E-M5 has DR 13!

Started Apr 13, 2012 | Discussions thread
Macx Senior Member • Posts: 1,433
Re: E-M5 has DR 13! - Or, TechRadar Has No Scruples About Sloppiness

Detail Man wrote:

Macx wrote:

That's rather presumptuous. You should be wary making unfounded accusations.

Actually, TechRadar ought to be wary about publishing test results that nobody who has retained any objectivity, and who is not swept-up in some kind of "fanboy fandango", finds to be believable.

When camera testers (surprisingly, and rather strangely) make no mention at all of the RAW processors/converters used in the process of testing and directly comparing camera models they are inviting speculation as to what it is that they are using. Add that to unbelievable results, and nobody should be surprised when people speculate as to what exists unstated "under the covers".

Emotional frenzies that surround a new camera release seem to divorce some from reality. Seeing some launch into delusions of machine-induced granduer speaks volumes as to their intelligence ...

Oh I agree completely. I just think we shouldn't presume malice.

What seems truly presumptuous to me is your annointing yourself as some magisterial arbitrator of merely alleged "truths" that you yourself have no idea of the veracity of. Kind of humorous, indeed - and it makes at least this reader wonder why you are appearing to emotionally identify so with total strangers. Could it be because they are whispering things into your ear that you would like to believe ? If you are somehow offended by my thoughts, or worried about my soul, perhaps you should get a firm grip upon yourself forthwith ... or could that be the problem in the first place?

Where I have done that? If you read my reaction to the review I called them "almost unbelievable" and that I was sceptical and needed more tests before I was ready to believe them. That doesn't sound very magisterial to me. I just don't have the knowledge that I can dismiss them forthright.

The way that you layed-into Iliah Borg recently spoke volumes as to your "better judgment" ...

It might have been bad judgement, and this isn't the place to restart that argument, but I was provoked by his patronizing and passive-aggressive attitude to another poster. He seemed very set on his views and definitions. I don't know who he was other than he seemed to be involved in RAW processing software, but he seemed offended that some people use the camera JPEG engines and CIPA's ISO numbering instead of working with RAW and noise. And I'm not proud of admitting it, but when I encounter stubbornness, I often respond in time. And that is definitely bad judgement. I'm new to these forums, so I hadn't encountered him before.

By the way : Did you happen to notice my use of the terms "(potentially)" and "(if so)" below ?

I did, and appreciate them, but they did feel a bit like afterthoughts, and we should really try to get the facts straight before jumping to conclusions. Jumping to conclusions can be fairly harmless, but when it leads to accusations we should remember that this isn't just a friendly club for gear enthusiasts, but also a very public place.

Detail Man wrote:

jkrumm wrote:

I would guess they are using Viewer to convert to Tiffs, and Viewer clearly has a strong noise filter now for the EM5, even when you turn it off, so it's not surprising they are clean.

I don't know for sure - but I suspect that the Olympus Viewer is not compatible with the (directly compared) Sony NEX-7, Fuji X Pro 1, and Panasonic GX1 RAW image-files ... implying that they are (potentially) using different RAW converters/processors for each different brand of camera model.

Very bad form, indeed. And (if so), no wonder they do not explicitly talk about it. Very flakey.


In the news :

Macxcam wrote:

I hope you don't mind me asking: What RAW software did you use? (And with what settings?)


Good show ! I can't imagine why they would/should have anything(s) to hide from us plebians ...

Thank you. I thought it wouldn't hurt to ask. Let's hope for a meaningful reply.

Oh, and by the way, thank you for the links regarding whether the RAW might be processed from some sort of unknown quantity/capacity of ADC's. My take on it is that the jury is still out, but that is unlikely?

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow