chuckielpn said:

Oh.... i'm guessing because the OP is beating a dead horse and not really saying that olympus users don't know or haven't heard for the 9458595281 T2imes.

Click to expand...

Actually I am just pointing out that the 4/3 sensor is not too small to perform great at higher ISOs. I am happy with a 12 MP sensor and Canon has proved that a 5.4 MP/cm² pixel density sensor is able to take good pictures up to ISO 6400.

In the past people have claimed that its the sensors fault because of size and Olympus need to come out with APC or FF cameras. That is not true and Canon proved it for us!

We just need Olympus to step up. And btw, I still recommend Olympus to most people.

I in no way meant to offend you nor was I saying anything bad about "the Fence". On the contrary, my use of that example was to make the statement that there should be as much tolerance for the repetition of what is perceived as "bad", in this case the lack of high ISO performance and related ability to have a high pixel density in a smaller sensor without noise, as there is for something that was obviously was "good", like the fence series.

If I DIDN'T like your fence series, my response should and would have been to offer some sort of constructive criticism directed at your work, not at YOU. If I didn't at least have that to offer, there are a whole lot of other threads I could occupy my time with, like the HDR car photos you do that I really like, or any number of other topics that exist here. Simply put, this is an Olympus gear forum. Whether negative or positive, discussion of the gear is what is encouraged and expected. That should include both the positive and the negative aspects. It should not include the crossing of the line between attacking a person because of his views on the gear. If more prominent members such as yourself were as quick to call out this type of behavior against someone else as you were in your response to me in defense of yourself, this would probably evolve into a much nicer place.

Bootstrap said:

Bootstrap said:

It's a gear forum, expect to hear the good, and expect to hear the bad, over and over and over. It's the rudeness that should be banned.

Click to expand...

Perhaps a look in the mirror might be appropriate.

Bootstrap said:

Bootstrap said:

Bill Turner

Click to expand...

Please do not copy or edit my photos without my permission.

Click to expand...

--

Click to expand...

Thanks for the response and you are correct in that a more active role on my part might be better. I've, lately, resisted posting in the more contentious threads as, in general, many of them serve no purpose.
--

mrhodges2 said:

mrhodges2 said:

Bill Turner

Click to expand...

Please do not copy or edit my photos without my permission.

Click to expand...

With 18mp resolution for the T2i, how big are the file sizes? I ask this because as file size increases more disk space is needed and the photos become less portable. I am for keeping things at a reasonable 12mp.

Ron
--

E-30, E-510 (with 51r), E-330, ZD 11-22, ZD14-54, ZD40-150 Mk II, FL-36, ZD50 f2, Sigma 135-400, Manfrotto tripod and head

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ronjoiner/
http://joiner.shutterchance.com/

Definitely. An active role on a large number of our parts would probably work wonders. The OP has made a very valid and legitimate argument. Count the number of rude replies he received before someone actually says something about it. Look at the rudeness Olyflyer is treated with now that he has an unmentionable brand camera. We all get more out of a conversation when one simple rule is followed. Good or bad, it's about the gear, not the person.

Olympus has really been a pioneer in a lot of areas that we all agree are not given the credit due. Slowly but surely other manufacturers seem to take numerous innovations that Olympus introduced to the market and incorporate them into their products all while giving them no credit. Oly for the longest time needed only to take ONE of theirs and run with it and we would have a product HERE that would be second to NONE. If that opportunity slips away...

Robert

I just thought of something that made me laugh. An ostrich is one big a-- bird! An ostrich with his head in the ground just looks like one big a--. If he were to pull his head out of the ground and spend his time figuring out how to do just one thing better, FLY, he'd be one big a-- kicking bird!

There is probably a lesson in there somewhere, for Olympus as well as me.

Robert

mrhodges2 said:

It genuinely makes US Olympus users look defensive and paranoid when statements like that are made, as if low adding low ISO capability subtracts from a person's ability to distinguish a good photo from a bad one. The two issues are not related, and trying to link them only points out how hard we try to defend our "sacred" camera from any criticism, warranted or not.

Click to expand...

While I can agree that some people are inherently defensive of any given brand, I would have to say that the hype attached to entry level cameras means that the things you mentioned are related. I'm not trying to "defend a sacred camera" as much as point out that the OP has made a blanket statement that deals with a situational value and is therefore not entirely accurate comparison

Someone with little or no knowledge of the photographic process decides to buy a dslr. He read the ads, visit forums etc. He sees constant harping about how one camera is superior because it has more MP and better high ISO performance. Why are these better? Uh, well, because...more is better.

He naturally assumes that someone who speaks with expertise about the technical aspects of a camera must really know his stuff, and by extension must really know photography. He doesn't have the knowledge or experience to recognize how often this sort of forum is dominated by fanboys, or at least gear heads who first and foremost judge photos by such things as high ISO performance and resolution, rarely considering genuine aesthetics unless the first 2 criteria are met. He things these people are giving balanced opinions, but they aren't.

Said shopper walks into a store, asking supposedly knowledgeable and helpful sales person about a dslr. Again, he is exposed to the litany of more MP and higher ISO is better. So he walks out with a Canon T2i convinced that he will take better photos than with an E620. Why? Because everything he read and heard said that is the way it works.

He decides that since his T2i can give "amazing" results at ISO6400 he will not bother with flash. Even in situations where a pro or more experienced photographer will use flash to ensure the best results. He probably leaves the camera on auto when he shoots stage shows.

In the end, this person doesn't really know what really goes into producing good photos because he has come to assume he doesn't have to learn what makes for good photos . He figures the camera can make photos good because that's what the ads and the salesperson said would happen.

So he posts improperly exposed low light photos with murky shadows and odd WB but dang, it MUST be good because there isn't much noise compared to that other camera. Meanwhile a more experienced photographer is grimacing at the flaws in what otherwise be an engagin photo.

Does the OP fit this description? I don't know. But his words do reflect the symptoms of Acute Equipment Dependency. ;-)

--

Some people operate cameras. Others use them to create images. There is a difference.

http://ikkens.zenfolio.com/

http://sarob-w.deviantart.com/

Everdog said:

chuckielpn said:

Oh.... i'm guessing because the OP is beating a dead horse and not really saying that olympus users don't know or haven't heard for the 9458595281 T2imes.

Click to expand...

Actually I am just pointing out that the 4/3 sensor is not too small to perform great at higher ISOs. I am happy with a 12 MP sensor and Canon has proved that a 5.4 MP/cm² pixel density sensor is able to take good pictures up to ISO 6400.

In the past people have claimed that its the sensors fault because of size and Olympus need to come out with APC or FF cameras. That is not true and Canon proved it for us!

We just need Olympus to step up. And btw, I still recommend Olympus to most people.

Click to expand...

Ok fair enough. How do we know Olympus isn't stepping up with the next generation of cameras? ;-)
--

Some people operate cameras. Others use them to create images. There is a difference.

http://ikkens.zenfolio.com/

http://sarob-w.deviantart.com/

mrhodges2 said:

I just thought of something that made me laugh. An ostrich is one big a-- bird! An ostrich with his head in the ground just looks like one big a--. If he were to pull his head out of the ground and spend his time figuring out how to do just one thing better, FLY, he'd be one big a-- kicking bird!

There is probably a lesson in there somewhere, for Olympus as well as me.

Robert

Click to expand...

Yes; the lesson is that an ostrich can run faster than predators that chase it. And if one does get too close, it can deliver a lethal kick. What it does works quite well. It doesn't miss being able to fly because it doesn't need to. An ostrich is just as good at being an ostrich as a swallow is at being a swallow.

So the lesson is that Olympus does what it has chosen to emphasize quite well. It works. Because this doesn't involve "flying" doesn't mean Olympus has failed. It means that people, (as you are with this analogy) are comparing the ostrich to a swallow and assuming the lack of flight is a shortcoming.

BTW, Ostriches don't stick their heads in the sand when they are afraid. ;-)

--

Some people operate cameras. Others use them to create images. There is a difference.

http://ikkens.zenfolio.com/

http://sarob-w.deviantart.com/

Don't hold your breath for either one.

--
'And only the stump, or fishy part of him remained'

http://www2.gol.com/users/nhavens
A Contemplative Companion to Fujino Township

CharlesB58 said:

Everdog said:

chuckielpn said:

Oh.... i'm guessing because the OP is beating a dead horse and not really saying that olympus users don't know or haven't heard for the 9458595281 T2imes.

Click to expand...

Actually I am just pointing out that the 4/3 sensor is not too small to perform great at higher ISOs. I am happy with a 12 MP sensor and Canon has proved that a 5.4 MP/cm² pixel density sensor is able to take good pictures up to ISO 6400.

In the past people have claimed that its the sensors fault because of size and Olympus need to come out with APC or FF cameras. That is not true and Canon proved it for us!

We just need Olympus to step up. And btw, I still recommend Olympus to most people.

Click to expand...

Ok fair enough. How do we know Olympus isn't stepping up with the next generation of cameras? ;-)
--

Some people operate cameras. Others use them to create images. There is a difference.

http://ikkens.zenfolio.com/

http://sarob-w.deviantart.com/

Click to expand...

I really hope so. When I bought my E-620, my plan was to spend money on the great Olympus lenses and then upgrade to a newer camera that will have better ISO performence and maybe a movie mode.