Em10ii jpeg output the same as original em5?

[kangarooinoz]

Hi all,

I'm looking at buying an em10ii used. I loved my old em5 particularly for the punchy JPEGs as I didn't have to Photoshop to get pleasing results. The ienhance was handy for sunsets too.

Anyway I have the opportunity to buy an em10ii. Should the output be pretty much identical?

Cheers

 

[Guy Parsons]

Wow your camera looks even smaller than the E-PL5!

Yes.

Do both cameras have the same featureset in terms of things like electronic shutter and all the other things we discussed?

Mostly yes.

The only difference is the lens then?

Mostly yes.

Also, do these cameras have features like zebra stripes (direct live histogram, which shows both areas of over exposure and under exposure in live view) as well as pixel mapping (mapping out bad pixels), etc.?

It seems to be an undocumented feature to have automatic pixel mapping built in, so no need to worry there.

I wonder how much the big one weighs-- under 1 kg? Thanks!

RX10M4 = 1095 grams, RX100M6/7 = 301/302 grams

 

[kangarooinoz]

How do the jpeg colours and image quality of the Sony rx100s compare with the Olympus M4/3 Guy?

 

[Guy Parsons]

How do the jpeg colours and image quality of the Sony rx100s compare with the Olympus M4/3 Guy?

They look OK to me, but I use the raw files and Photolab5 and get just what I want.

The Sony turns intense blues towards purple in its camera jpegs, but turns out accurate blues in the raw converted jpeg.

 

[OutsideTheMatrix]

Wow your camera looks even smaller than the E-PL5!

Yes.

Do both cameras have the same featureset in terms of things like electronic shutter and all the other things we discussed?

Mostly yes.

The only difference is the lens then?

Mostly yes.

Also, do these cameras have features like zebra stripes (direct live histogram, which shows both areas of over exposure and under exposure in live view) as well as pixel mapping (mapping out bad pixels), etc.?

It seems to be an undocumented feature to have automatic pixel mapping built in, so no need to worry there.

I wonder how much the big one weighs-- under 1 kg? Thanks!

RX10M4 = 1095 grams, RX100M6/7 = 301/302 grams

So they are both pretty portable. I've found that I find 1.3 kg and above very uncomfortable to handhold, but up to 1.1 kg is fine.

 

[OutsideTheMatrix]

How do the jpeg colours and image quality of the Sony rx100s compare with the Olympus M4/3 Guy?

They look OK to me, but I use the raw files and Photolab5 and get just what I want.

The Sony turns intense blues towards purple in its camera jpegs, but turns out accurate blues in the raw converted jpeg.

I read that their raws don't have the "star eater" problems of some of their FF mirrorless cameras either.

 

[OutsideTheMatrix]

Now a lot are taken with my Sony RX100M6 thus easing the load on the Olys.

Guy do any of these Sony 1" cameras have fully electronic shutters?

Yes, my RX100M6 uses mechanical in-lens shutter up to 1/2000 sec and electronic up to 1/32000 sec. The selection can be auto so it changes as needed, or mechanical only or electronic only.

wow thanks may be my new camera....for longer shutter speeds, say 1 second and longer, can you still use only the electronic shutter?

Probably, but not sure.

Wait - the specs say variously for different modes 4" to 1/32000 and also 30" to 1/32000 for the electronic shutter.

No real advantage as the usual leaf shutter is also silent, lasts forever and causes no shock or shake. Electronic makes sense faster than 1/2000 of course and works for the stacking modes where it needs to capture a few frames in the shortest possible time.

I remember you once told me you don't do continuous or burst modes-- but I have a question I wanted to ask about the EM10Mk2.

Do you think using the electronic shutter for burst mode doesn't cause any kind of wear on the camera? When I first got the EM10Mk2 I used to test it for long duration bursts to see how fast and long it could shoot for before slowing down. I kept going for 10-11 minutes and the camera did not slow down in JPG mode but after 10 min of burst shooting the LCD would flicker and even go black for a second or two before resuming displaying the live view. You don't believe that would damage or shorten the camera's life in any way? After this happened a couple of times I decided to shorten my bursts to under 10 minutes and it hasn't happened since. Now, I don't do anything longer than one minute of continuous shooting. I figured long bursts using the electronic shutter shouldn't cause any wear, it should be much like shooting a full resolution movie mode?

 

[Guy Parsons]

I remember you once told me you don't do continuous or burst modes-- but I have a question I wanted to ask about the EM10Mk2.

Do you think using the electronic shutter for burst mode doesn't cause any kind of wear on the camera? When I first got the EM10Mk2 I used to test it for long duration bursts to see how fast and long it could shoot for before slowing down. I kept going for 10-11 minutes and the camera did not slow down in JPG mode but after 10 min of burst shooting the LCD would flicker and even go black for a second or two before resuming displaying the live view. You don't believe that would damage or shorten the camera's life in any way? After this happened a couple of times I decided to shorten my bursts to under 10 minutes and it hasn't happened since. Now, I don't do anything longer than one minute of continuous shooting. I figured long bursts using the electronic shutter shouldn't cause any wear, it should be much like shooting a full resolution movie mode?

What the heck are you doing such ridiculously long bursts for?

Photography is all about capturing the moment, but that needs anticipation, or for laziness, a very short burst where you can select the critical frame later and throw the rest away.

Bursts using the electronic shutter don't really wear anything out, maybe stress the battery a little but that would be debatable. Video also uses the electronic shutter and doesn't wear anything out.

As for the need for long bursts, that leaves me puzzled. For long period captures then video makes much more sense to me.

 

[OutsideTheMatrix]

I remember you once told me you don't do continuous or burst modes-- but I have a question I wanted to ask about the EM10Mk2.

Do you think using the electronic shutter for burst mode doesn't cause any kind of wear on the camera? When I first got the EM10Mk2 I used to test it for long duration bursts to see how fast and long it could shoot for before slowing down. I kept going for 10-11 minutes and the camera did not slow down in JPG mode but after 10 min of burst shooting the LCD would flicker and even go black for a second or two before resuming displaying the live view. You don't believe that would damage or shorten the camera's life in any way? After this happened a couple of times I decided to shorten my bursts to under 10 minutes and it hasn't happened since. Now, I don't do anything longer than one minute of continuous shooting. I figured long bursts using the electronic shutter shouldn't cause any wear, it should be much like shooting a full resolution movie mode?

What the heck are you doing such ridiculously long bursts for?

Photography is all about capturing the moment, but that needs anticipation, or for laziness, a very short burst where you can select the critical frame later and throw the rest away.

Bursts using the electronic shutter don't really wear anything out, maybe stress the battery a little but that would be debatable. Video also uses the electronic shutter and doesn't wear anything out.

As for the need for long bursts, that leaves me puzzled. For long period captures then video makes much more sense to me.

I saw a review that stated that the buffer of this camera is "unlimited" for JPG only and I wanted to see if it was true, Guy

I only ran the test twice to see if it could do it, and it indeed is unlimited for JPG only (no slow down even after over 10 minutes)-- I guess the black out was because the LCD couldn't keep up with the burst rate?

The stress on the battery is just a short term thing right, it basically just uses up power, not that it shortens its overall life or anything? I have four of these BLS50 batteries now, all OEM.

I don't do such long bursts anymore, that was only when I first got the camera.

The problem with video is that the resolution is only 1080P but I realized that I can use the x2 DTC with it to make it a crop of the center of the sensor, which increases the "effective resolution".....if I have my math right, 1080 P is 2 MP and x2 DTC on top of that would be like a 25% crop of the center of an 8 MP sensor?

--
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.
-Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1961

 

[Guy Parsons]

The problem with video is that the resolution is only 1080P but I realized that I can use the x2 DTC with it to make it a crop of the center of the sensor, which increases the "effective resolution".....if I have my math right, 1080 P is 2 MP and x2 DTC on top of that would be like a 25% crop of the center of an 8 MP sensor?

Never have tried 2xDTC with video.

Normal video downsizes the width of the sensor to 1920 pixels wide for FHD so I guess that 2xDTC video uses the usual crop (4MP worth out of the 16MP sensor) and uses that to make the FHD frame.

E-M10 pixel width 4608, downsized to 1920 wide for FHD, with 2xDTC then my guess is the frame width of half is used, that is now 2304 width downsized to 1920 for the video. So no loss of resolution in the FHD frame, unlike 2xDTC stills where only 4MP is used then resized to 16MP.

 

[OutsideTheMatrix]

The problem with video is that the resolution is only 1080P but I realized that I can use the x2 DTC with it to make it a crop of the center of the sensor, which increases the "effective resolution".....if I have my math right, 1080 P is 2 MP and x2 DTC on top of that would be like a 25% crop of the center of an 8 MP sensor?

Never have tried 2xDTC with video.

Normal video downsizes the width of the sensor to 1920 pixels wide for FHD so I guess that 2xDTC video uses the usual crop (4MP worth out of the 16MP sensor) and uses that to make the FHD frame.

E-M10 pixel width 4608, downsized to 1920 wide for FHD, with 2xDTC then my guess is the frame width of half is used, that is now 2304 width downsized to 1920 for the video. So no loss of resolution in the FHD frame, unlike 2xDTC stills where only 4MP is used then resized to 16MP.

Guy why do they do it that way instead of just using 1:1 pixels of the sensor and giving us more "reach"?

So would you say that x2 DTC is beneficial for video? I know there is also a video teleconverter, and I'm not sure if x2 DTC and video teleconverter can be "stacked" on top of each other?

I want to test something out but don't have a 4K device to do so. Do you think if someone was filming birds in flight there would be more feather detail in a video made with 4K video (no DTC-- since that would cause a loss of resolution in 4K video) vs FHD with x2 DTC? if using the same lens at the same focal length with both?

 

[Guy Parsons]

The problem with video is that the resolution is only 1080P but I realized that I can use the x2 DTC with it to make it a crop of the center of the sensor, which increases the "effective resolution".....if I have my math right, 1080 P is 2 MP and x2 DTC on top of that would be like a 25% crop of the center of an 8 MP sensor?

Never have tried 2xDTC with video.

Normal video downsizes the width of the sensor to 1920 pixels wide for FHD so I guess that 2xDTC video uses the usual crop (4MP worth out of the 16MP sensor) and uses that to make the FHD frame.

E-M10 pixel width 4608, downsized to 1920 wide for FHD, with 2xDTC then my guess is the frame width of half is used, that is now 2304 width downsized to 1920 for the video. So no loss of resolution in the FHD frame, unlike 2xDTC stills where only 4MP is used then resized to 16MP.

Guy why do they do it that way instead of just using 1:1 pixels of the sensor and giving us more "reach"?

No idea.

Usually they say to buy appropriate lenses if more reach is needed.

So would you say that x2 DTC is beneficial for video?

I would not choose the word "beneficial".

I know there is also a video teleconverter, and I'm not sure if x2 DTC and video teleconverter can be "stacked" on top of each other?

No idea.

I want to test something out but don't have a 4K device to do so. Do you think if someone was filming birds in flight there would be more feather detail in a video made with 4K video (no DTC-- since that would cause a loss of resolution in 4K video) vs FHD with x2 DTC? if using the same lens at the same focal length with both?

Frames from 4K look pretty good if taken with good lenses and appropriate shutter speed. The 8MP result is rather good, but then sitting back from a TV even the 2MP FHD frames look good, again if shot with appropriate shutter speed and good lenses.

 

[OutsideTheMatrix]

The problem with video is that the resolution is only 1080P but I realized that I can use the x2 DTC with it to make it a crop of the center of the sensor, which increases the "effective resolution".....if I have my math right, 1080 P is 2 MP and x2 DTC on top of that would be like a 25% crop of the center of an 8 MP sensor?

Never have tried 2xDTC with video.

Normal video downsizes the width of the sensor to 1920 pixels wide for FHD so I guess that 2xDTC video uses the usual crop (4MP worth out of the 16MP sensor) and uses that to make the FHD frame.

E-M10 pixel width 4608, downsized to 1920 wide for FHD, with 2xDTC then my guess is the frame width of half is used, that is now 2304 width downsized to 1920 for the video. So no loss of resolution in the FHD frame, unlike 2xDTC stills where only 4MP is used then resized to 16MP.

Guy why do they do it that way instead of just using 1:1 pixels of the sensor and giving us more "reach"?

No idea.

Usually they say to buy appropriate lenses if more reach is needed.

So would you say that x2 DTC is beneficial for video?

I would not choose the word "beneficial".

I know there is also a video teleconverter, and I'm not sure if x2 DTC and video teleconverter can be "stacked" on top of each other?

No idea.

I want to test something out but don't have a 4K device to do so. Do you think if someone was filming birds in flight there would be more feather detail in a video made with 4K video (no DTC-- since that would cause a loss of resolution in 4K video) vs FHD with x2 DTC? if using the same lens at the same focal length with both?

Frames from 4K look pretty good if taken with good lenses and appropriate shutter speed. The 8MP result is rather good, but then sitting back from a TV even the 2MP FHD frames look good, again if shot with appropriate shutter speed and good lenses.

I wonder if it makes a difference if 4K is shot at 30 fps and 1080P is shot at 60 fps as is usually the case? Would that make the latter more handholdable?

 

[Guy Parsons]

The problem with video is that the resolution is only 1080P but I realized that I can use the x2 DTC with it to make it a crop of the center of the sensor, which increases the "effective resolution".....if I have my math right, 1080 P is 2 MP and x2 DTC on top of that would be like a 25% crop of the center of an 8 MP sensor?

Never have tried 2xDTC with video.

Normal video downsizes the width of the sensor to 1920 pixels wide for FHD so I guess that 2xDTC video uses the usual crop (4MP worth out of the 16MP sensor) and uses that to make the FHD frame.

E-M10 pixel width 4608, downsized to 1920 wide for FHD, with 2xDTC then my guess is the frame width of half is used, that is now 2304 width downsized to 1920 for the video. So no loss of resolution in the FHD frame, unlike 2xDTC stills where only 4MP is used then resized to 16MP.

Guy why do they do it that way instead of just using 1:1 pixels of the sensor and giving us more "reach"?

No idea.

Usually they say to buy appropriate lenses if more reach is needed.

So would you say that x2 DTC is beneficial for video?

I would not choose the word "beneficial".

I know there is also a video teleconverter, and I'm not sure if x2 DTC and video teleconverter can be "stacked" on top of each other?

No idea.

I want to test something out but don't have a 4K device to do so. Do you think if someone was filming birds in flight there would be more feather detail in a video made with 4K video (no DTC-- since that would cause a loss of resolution in 4K video) vs FHD with x2 DTC? if using the same lens at the same focal length with both?

Frames from 4K look pretty good if taken with good lenses and appropriate shutter speed. The 8MP result is rather good, but then sitting back from a TV even the 2MP FHD frames look good, again if shot with appropriate shutter speed and good lenses.

I wonder if it makes a difference if 4K is shot at 30 fps and 1080P is shot at 60 fps as is usually the case? Would that make the latter more handholdable?

I have no answers, don't do much video.

Anyway, I'm out of here now, as we have hi-jacked this thread way too much.

Ask new questions in fresh posts one at a time.