luisflorit
Veteran Member
Let's hope...
L.
--
My gallery: http://luis.impa.br/photos
Oly Ee3 + 12--60 + 50--200 + EeC-14 + Oly EfEl50R
Pany FZee50 + Oly EfEl50 + TeeCon17 + Raynx 150 & 250
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
L.
--
My gallery: http://luis.impa.br/photos
Oly Ee3 + 12--60 + 50--200 + EeC-14 + Oly EfEl50R
Pany FZee50 + Oly EfEl50 + TeeCon17 + Raynx 150 & 250
Wow, you're actually accusing me of double standards? I don't see you posting in every topic on this thread....I post where I choose to, just like you...I wouldn't necessarily call that a double-standard. I hope you have the decency to apologise.
--
Raj Sarma
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rssarma
--
Follow me on Twitter: rssarma
Olympus enthusiasts from NYC Metro, join UKPSG:
http://snipurl.com/crc3n
luisflorit
Veteran Member
Indeed, but that accounts for 80% of my photography. So, for my uses, it is the normal/usual/common case, not the worse.
Anyway, the precise amount of moire will appear in those ugly test charts, so we will see.
L.
--
My gallery: http://luis.impa.br/photos
Oly Ee3 + 12--60 + 50--200 + EeC-14 + Oly EfEl50R
Pany FZee50 + Oly EfEl50 + TeeCon17 + Raynx 150 & 250
Its you who's been saying that the E-5 will have magical JPEGs which will make folks that shoot RAW switch to JPEG...
A statement you wouldn't make if you understood the many reasons why folks choose to shoot RAW to begin with.
--
Raj Sarma
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rssarma
--
Follow me on Twitter: rssarma
Olympus enthusiasts from NYC Metro, join UKPSG:
http://snipurl.com/crc3n
R
Raist3d
Guest
Apologize for what? If you see someone picking on your posts for certain subjects that go ignored when some others bring it up then it's common sense something is a bit off. Of course you post wherever you like. That's besides the point. I said what I said because you pointed something out to me, accusing me of something that there's plenty of evidence to tell someone else, but I don't see you doing so.
shrugs
That's ins't my choice.
--
Raist3d (Photographer & Tools/Systems/Gui Games Developer)
Andreas Feininger (1906-1999) 'Photographers — idiots, of which there are
so many — say, “Oh, if only I had a Nikon or a Leica, I could make great
photographs.” That’s the dumbest thing I ever heard in my life. It’s
nothing but a matter of seeing, and thinking, and interest. That’s what
makes a good photograph.'
R
Raist3d
Guest
[]
Well I am certainly not going to indulge in a JPEG vs RAW discussion because (i) it has been done to death, (ii) there's more than just "anecdotal evidence" many pros do it (just like many do RAW) for their own reasons and (iii) isn't even the point of this thread. As I say, the $8,000 USD Nikon D3x has JPEG for a reason.
I do argue that there are indeed points of diminishing returns and in some fields/jobs/photographers virtually no difference to justify the other side. But that's a RAW vs JPEG discussion. I can even go by the assumption of what you are saying is completely true, no argument, and it doesn't affect the point of the thread.
Hey sorry, I didn't realize that you realized this truth already. So maybe the other truth is that a D7000 is $1,200 USD vs an E-5 for $1,7000 USD. Ditto for the Canon 60D. Of course, apparently for you, shooting Zuiko glass is enough reason, congrats. That's not the boat everyone is in, nor did I address specifically you when I wrote the post in the first place for this thread.
Looks like you are in the group of "I'll shoot raw with my E-5 and I still see no issues with it because I don't see any of the much touted Olympus advantages for their JPEG engine or processing with their RAW converters an advantage". This thread then doesn't really apply to you.
Wow you better start preaching this in this forum. There's so many it seems firmly believe otherwise. Me personally from what I have seen, you can get some results but you have to work more depending on the type of shot.
R
Raist3d
Guest
Most people I see here go for the Olympus colors, but hey, allright, I could be wrong there.
Raist3d (Photographer & Tools/Systems/Gui Games Developer)
They said it is a sensor with a lighter AA filter, just like the E_PL1's was. How much lighter you honestly think it could be to bring anything better vs a competitor. Maybe that't he part that is being missed here. Yes, vs an E-3 this is going to be better. The issue here is the E-5 doesn't exist in a vacuum and invites the question "is it worth the cash being asked?" Maybe to you the choice is "yes" and that's fine. To many that choice becomes tougher if they are married to the "Olympus colors" and yet shoot RAW because you as you say, you can shoot RAW somewhere else and get the Olympus colors.
IN a vacuum yes. The increase of MP counts on competitors also gets a step closer to realize their lenses potentials.
That's true. The LCD that competitors have had for a while.
For you they are. Surely if you are already seeing the advantage pretty much on the Zuiko glass, sure. Certainly you aren't everyone though and then this thread doesn't really address you.
Which is why my post is asking the question and mentioning in the title "the experiment." I am only describing facts and conditions that put some constraints. Certainly I don't know which way - for sure- people will react/decide to those new constraints. I am certainly watching to see what happens. That's all.
You mean the raw shooters and those who dont' get what they want out of JPEG, as I have pointed out, there are indeed pros that get what they need out of JPEG due to preferences, needs, domain of what they shoot and so on. But yes, those who shoot raw.
That's fine and fair. And that's you. Nothing wrong with that.
--
Raist3d (Photographer & Tools/Systems/Gui Games Developer)
R
Raist3d
Guest
Actually that would probably be Olympus, not me. All the things they are saying about their new processing that gets more detail and better color is for JPEG - or their RAW converter (which as pointed now will runs slower).
BTW, I haven't said anything about magical JPEGS, what I have said is the E-5 has a very nice JPEG engine, improved further from the Pens', and is a key advantage vs many competitors (in my opinion of course).
My question in the end is not RAW vs JPEG. It's about people behavior.
--
Raist3d (Photographer & Tools/Systems/Gui Games Developer)
Andreas Feininger (1906-1999) 'Photographers — idiots, of which there are
so many — say, “Oh, if only I had a Nikon or a Leica, I could make great
photographs.” That’s the dumbest thing I ever heard in my life. It’s
nothing but a matter of seeing, and thinking, and interest. That’s what
makes a good photograph.'
R
Raist3d
Guest
Just to clarify- when I said "worst case" I meant "worst case for the algorithms." Yeah, I hear you.
--Anyway, the precise amount of moire will appear in those ugly test charts, so we will see.
L.
--
My gallery: http://luis.impa.br/photos
Oly Ee3 + 12--60 + 50--200 + EeC-14 + Oly EfEl50R
Pany FZee50 + Oly EfEl50 + TeeCon17 + Raynx 150 & 250
Raist3d (Photographer & Tools/Systems/Gui Games Developer)
Andreas Feininger (1906-1999) 'Photographers — idiots, of which there are
so many — say, “Oh, if only I had a Nikon or a Leica, I could make great
photographs.” That’s the dumbest thing I ever heard in my life. It’s
nothing but a matter of seeing, and thinking, and interest. That’s what
makes a good photograph.'
Joe Franek
Senior Member
This is an eye opener for me. I always thought that pro's use RAW, and lots of PP.
I am only an amateur, so I suppose that must be why I do a lot of PP in Adobe Camera Raw. (I shoot Pentax, but unhappy with their zooms. I am considering switching to Olympus for the Zuiko 12-60 zoom).
I do lots of travel photography in Europe - architecture in tight spaces, inside churches, but also landscape.
Almost every shot needs a bit of adjustment of perspective, rotation, white balance, not to mention curves. The ACR has fantastic tools to fix local under/over exposure.
I don't believe that any Olympus camera in the hands of the best pro on Earth will always expose to the satisfaction of the photographer. Maybe studio shots?
All the above adjustments are best done in RAW.
It is not certain at this stage, but it looks like the RAW output from the E-5 will be poorer than the jpegs because the latest image engine seems to be jpeg oriented.
Everything would be OK if Adobe could simulate the Olympus TruePic V+ etc in their raw converter. But I doubt they will do that.
The other option would be to have proprietary Olympus software to do that and to output 16 bit uncompressed TIFF files.
But at this stage it looks to me that the E-5 will be a massive, expensive body producing jpegs.
R
Raist3d
Guest
I just want to be clear, - there are many pros who use jpegs, there are many pros who use RAW, there are many (most?) who use both. When I bring this up I only bring it up in the context that traditionally - as you mentioned- most people think that pros shoot only RAW and do lots of PP.
Again, just some logic invites some questioning of this- Nikon comes out with a D3X which is $8,000 MSRP, and it has a JPEG engine with options. Someone spending $8,000 USD for a body only camera (that is quite big and weighty) I think we can agree is not just the average joe photographer next door. Why else would Nikon spend time on that. Same with Canon high end models.
I just want to make sure I don't come across as suggesting that many pros don't shoot RAW, which wouldn't be true.
(personally I do shoot RAW for my weddings, and for with my Sigma DP2 because the difference between its RAW and JPEG is night and day. I did start shooting raw with my 620 only because I wasn't too happy with the results I was getting with JPEG on that model, due to the increased noise/less DR on shadows due to the Olympus tone curve shift. The E-5 has this shift but given the level of sophistication of the algorithms they now have it will most likely be very fine on that end for me).
--
Raist3d (Photographer & Tools/Systems/Gui Games Developer)
Andreas Feininger (1906-1999) 'Photographers — idiots, of which there are
so many — say, “Oh, if only I had a Nikon or a Leica, I could make great
photographs.” That’s the dumbest thing I ever heard in my life. It’s
nothing but a matter of seeing, and thinking, and interest. That’s what
makes a good photograph.'
Again, just some logic invites some questioning of this- Nikon comes out with a D3X which is $8,000 MSRP, and it has a JPEG engine with options. Someone spending $8,000 USD for a body only camera (that is quite big and weighty) I think we can agree is not just the average joe photographer next door. Why else would Nikon spend time on that. Same with Canon high end models.
I just want to make sure I don't come across as suggesting that many pros don't shoot RAW, which wouldn't be true.
(personally I do shoot RAW for my weddings, and for with my Sigma DP2 because the difference between its RAW and JPEG is night and day. I did start shooting raw with my 620 only because I wasn't too happy with the results I was getting with JPEG on that model, due to the increased noise/less DR on shadows due to the Olympus tone curve shift. The E-5 has this shift but given the level of sophistication of the algorithms they now have it will most likely be very fine on that end for me).
--
Raist3d (Photographer & Tools/Systems/Gui Games Developer)
Andreas Feininger (1906-1999) 'Photographers — idiots, of which there are
so many — say, “Oh, if only I had a Nikon or a Leica, I could make great
photographs.” That’s the dumbest thing I ever heard in my life. It’s
nothing but a matter of seeing, and thinking, and interest. That’s what
makes a good photograph.'
Does anyone recognise the website these test pictures came from? Is the crop on the right even an Olympus camera?I suppose the left shot is shot at 6400 ISO, but with what camera, and what is the data of the right image?
Why did you not tell?
Come on, the E-5 will offer clean ISO 6400. I mean, how can you argue with quality like this?
--
--
Jon
Rriley
Forum Pro
- Messages
- 21,846
- Solutions
- 1
- Reaction score
- 474
Digital Camera Review give some quick and dirty samples if you wanted to see how jpeg and RAW can contrast against each other at high ISO
ISO3200 JPEG, crop straight out of the camera
ISO3200 RAW -> JPEG conversion crop + NeatImage + Unsharp Mask
im pretty sure Imagenomic would improve on this
using DCR ISO3200 RAW conversion with Imagenomic and USM
http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/olympus/e_pl1-review/using
--
Riley
any similarity to persons living or dead is coincidental and unintended
ISO3200 JPEG, crop straight out of the camera
ISO3200 RAW -> JPEG conversion crop + NeatImage + Unsharp Mask
im pretty sure Imagenomic would improve on this
using DCR ISO3200 RAW conversion with Imagenomic and USM
http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/olympus/e_pl1-review/using
--
Riley
any similarity to persons living or dead is coincidental and unintended
Melvinphoto
Forum Enthusiast
No way! You give away control to the final output and RAW conversion is so easy and quick nowadays, no reason to shoot jeepeg at all.
SHG users don't have a pen, they compare to their E3. I think the E5 will give me
1) better DR (compared to E3)
2) better/ stronger battery (really a big pro 300/2.8 needs a lot of juice!)
3) will focus more accurate and more reliable in s-AF and C-AF (I know someone who used E5 for an hour and he stated C-AF was better)
4) better LCD
5) lower noise/ better high iso, also in RAW files
6) much more resolution/ sharper images to celebratel SHG glass
7) movie mode (and the art filters are nice to use in movie mode)
8) art filters. Sometimes I cross process images I publish. I have seen E5 art filters that look nice. It will save me time when I use these as a starting point and tweak them a little more until I get my desired result.
Compared to E3 the E5 is reallu a nice cam. More reasons to buy one? But I will wait until I have seen descent tests/ reviews with RAW images included.
--
http://www.melvinredeker.com
R
Raist3d
Guest
[]
No more than the Pens (in RAW).
[]
It just begs the question how the competition does here and at what price. The E-5 doesn't exist in a vacuum, but certainly someone who is staying 4/3rds only sure, the E-5 is a logical step if they were into the E-3 class size/line/price.
Raist3d (Photographer & Tools/Systems/Gui Games Developer)
Andreas Feininger (1906-1999) 'Photographers — idiots, of which there are
so many — say, “Oh, if only I had a Nikon or a Leica, I could make great
photographs.” That’s the dumbest thing I ever heard in my life. It’s
nothing but a matter of seeing, and thinking, and interest. That’s what
makes a good photograph.'
No more than the Pens (in RAW).
[]
It just begs the question how the competition does here and at what price. The E-5 doesn't exist in a vacuum, but certainly someone who is staying 4/3rds only sure, the E-5 is a logical step if they were into the E-3 class size/line/price.
You can see the E_PL1 raws right now. I don't expect much difference at all from there if what Olympus said is true (which they did say it).
--
Raist3d (Photographer & Tools/Systems/Gui Games Developer)
Andreas Feininger (1906-1999) 'Photographers — idiots, of which there are
so many — say, “Oh, if only I had a Nikon or a Leica, I could make great
photographs.” That’s the dumbest thing I ever heard in my life. It’s
nothing but a matter of seeing, and thinking, and interest. That’s what
makes a good photograph.'
Rriley
Forum Pro
- Messages
- 21,846
- Solutions
- 1
- Reaction score
- 474
maybe this is pertinent to this discussion
http://photofan.jp/camera/html/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=7735&forum=2&viewmode=flat&order=ASC&start=20
--
Riley
any similarity to persons living or dead is coincidental and unintended
http://photofan.jp/camera/html/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=7735&forum=2&viewmode=flat&order=ASC&start=20
--
Riley
any similarity to persons living or dead is coincidental and unintended
Really should be, is the E-5 worth the money? To which the answer is, if you have HG & SHG glass and/or are a working pro, then yes. If not, then there are and have always been better options out there.
This whole thread about how much RAW shooters specifically stand to gain from an E-5 is a pointless question. They stand to gain the same advantages they did when shooting with the E-3, or any other 4/3s body, probably more since no other 4/3s body offers the presumed IQ that the E-5 brings to the table. Conversely they shoot with the same compromises as they did with the E-3 in comparison to other systems, simply because technology has moved ahead parallely.
The fact that you suddenly bring up the price of the E-5, somehow tie it to a RAW shooters dilemma and then compare it to the competition is simply too convoluted and senseless.
--
Raj Sarma
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rssarma
--
Follow me on Twitter: rssarma
Olympus enthusiasts from NYC Metro, join UKPSG:
http://snipurl.com/crc3n
This whole thread about how much RAW shooters specifically stand to gain from an E-5 is a pointless question. They stand to gain the same advantages they did when shooting with the E-3, or any other 4/3s body, probably more since no other 4/3s body offers the presumed IQ that the E-5 brings to the table. Conversely they shoot with the same compromises as they did with the E-3 in comparison to other systems, simply because technology has moved ahead parallely.
The fact that you suddenly bring up the price of the E-5, somehow tie it to a RAW shooters dilemma and then compare it to the competition is simply too convoluted and senseless.
--
Raj Sarma
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rssarma
--
Follow me on Twitter: rssarma
Olympus enthusiasts from NYC Metro, join UKPSG:
http://snipurl.com/crc3n
Don't know if this test is representative of the gain in detail and resolution, if it is the E5 might bring us a nice surprise. It blows the other cams away in this test. E3 is just a blurry mess compared to E5. Hopefully dpreview and others will test the E5 soon.
http://photofan.jp/...mp ;forum=2&viewmode=flat&order=ASC&start=20
http://photofan.jp/...mp ;forum=2&viewmode=flat&order=ASC&start=20
Big Ga
Forum Pro
I think you'll find that there is a HUGE preponderance towards those that use RAW. In some fields, you'll be hard pressed to find a JPG shooter at all nowadays.
If only 5% of high end canikon users needed JPG and the manufacturers left it off, there would be uproar.
JPG has an important place for the pro photographer who needs to get images quickly off the line and into production.
I know for me it saves me a ton of time to have a nice jpg image to start with instead of having the fix everything with a raw converter. If I save 5 min on 500 wedding images you can see the time savings, and we all know time = money.
Surely Olympus will have a good RAW converter for the E5 so if people did choose to shoot RAW they could get equally nice results.
But to me, as a JPEG shooter, the fact that Olympus gets it more consistently right straight out of the camera than competitors is a huge reason I stay with them. And I'm sure many other people as well. It might be the number 1 reason.
I know for me it saves me a ton of time to have a nice jpg image to start with instead of having the fix everything with a raw converter. If I save 5 min on 500 wedding images you can see the time savings, and we all know time = money.
Surely Olympus will have a good RAW converter for the E5 so if people did choose to shoot RAW they could get equally nice results.
But to me, as a JPEG shooter, the fact that Olympus gets it more consistently right straight out of the camera than competitors is a huge reason I stay with them. And I'm sure many other people as well. It might be the number 1 reason.