Reading mode: Light Dark

Olympus C-5050 Review on Dpreview!!!

Go to last post
Alfred Molon said:
Only 'Recommended'
Click to expand...
Phil has never given an Olympus camera a highly recommended review. He should have tested the C4040Z...that was a terrific camera, and would smoke many another camera in it's class for image quality.
 
I'd think comparing C-5050 shots with sharpening set to 0 with F717 or G3 also with sharpening set to 0 is the only fair comparison because that's the default setting! Do you think setting one camera sharpening to -5 and the other to +5 will give you a fair or equal comparison?

James
Alfred Molon said:
Only 'Recommended'

He probably made all tests with sharpening set to 0, which would
explain the noise and the jaggies.

--

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Olympus4040_5050/
http://www.molon.de/Galleries.htm
Click to expand...
 
Probably it wouldn't. The kind of "CA" that appears on highlighted areas is the effect of CCD blooming that amplifies the original (but smaller) lens CA. It's a hardware issue (entirely sensor related). There are some anti-blooming techniques but they have they compromise linearity sensitivity a bit.

See this
http://micro.magnet.fsu.edu/primer/java/digitalimaging/ccd/blooming/index.html
casper said:
if the CA can not be rectified in photoshop, would a future
software upgrade cure this apparent problem?

casper.
Click to expand...
 
Read: There are some anti-blooming techniques but they compromise linearity & sensitivity a bit. It would be interesting to see the behaviour of other cameras with the same ccd sensor.
 
Not sure why so many have been on the defensive about the review. I thought it was pretty good. Admittedly I skimmed some, but I think over all it seemed positive. Boils down to test pix anyway, and I thought they were good. I think that 'jaggies' are acceptable for the detail, where Canon and Sony pix come off as too soft to me.

But that Oly CA rears it's ugly head again. Seems like Olympus cams have more of an issue with this than others. Or is that just me?
Corne26033 said:
Looks like he feels it's a good camera. Amazing resolution. Battery
life outperforms any previous Olycam (and plenty of others). Off to
read the rest of it...

Thanks to Phil for the great review :-)
Click to expand...
 
Bill Dutton said:
How do 5050 photos look when printed with respect to the jaggies
mentioned in the review?
Click to expand...
I've had prints done from ezprints.com at 16X20 and they are amazing. IMHO all of the talk about jaggies and artifacts are OK if you are going to view the image at 2 or 3 times its actual size, but when you view them at full size, or have them printed, the quality is outstanding. I would be very curious to see how many people have actually had 16X20 or larger prints done...for me that it where the real tale is told. It really matters what you are going to do with the images.
 
Lance W said:
Not sure why so many have been on the defensive about the review.
I thought it was pretty good. Admittedly I skimmed some, but I
think over all it seemed positive. Boils down to test pix anyway,
and I thought they were good. I think that 'jaggies' are acceptable
for the detail, where Canon and Sony pix come off as too soft to me.
But that Oly CA rears it's ugly head again. Seems like Olympus cams
have more of an issue with this than others. Or is that just me?
Click to expand...
My feelings too. CA became apparant in the c3000/c3030, and has been an issue in all of the cx0x0 series cameras since. Too bad they didn't improve it with the c5050.
Regards
 
Not true.

"If some of the speed issues and the lack of an interchangeable lens aren't big issues to you and you don't already own bags of "one brand" equipment then the E-10 should certainly be near the top of your list. Value for money? You bet.

Highly Recommended"
Stephen Scharf said:
Phil has never given an Olympus camera a highly recommended review.
Click to expand...
--
John
 
I'm a confirmed Nikon fan. But don't flame me just yet. I love Olympus gear, having had an OM1, OM2 SP and Mju (or Stylus for US) for film cameras. My first digital camera was a Oly C900z. This review seems pretty fair IMHO. Olympus have ALWAYS produced exceptional quality cameras, and the C5050 looks very good to me. It scores very highly and is only marked down to "recommended" because of the CA. I always thought that CA was due to the lens, not the sensor. However, I know that Olympus produce superb lenses, so surely it is the sensor? Who makes that? Do Oly make their own sensors? Or is it ......Sony? Oh BTW, I may be buying back into Olympus, the Mju (Stylus) 400 looks like the sort of P&S and a bit extra I would like when I don't want to carry lots of DSLR gear about. So I might be annoying this forum more frequently in a month or two. I have just read this through, and I sound like a pompus a$$ .... I apologise in advance.

best regards all

Eric
Corne said:
Lance W said:
Not sure why so many have been on the defensive about the review.
I thought it was pretty good. Admittedly I skimmed some, but I
think over all it seemed positive. Boils down to test pix anyway,
and I thought they were good. I think that 'jaggies' are acceptable
for the detail, where Canon and Sony pix come off as too soft to me.
But that Oly CA rears it's ugly head again. Seems like Olympus cams
have more of an issue with this than others. Or is that just me?
Click to expand...
My feelings too. CA became apparant in the c3000/c3030, and has
been an issue in all of the cx0x0 series cameras since. Too bad
they didn't improve it with the c5050.
Regards
Click to expand...
--

 
Lance W said:
Not sure why so many have been on the defensive about the review.
I thought it was pretty good.
Click to expand...
Indeed. In fact: he gave it a 9 out of 10, over-all. Too bad about the CA, tho :(.

Thanks for the thorough review, Phil!

Regards,
Jim
 
I do believe that CA is the result of the lens, and not the CCD. I don't know too much about it myself but read lots of posts by the experts here and that is what comes up over and over again. At any rate though, it is a hardware issue and won't be cured within a model line via a firmware upgrade or something like that. Even subsequent models that use the same lens usually have the sames issues since it is a lens problem, and not CCD.

Kiran

--

 
It appears the "highly recommended" G3 ( that's the camera that has its viewfinder partially obstructed by the lens barrel) has its share of problems with color fringing, CA and "blue snow" - check out this thread:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1010&message=4156232

Bob
http://www.pbase.com/caseus
Lance W said:
Lance W said:
Looks like he feels it's a good camera. Amazing resolution. Battery
life outperforms any previous Olycam (and plenty of others). Off to
read the rest of it...

Thanks to Phil for the great review :-)
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
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