16 Unique Features That Your Camera Probably Doesn't Have

Started 4 months ago | Discussions
Guy Parsons
Guy Parsons Forum Pro • Posts: 37,061
Telecentric
2

Art_P wrote:

Thought 'telecentric' was dropped when they moved from 4/3 to M43?

I thought that the need for sensor side telecentricity diminished as sensor design moved to larger and maybe some offset microlenses over the pixels as they got further from the centre. That plus in-camera option image processing to reduce the vignetting.

As for "telecentric" then there's a few variations of that feature that the Olympus marketing name does not adequately address.

The usually referenced telecentric lens is explained here, it would be useless in a normal camera. https://www.edmundoptics.com.au/knowledge-center/application-notes/imaging/advantages-of-telecentricity/

The Olympus version (when it exists) is sensor side telecentric but not telecentric on the subject side.

Easy to check your lenses to see what is what.

Measure the diameter of the rear element of the lens, if the diameter of the rear element is the same as the diagonal measure of the sensor then it's a fair bet that it is a sensor side telecentric lens (properly called a image-space telecentric lens). If the diameter of the rear element is less than the sensor diagonal then no way it could be called "telecentric".

Though the Wiki article tells the true test "Image-space telecentric lenses have an exit pupil infinitely far in front of the lens; that is, if one looks in the back of the lens, the image of the aperture is very far away."

I am no expert, simply interested in truthiness. See the Wiki article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telecentric_lens for more info.

 Guy Parsons's gear list:Guy Parsons's gear list
Sony RX100 VI Olympus PEN E-PL1 Olympus PEN E-PL5 Olympus PEN E-P5 Olympus OM-D E-M10 II +10 more
CedarTree33 Contributing Member • Posts: 554
Re: 16 Unique Features That Your Camera Probably Doesn't Have
1

rogerstpierre wrote:

SrMi wrote:

400trix wrote:

rogerstpierre wrote:

One feature I'd like to see improved upon is Live ND. Why not add a split capability, with the ability to specify the bottom and top end of the transition between 0EV and -1, -2 or -3EV. That would be cool and very useful.

It’s not really necessary. There’s plenty of signal so that there’s no loss in quality by adding a gradient filter in post.

It is also not possible since LiveND does not reduce exposure but shoots a series of images that are combined to simulate long exposure (e.g. movement blur).

So Live ND is just another name for Live Composite or Multi-exposure?

Multiple Exposure on other camera systems is different. I tried to replicate Live ND on my Canon and it didn’t work as well. I couldn’t handhold the camera when taking the shot and the multiple exposure images (on Average mode) rarely lined up. Also, I could only do a max of 9 exposures. Live ND 16 or 32 averages more exposures into one. Lastly, the result was a jpeg with my Canon. On the Olympus, the result is a RAW, which is nice for post (if you are shooting RAW). 
The Live ND is more similar to stacking multiple images in Photoshop and blending/averaging them all together. For which, you would definitely need a tripod to get a crisp image. The Live ND is pretty cool as it seems to do this computations “magic” in camera. Although, it still has its limitations.

 CedarTree33's gear list:CedarTree33's gear list
Nikon Coolpix AW100 Olympus E-M1 III Canon EOS R5 Olympus 12-100mm F4.0 Olympus 25mm F1.2 +4 more
SrMi
SrMi Senior Member • Posts: 2,390
Re: 16 Unique Features That Your Camera Probably Doesn't Have
1

CedarTree33 wrote:

rogerstpierre wrote:

SrMi wrote:

400trix wrote:

rogerstpierre wrote:

One feature I'd like to see improved upon is Live ND. Why not add a split capability, with the ability to specify the bottom and top end of the transition between 0EV and -1, -2 or -3EV. That would be cool and very useful.

It’s not really necessary. There’s plenty of signal so that there’s no loss in quality by adding a gradient filter in post.

It is also not possible since LiveND does not reduce exposure but shoots a series of images that are combined to simulate long exposure (e.g. movement blur).

So Live ND is just another name for Live Composite or Multi-exposure?

Multiple Exposure on other camera systems is different. I tried to replicate Live ND on my Canon and it didn’t work as well. I couldn’t handhold the camera when taking the shot and the multiple exposure images (on Average mode) rarely lined up. Also, I could only do a max of 9 exposures. Live ND 16 or 32 averages more exposures into one. Lastly, the result was a jpeg with my Canon. On the Olympus, the result is a RAW, which is nice for post (if you are shooting RAW).
The Live ND is more similar to stacking multiple images in Photoshop and blending/averaging them all together. For which, you would definitely need a tripod to get a crisp image. The Live ND is pretty cool as it seems to do this computations “magic” in camera. Although, it still has its limitations.

I simulated LiveND on my Nikon DSLRs using multiple exposures (max 9 exposures, the output is raw). The camera had to be on the tripod, and there was a considerable gap between shots, of course. It is not as convenient as LiveND, but that technique has been used by Nikon shooters regularly.

Stacking in Photoshop (or better with OctaveRawTools) does align images. It is more cumbersome (and very slow with PS) but can work better with handheld shots.

I rarely use LiveND handheld as the fastest total shutter speed with ND16 is 1/4 sec. I wish Olympus could auto-align the individual shots in-camera. It would also be nice to use faster shutter speeds to reduce noise in shadows.

tko Forum Pro • Posts: 13,456
bogus
16

A combination of mistakes, features that don't matter,  and stuff everyone else has.

I mean, shorter flange distance is only a benefit if it gives you better performance, not proven. And every single mirrorless has that, from Sony to Canon. In body stabilization, who doesn't have it? Ditto for eye tracking. Crop factor works both for and against you.

I don't get these articles where people have to dredge the barrel to justify their choice. Just be happy with what you have and don't act like a Oly salesman.

-- hide signature --

no, I won't return to read your witty reply!
professional cynic and contrarian: don't take it personally
http://500px.com/omearak

prsc Regular Member • Posts: 246
Re: Telecentric

Guy Parsons wrote:

Art_P wrote:

Thought 'telecentric' was dropped when they moved from 4/3 to M43?

I thought that the need for sensor side telecentricity diminished as sensor design moved to larger and maybe some offset microlenses over the pixels as they got further from the centre. That plus in-camera option image processing to reduce the vignetting.

As for "telecentric" then there's a few variations of that feature that the Olympus marketing name does not adequately address.

The usually referenced telecentric lens is explained here, it would be useless in a normal camera. https://www.edmundoptics.com.au/knowledge-center/application-notes/imaging/advantages-of-telecentricity/

The Olympus version (when it exists) is sensor side telecentric but not telecentric on the subject side.

Easy to check your lenses to see what is what.

Measure the diameter of the rear element of the lens, if the diameter of the rear element is the same as the diagonal measure of the sensor then it's a fair bet that it is a sensor side telecentric lens (properly called a image-space telecentric lens). If the diameter of the rear element is less than the sensor diagonal then no way it could be called "telecentric".

Though the Wiki article tells the true test "Image-space telecentric lenses have an exit pupil infinitely far in front of the lens; that is, if one looks in the back of the lens, the image of the aperture is very far away."

I am no expert, simply interested in truthiness. See the Wiki article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telecentric_lens for more info.

This is correct. They tried to design the system completely with digital in mind and in a sense went too deep. Early CMOS sensors actually didn't have microlenses at all, so the image-space telecentricity actually made some sense, but not for long at all. Only thing it really ended up doing was hurting the lens designs as it was pretty much just an useless restriction, I'm not sure if it was actually dropped during 4/3s time?

FingerPainter Forum Pro • Posts: 10,364
Re: 16 Unique Features That Your Camera Probably Doesn't Have
4

SrMi wrote:

ahaslett wrote:

Lost all credibility with me on the diffraction howler.

Andrew

Yes, that one is a doozy. As you might know, diffraction is proportional to pixel size, not the sensor size.

Olympus M1.3: 3.36 microns

Sony a7rIV: 3.76 microns

Nikon Z 6: 5.92 microns

Diffraction is an optical property. It has noting to do with pixel size. Sensor size determines the size of the blur produced by diffraction on a print of given size.

Guy Parsons
Guy Parsons Forum Pro • Posts: 37,061
Re: Telecentric

prsc wrote:

This is correct. They tried to design the system completely with digital in mind and in a sense went too deep. Early CMOS sensors actually didn't have microlenses at all, so the image-space telecentricity actually made some sense, but not for long at all. Only thing it really ended up doing was hurting the lens designs as it was pretty much just an useless restriction, I'm not sure if it was actually dropped during 4/3s time?

I am sure that my bunch of old 4/3 lenses stored somewhere are a mix of possibly "telecentric" and impossible to be "telecentric" lenses, due to that rear element measurement.

So it was mainly to do with marketing - the reliable source of most baloney in any industry.

When the sun comes up here in Oz I will look through a few of the old 4/3 lenses to see how they obey the test stated in Wiki as "Image-space telecentric lenses have an exit pupil infinitely far in front of the lens; that is, if one looks in the back of the lens, the image of the aperture is very far away." I'll try to remember to report back on that.

Aside: Heading towards a total hard lockdown in Sydney due to delta variation of covid-19 virus escaped from a US flight crew being transported to a hotel, so plenty of time at home now to play.

