E-1 - temptated .. but what about 5 MP DETAIL ?!? Locked

Started Jul 3, 2013 | Discussions thread
This thread is locked.
boggis the cat Veteran Member • Posts: 6,329
Other considerations ('all else' is never equal)

Great Bustard wrote:

veroman wrote:

And, no, you can't print detail that isn't there. But if the detail that IS there is well-defined and perhaps even BETTER defined than another camera, then you end up, as I do, with prints that have excellent detail.

In what way would the captured detail on an E1 be superior to the captured detail on an E5?

In theory, you could have more problems with artefacts using an E-5.  So, for example, if you were shooting a person wearing chequered clothing of the 'wrong' pattern you may find that the resolution works against you.  (Although I have not seen any problems of this type myself.)

The main difference between the E-1 and E-5 at base ISO is the distinctly different colour rendering. While many people will claim that you can adjust the colours as you want in post-processing, I have yet to see anyone able to exactly colour match photos from two different rendering pipelines (whether they be the same brand or not).

The E-1 is also a lot smoother at base ISO.  If you shoot a sky area on each camera you will see noise in the E-5 shot but not the E-1.  (Under high magnification, obviously.  My point is that the E-1 produces completely smooth gradients when inspected closely while the E-5 has observable noise.)

The interesting thing about "detail that isn't there" is that a casual observer of the print doesn't know that the detail isn't there. They don't know what's missing or if anything at all is missing. And yet, that same person can find that same image perfectly acceptable if not great ... worthy even of purchasing.

As the old saying goes, "Content Is King." Detail is not king, no more than megapixels are king. We often chase after the wrong things. I'll take soft, blurred superior content before I'll take sharp, detailed pictures of nothing important.

That's a straw man argument, you know. Why would you capture "superior content" on an E1 but "detailed pictures of nothing important" on a camera with more pixels?

I prefer the E-1 colour rendition to the E-5. If I were shooting something where the pixel count was not greatly important and low light were not an issue, but I wanted more pleasing colours (portraiture, for example) then the E-1 would be my choice.

At base ISO, I don't believe that the E-5 necessarily has an 'IQ' advantage.  It would depend on the subject being shot and the conditions.  Olympus seem to have poured much more effort into the E-1 (being the first of the system and the flagship body) and the Kodak sensor has some advantages over the later Panasonic NMOS variants.

 boggis the cat's gear list:boggis the cat's gear list
Olympus E-5 Olympus E-M1 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 12-60mm 1:2.8-4.0 SWD Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50-200mm 1:2.8-3.5 SWD Olympus 12-40mm F2.8 +7 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow