Reading mode: Light Dark

OM-D : which sensor??? Is it official???

Go to last post
Pixnat2 said:
Louis_Dobson said:
Won't be "official" until the 8th.
Click to expand...
Ok, so what a fuss about a rumor!
Pixnat2 said:
The cat is well and truly out of the bag now though, but if you only believe official announcements, then you'll have to wait.
Click to expand...
Of course I don't believe rumors.
Pixnat2 said:
I don't think anyone is saying the GX1 sensor is a POS. But the two design goals seem to be cheap, and good at high ISO, at the expense of low ISO DR.

That doesn't make it a POS.

It does make it just the sort of sensor I don't want though, and clearly a lot of people feel the same.
Click to expand...
I will not be happy if it's really the GX1 sensor.

Of course I would prefer the GH2 sensor too. I don't give a sh*t about ISO 64000000 and would prefer better DR.

But hey, we don't know yet which sensor it is!
Click to expand...
That's right, and more important, you don't know which ADC system it is. It looks like the Panasonic sensors have analog readout, because the readout characteristics of the Olympus and panasonic are different, suggesting they are using different circuitry. The low ISO DR thing is a readout circuitry issue, so if Olympus has done a very good job they could give good DR. The sensor will yield over 12 stops of DR, it depends whether the ADC can capture that. In the past, Olympus' ADC has been worse than Panasonic's but maybe they have pushed the boat out.
--
Bob
 
"hi DR and low noise are the same thing" ??
not in my book, let's just wait and see what this thing does

--
Neil
http://about.me/buchangrant
 
DR is the space between the noise floor and overload (which is a given).

So low noise = high DR at any given ISO.

Of course what people tend to mean by "low noise" is the "low noise / high DR at high ISO" and tend to mean by high DR is "high low noise/ high DR at low ISO".
Buchan-Grant said:
"hi DR and low noise are the same thing" ??
not in my book, let's just wait and see what this thing does

--
Neil
http://about.me/buchangrant
Click to expand...
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/acam
http://thegentlemansnapper.blogspot.com
 
Louis_Dobson said:
DR is the space between the noise floor and overload (which is a given).

So low noise = high DR at any given ISO.

Of course what people tend to mean by "low noise" is the "low noise / high DR at high ISO" and tend to mean by high DR is "high low noise/ high DR at low ISO".
Click to expand...
There are two major sources of noise and people sometimes don't differentiate between them. Photon shot noise is the one you usually see, it is the noise in the light striking the sensor itself and is dependent on the number of photons collected (which is why it is favoured by bright light and big sensors). Read noise is the electronic noise, and has no dependency on the amount of light, and therefore determines the 'noise floor' which will mask image content below it. As you say, the DR is the ratio of maximum to minimum, dictated by this noise floor. The smaller the noise floor for the same maximum the more DR you get. The thing is though, most of the noise you see is shot noise, so the same DR range can appear very different visually, depending on how much light has been captured to achieve that DR.

--
Bob
 
Louis, what is this supposed to mean? "high low noise/ high DR at low ISO".

I'm not really looking for an answer, life is too short, I'm just going to wait and test this body out whenever I can get my hands on one:)

--
Neil
http://about.me/buchangrant
 
Louis_Dobson said:
Well, if we get the GH2 sensor I will be delighted, and I'll put my money where my mouth is - instant pre-order.

But I don't think we will, and I doubt you do either :-)
Click to expand...
Oh sure, I'm not expecting the GH2 sensor either. I just think that the IS mechanism is one of the least likely reasons for its absence.

I suspect it's simply the G3/GX1 sensor, which isn't all bad if you look at the DxO data. Its only weakness is the leveling off of the DR curve for low ISO values. I'm not sure if this is all down to the silicon design, or whether Olympus has a chance to use higher-spec readout circuitry. [although banding issues in the past don't give me much hope for that either]
 
bobn2 said:
Louis_Dobson said:
DR is the space between the noise floor and overload (which is a given).

So low noise = high DR at any given ISO.

Of course what people tend to mean by "low noise" is the "low noise / high DR at high ISO" and tend to mean by high DR is "high low noise/ high DR at low ISO".
Click to expand...
There are two major sources of noise and people sometimes don't differentiate between them. Photon shot noise is the one you usually see, it is the noise in the light striking the sensor itself and is dependent on the number of photons collected (which is why it is favoured by bright light and big sensors). Read noise is the electronic noise, and has no dependency on the amount of light, and therefore determines the 'noise floor' which will mask image content below it. As you say, the DR is the ratio of maximum to minimum, dictated by this noise floor. The smaller the noise floor for the same maximum the more DR you get. The thing is though, most of the noise you see is shot noise, so the same DR range can appear very different visually, depending on how much light has been captured to achieve that DR.
Click to expand...
The G3/GX1 sensor has more DR at higher ISO than the GH2, which make me think that if Olympus was able to lower the read noise then we would get better performance all around than the GH2.

--
http://www.pbase.com/dot_borg
 
dotborg said:
bobn2 said:
Louis_Dobson said:
DR is the space between the noise floor and overload (which is a given).

So low noise = high DR at any given ISO.

Of course what people tend to mean by "low noise" is the "low noise / high DR at high ISO" and tend to mean by high DR is "high low noise/ high DR at low ISO".
Click to expand...
There are two major sources of noise and people sometimes don't differentiate between them. Photon shot noise is the one you usually see, it is the noise in the light striking the sensor itself and is dependent on the number of photons collected (which is why it is favoured by bright light and big sensors). Read noise is the electronic noise, and has no dependency on the amount of light, and therefore determines the 'noise floor' which will mask image content below it. As you say, the DR is the ratio of maximum to minimum, dictated by this noise floor. The smaller the noise floor for the same maximum the more DR you get. The thing is though, most of the noise you see is shot noise, so the same DR range can appear very different visually, depending on how much light has been captured to achieve that DR.
Click to expand...
The G3/GX1 sensor has more DR at higher ISO than the GH2, which make me think that if Olympus was able to lower the read noise then we would get better performance all around than the GH2.
Click to expand...
It should be within their power, but they haven't managed it before. Maybe if they've been given the budget to buy a new sensor, they'll be able to buy a better ADC too.
--
Bob
 
bobn2 said:
dotborg said:
bobn2 said:
Louis_Dobson said:
DR is the space between the noise floor and overload (which is a given).

So low noise = high DR at any given ISO.

Of course what people tend to mean by "low noise" is the "low noise / high DR at high ISO" and tend to mean by high DR is "high low noise/ high DR at low ISO".
Click to expand...
There are two major sources of noise and people sometimes don't differentiate between them. Photon shot noise is the one you usually see, it is the noise in the light striking the sensor itself and is dependent on the number of photons collected (which is why it is favoured by bright light and big sensors). Read noise is the electronic noise, and has no dependency on the amount of light, and therefore determines the 'noise floor' which will mask image content below it. As you say, the DR is the ratio of maximum to minimum, dictated by this noise floor. The smaller the noise floor for the same maximum the more DR you get. The thing is though, most of the noise you see is shot noise, so the same DR range can appear very different visually, depending on how much light has been captured to achieve that DR.
Click to expand...
The G3/GX1 sensor has more DR at higher ISO than the GH2, which make me think that if Olympus was able to lower the read noise then we would get better performance all around than the GH2.
Click to expand...
It should be within their power, but they haven't managed it before. Maybe if they've been given the budget to buy a new sensor, they'll be able to buy a better ADC too.
Click to expand...
Even if not, the G3/GX1 sensor is still an improvement over the old 12 mega-pixel sensor.

--
http://www.pbase.com/dot_borg
 
dotborg said:
bobn2 said:
dotborg said:
bobn2 said:
Louis_Dobson said:
DR is the space between the noise floor and overload (which is a given).

So low noise = high DR at any given ISO.

Of course what people tend to mean by "low noise" is the "low noise / high DR at high ISO" and tend to mean by high DR is "high low noise/ high DR at low ISO".
Click to expand...
There are two major sources of noise and people sometimes don't differentiate between them. Photon shot noise is the one you usually see, it is the noise in the light striking the sensor itself and is dependent on the number of photons collected (which is why it is favoured by bright light and big sensors). Read noise is the electronic noise, and has no dependency on the amount of light, and therefore determines the 'noise floor' which will mask image content below it. As you say, the DR is the ratio of maximum to minimum, dictated by this noise floor. The smaller the noise floor for the same maximum the more DR you get. The thing is though, most of the noise you see is shot noise, so the same DR range can appear very different visually, depending on how much light has been captured to achieve that DR.
Click to expand...
The G3/GX1 sensor has more DR at higher ISO than the GH2, which make me think that if Olympus was able to lower the read noise then we would get better performance all around than the GH2.
Click to expand...
It should be within their power, but they haven't managed it before. Maybe if they've been given the budget to buy a new sensor, they'll be able to buy a better ADC too.
Click to expand...
Even if not, the G3/GX1 sensor is still an improvement over the old 12 mega-pixel sensor.
Click to expand...
A huge improvement. One third the read noise, more resolution, better quantum efficiency. Win, win, win.
--
Bob
 
Not much of a win....
dotborg said:
bobn2 said:
dotborg said:
bobn2 said:
Louis_Dobson said:
DR is the space between the noise floor and overload (which is a given).

So low noise = high DR at any given ISO.

Of course what people tend to mean by "low noise" is the "low noise / high DR at high ISO" and tend to mean by high DR is "high low noise/ high DR at low ISO".
Click to expand...
There are two major sources of noise and people sometimes don't differentiate between them. Photon shot noise is the one you usually see, it is the noise in the light striking the sensor itself and is dependent on the number of photons collected (which is why it is favoured by bright light and big sensors). Read noise is the electronic noise, and has no dependency on the amount of light, and therefore determines the 'noise floor' which will mask image content below it. As you say, the DR is the ratio of maximum to minimum, dictated by this noise floor. The smaller the noise floor for the same maximum the more DR you get. The thing is though, most of the noise you see is shot noise, so the same DR range can appear very different visually, depending on how much light has been captured to achieve that DR.
Click to expand...
The G3/GX1 sensor has more DR at higher ISO than the GH2, which make me think that if Olympus was able to lower the read noise then we would get better performance all around than the GH2.
Click to expand...
It should be within their power, but they haven't managed it before. Maybe if they've been given the budget to buy a new sensor, they'll be able to buy a better ADC too.
Click to expand...
Even if not, the G3/GX1 sensor is still an improvement over the old 12 mega-pixel sensor.

--
http://www.pbase.com/dot_borg
Click to expand...
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/acam
http://thegentlemansnapper.blogspot.com
 
Louis_Dobson said:
dotborg said:
bobn2 said:
dotborg said:
bobn2 said:
Louis_Dobson said:
DR is the space between the noise floor and overload (which is a given).

So low noise = high DR at any given ISO.

Of course what people tend to mean by "low noise" is the "low noise / high DR at high ISO" and tend to mean by high DR is "high low noise/ high DR at low ISO".
Click to expand...
There are two major sources of noise and people sometimes don't differentiate between them. Photon shot noise is the one you usually see, it is the noise in the light striking the sensor itself and is dependent on the number of photons collected (which is why it is favoured by bright light and big sensors). Read noise is the electronic noise, and has no dependency on the amount of light, and therefore determines the 'noise floor' which will mask image content below it. As you say, the DR is the ratio of maximum to minimum, dictated by this noise floor. The smaller the noise floor for the same maximum the more DR you get. The thing is though, most of the noise you see is shot noise, so the same DR range can appear very different visually, depending on how much light has been captured to achieve that DR.
Click to expand...
The G3/GX1 sensor has more DR at higher ISO than the GH2, which make me think that if Olympus was able to lower the read noise then we would get better performance all around than the GH2.
Click to expand...
It should be within their power, but they haven't managed it before. Maybe if they've been given the budget to buy a new sensor, they'll be able to buy a better ADC too.
Click to expand...
Even if not, the G3/GX1 sensor is still an improvement over the old 12 mega-pixel sensor.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Depends what you were expecting. Olympus has gone form a sensor like this:



to one like this



That's a serious improvement, 1/3 of the electronic noise. Really, quite as good as this:



You're simply not going to get more base ISO DR without a Sony sensor, or some other special sauce in the ADC.
--
Bob
 
Louis_Dobson said:
Maybe it doesn't.... I always assumed it would use a GX1 chip, but now I know more about that chip than I did two days ago I can see that Oly, if they have any sense, will have moved heaven and Earth to get something better.

We shall see.
Click to expand...
... which sensor it is? Wait for DxO Labs to run their evaluation suite on it? Expect some little bird will tell someone in the press where the sensor came from? Take the camera apart to look for size and trademarks? In short, how shall we see?
--
http://www.pbase.com/morepix
 
I seriously think that LD needs some time to cool.. He's way too agitated for all this. Afterall, as far as I have understood he ain't in imminent danger or anything (besides bursting a vein ?) so IMHO that amount of Rant aint' really justifiable..

But.. this is not my forum.. and I'm not about to complain to moderatos or anything..
Buchan-Grant said:
Louis, what is this supposed to mean? "high low noise/ high DR at low ISO".

I'm not really looking for an answer, life is too short, I'm just going to wait and test this body out whenever I can get my hands on one:)

--
Neil
http://about.me/buchangrant
Click to expand...
 
morepix said:
Louis_Dobson said:
Maybe it doesn't.... I always assumed it would use a GX1 chip, but now I know more about that chip than I did two days ago I can see that Oly, if they have any sense, will have moved heaven and Earth to get something better.

We shall see.
Click to expand...
... which sensor it is? Wait for DxO Labs to run their evaluation suite on it? Expect some little bird will tell someone in the press where the sensor came from? Take the camera apart to look for size and trademarks? In short, how shall we see?
--
Click to expand...
Most likely he don't know.. And even if he knew, what good that amount of rant would do? It won't make the camera any better, nor apparently make him feel better either...
 
I'm beginning to think LD is nothing more than a miserable cantankerous old twit for whom nothing will ever be good enough, especially if it bears the name Panasonic...

He seems to be the only one around here who genuinely hates the GH2 - a camera that is hard to beat in any department, especially it's ergonomics and functionality - perhaps it's just a shade too complex for him?

Just to keep on topic - I'm wondering if Oly perhaps will get the GH2 sensor as Panasonic will shortly be moving their flagship on to the GH3 with perhaps something even better - sensor-wise?
 
SidSnot said:
I'm beginning to think LD is nothing more than a miserable cantankerous old twit ...
Click to expand...
Yes, Andy Rooney rides again! But I still want to know how "you" (how anyone) will know what the pedigree of the sensor is once the camera is out and in your hand. Will all be revealed somehow, or will it remain a mystery?
--
http://www.pbase.com/morepix
 
But I still want to know how "you" (how anyone) will know what the pedigree of the sensor is once the camera is out and in your hand. Will all be revealed somehow, or will it remain a mystery?
morepix said:
--
Click to expand...
Well it's usually revealed in the photographic web sites/forums - one way or another we manage to get this sort of info sooner or later....
 
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