 Guy Parsons's gear list:Guy Parsons's gear list
Sony RX100 VI Olympus PEN E-PL1 Olympus PEN E-PL5 Olympus PEN E-P5 Olympus OM-D E-M10 II +10 more
SrMi
SrMi Senior Member • Posts: 2,390
Re: 16 Unique Features That Your Camera Probably Doesn't Have
1

FingerPainter wrote:

SrMi wrote:

ahaslett wrote:

Lost all credibility with me on the diffraction howler.

Andrew

Yes, that one is a doozy. As you might know, diffraction is proportional to pixel size, not the sensor size.

Olympus M1.3: 3.36 microns

Sony a7rIV: 3.76 microns

Nikon Z 6: 5.92 microns

Diffraction is an optical property. It has noting to do with pixel size. Sensor size determines the size of the blur produced by diffraction on a print of given size.

From: LENS DIFFRACTION & PHOTOGRAPHY

Diffraction is an optical effect.

The 2D diffraction pattern is called an airy disk. When the size of the airy disk central peak becomes large relative to the pixel size, it begins to have a visual impact on the image.

Jim Kasson also wrote about pixel pitches and diffraction:

Diffraction and ultimate FF pixel count

epozar Senior Member • Posts: 1,523
Re: bogus

And anyway I wish AF tracking performace is one of them......

-- hide signature --
 epozar's gear list:epozar's gear list
Olympus E-M1 Olympus E-M1 II Olympus E-M1 III Olympus Zuiko Digital 2.0x Teleconverter EC-20 Olympus Zuiko Digital 1.4x Teleconverter EC-14 +8 more
Raist3d Forum Pro • Posts: 45,140
Correct, bogus advantage.. it's not there...
1

in m43rds.

-- hide signature --

Raist3d/Ricardo (Photographer, software dev.)- I photograph black cats in coal mines at night...
“The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it.” - George Orwell

Raist3d Forum Pro • Posts: 45,140
Another pro influencer justifier sales pitch...
3

this is a bit of a biased list of things. Some are not even true- for example tele centricity is NOT a requirement at all in m43rds as it was in 4/3rds days.

Fuji had a pro capture equivalent ages ago, and has it now in virtually all their line.

Close focusing? Bogus.

In body image stabilization is no longer in the realm of Olympus as a unique advantage.

Amazing customer support? Fuji does rather well in USA.

Weight and size- the unique selling proposition of the system tarnished by going bigger models but finally we have the EM10 MKIV and EP7 to claw that back a bit.

Intelligent subject detection AF is hardly the real of Olympus.

-- hide signature --

Raist3d/Ricardo (Photographer, software dev.)- I photograph black cats in coal mines at night...
“The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it.” - George Orwell

FingerPainter Forum Pro • Posts: 10,364
Re: 16 Unique Features That Your Camera Probably Doesn't Have
2

SrMi wrote:

FingerPainter wrote:

SrMi wrote:

ahaslett wrote:

Lost all credibility with me on the diffraction howler.

Andrew

Yes, that one is a doozy. As you might know, diffraction is proportional to pixel size, not the sensor size.

Olympus M1.3: 3.36 microns

Sony a7rIV: 3.76 microns

Nikon Z 6: 5.92 microns

Diffraction is an optical property. It has noting to do with pixel size. Sensor size determines the size of the blur produced by diffraction on a print of given size.

From: LENS DIFFRACTION & PHOTOGRAPHY

LOL! I thought so. That bogus article has led a lot of people astray.

Diffraction is an optical effect.

The 2D diffraction pattern is called an airy disk. When the size of the airy disk central peak becomes large relative to the pixel size, it begins to have a visual impact on the image.

Jim Kasson also wrote about pixel pitches and diffraction:

Diffraction and ultimate FF pixel count

I suggest you read Jim's post again. It might help you realize that pixel size isn't an issue for diffraction on current MFT sensors. With Q=2, for f/1.4 you'd need to have a 5.5 GigaPixel MFT sensor.

Raist3d Forum Pro • Posts: 45,140
Re: bogus
1

tko wrote:

A combination of mistakes, features that don't matter, and stuff everyone else has.

While not 100% imho, about 98% accurate :_). Great summary.

I mean, shorter flange distance is only a benefit if it gives you better performance, not proven. And every single mirrorless has that, from Sony to Canon. In body stabilization, who doesn't have it? Ditto for eye tracking. Crop factor works both for and against you.

I don't get these articles where people have to dredge the barrel to justify their choice. Just be happy with what you have and don't act like a Oly salesman.

He seems to be associated with Olympus UK. It's just another pro-brand influencer article.

-- hide signature --

Raist3d/Ricardo (Photographer, software dev.)- I photograph black cats in coal mines at night...
“The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it.” - George Orwell

faunagraphy
faunagraphy Contributing Member • Posts: 661
AF Limiter
3

I agree with some of the comments here - the article missed out on some genuine Olympus / m43 advantages and turned into a sales pitch. Sony, for instance, has a shorter flange distance. And even some DSLR systems (like Canon EF) can take lens adapters.

We can do without the "Sony shill" energy for Olympus.

I can't believe that it didn't talk about the AF limiter, which is probably my most-used feature for BIFs. I had to create an account just to post a comment describing this feature (for the benefit of readers).

I might have gone a bit overboard - attached a few sample photos and all. But I do shamelessly love the Olympus system.

-- hide signature --

Formerly known as 'anupamkatkar'.

 faunagraphy's gear list:faunagraphy's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus PEN E-PL6 Nikon D500 Olympus E-M1 II Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50-200mm 1:2.8-3.5 SWD +23 more
SrMi
SrMi Senior Member • Posts: 2,390
Re: 16 Unique Features That Your Camera Probably Doesn't Have

FingerPainter wrote:

SrMi wrote:

FingerPainter wrote:

SrMi wrote:

ahaslett wrote:

Lost all credibility with me on the diffraction howler.

Andrew

Yes, that one is a doozy. As you might know, diffraction is proportional to pixel size, not the sensor size.

Olympus M1.3: 3.36 microns

Sony a7rIV: 3.76 microns

Nikon Z 6: 5.92 microns

Diffraction is an optical property. It has noting to do with pixel size. Sensor size determines the size of the blur produced by diffraction on a print of given size.

From: LENS DIFFRACTION & PHOTOGRAPHY

LOL! I thought so. That bogus article has led a lot of people astray.

I agree that CambridgeInColour occasionally had questionable content. Unfortunately, that article seems to be inaccurate as well.

How about this one?

https://www.scantips.com/lights/diffraction.html

Diffraction is an optical effect.

The 2D diffraction pattern is called an airy disk. When the size of the airy disk central peak becomes large relative to the pixel size, it begins to have a visual impact on the image.

Jim Kasson also wrote about pixel pitches and diffraction:

Diffraction and ultimate FF pixel count

I suggest you read Jim's post again. It might help you realize that pixel size isn't an issue for diffraction on current MFT sensors. With Q=2, for f/1.4 you'd need to have a 5.5 GigaPixel MFT sensor.

Thank you for correcting me.

Raist3d Forum Pro • Posts: 45,140
Some other brands do this too?
1

I don't think this is an Olympus exclusive.

-- hide signature --

Raist3d/Ricardo (Photographer, software dev.)- I photograph black cats in coal mines at night...
“The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it.” - George Orwell

faunagraphy
faunagraphy Contributing Member • Posts: 661
Re: Some other brands do this too?
2

Raist3d wrote:

I don't think this is an Olympus exclusive.

I'd love to know what other brand's cameras do it, so I might try them sometime. Since I cannot afford an A9 / A1, I find this feature indispensable.

-- hide signature --

Formerly known as 'anupamkatkar'.

 faunagraphy's gear list:faunagraphy's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus PEN E-PL6 Nikon D500 Olympus E-M1 II Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50-200mm 1:2.8-3.5 SWD +23 more
Raist3d Forum Pro • Posts: 45,140
Re: Some other brands do this too?

faunagraphy wrote:

Raist3d wrote:

I don't think this is an Olympus exclusive.

I'd love to know what other brand's cameras do it, so I might try them sometime. Since I cannot afford an A9 / A1, I find this feature indispensable.

Fuji Xpro3 has it. Which means probably all Fuji contemporaries - like XT4, XT3, X-E4, X-S10.

Update: X100V also has it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XiEdSG_uAuM

-- hide signature --

Raist3d/Ricardo (Photographer, software dev.)- I photograph black cats in coal mines at night...
“The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it.” - George Orwell

OP shinndigg Veteran Member • Posts: 4,472
Re: bogus
2

tko

A combination of mistakes, features that don't matter, and stuff everyone else has.

Features that don't to YOU. And how many have these "features that don't matter" to you, in one body?

I mean, shorter flange distance is only a benefit if it gives you better performance, not proven. And every single mirrorless has that, from Sony to Canon. In body stabilization, who doesn't have it? Ditto for eye tracking. Crop factor works both for and against you.

I don't get these articles where people have to dredge the barrel to justify their choice. Just be happy with what you have and don't act like a Oly salesmaN

-- hide signature --

shinndigg
www.pbase.com/shinndigg

 shinndigg's gear list:shinndigg's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ35 Olympus E-510 Olympus PEN E-PL1 Olympus E-M1 Olympus OM-D E-M10 +7 more
OP shinndigg Veteran Member • Posts: 4,472
Ricardo...
1

...then why are you so Gaga over the EP7?

-- hide signature --

shinndigg
www.pbase.com/shinndigg

 shinndigg's gear list:shinndigg's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ35 Olympus E-510 Olympus PEN E-PL1 Olympus E-M1 Olympus OM-D E-M10 +7 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads