This is just a reply, full of observations, comments and explanations. Please don't take it as the start of an argument. And by the way, I have posted a gallery of tests, of 100 ISO photos shot RAW, converted o jpegs, showing all of the iterations of noise filter plus sharpness settings available. I know you want high ISO tests, but these were more for those that seem to want an excuse to buy into a different system, and I'm just providing that, so they might move to another forum (it is a joke Louis - I think?).
I will try some high ISO tests when I fins a suitable place, maybe tonight.
I have seen some of your 410 pics Ray, but I hadn't seen any low
light, high iso crops. Certainly no comparisons.
The first pictures I posted were all full size jpegs straight out of camera, no other PP, and at various ISO ratings, up to 1600. Some 3000 visitors saw them. But they had to come down because they were soaking up bandwidth, and were 'nothing' photographs.
So if you really
want them, do it yourself?
I certainly will when I get one of the new panasonic sensor
cameras. Right now its impossible/impractical for me to do so.
Sorry, Really a remark made in frustration. It just seems that whatever one puts up, someone will come along and say it is worthless, go and do it again, how I want it.
Well just to put things straight, that's not from me. I very
possibly own more E system cameras than anyone else here, however
I'm very much like AdamT in that I'll tell it like it is.
As I do, because I am not concerned about, or for the prosperity of Olympus, save that if they survive, they will keep innovating in good directions (This camera release does represent innovation. Show me another 40-150 zoom near that size, that works that well). Unlike some (and I said some) others though, my main concern is; does it enable me to make the photographs I want? And the answer to that is a resounding yes.
In a way, this incredible enthusiasm for the new cameras is good,
because it makes a nice change for Oly to get good consumer
reviews.
Yes, it has had some good reviews, and I have read those with interest, and generally agree with them on the value and functionality of this camera. But the 'bad press' has largely come from folks who are knocking stuff like the strap loops, and the size, because they 'can't hold it'. If they can't hold anything smaller than an E1, it must make toilet breaks both difficult and messy! And some folks who should know better seem to be really 'after' it. I cannot work out why, but I cannot help but relate it to a 'size matters' syndrome. And others are saying it is too complicated for the market, without having any idea of what the market is. By the way, it is walking out of shops here, according to the salesmen. But for goodness sake, wait until you see it (folks), try it, and then decide if it suits you.
But I need to know what is hype and what isn't because its going to
cost me money if I get it wrong.
I fully understand that, and would say that in that case, you would be very silly to swallow anything that anybody said on here, including me, before you did your own tests, and used the camera yourself, and then came to some conclusions about what suited you. I am not a working pro anymore, and have very simple needs when it comes to cameras. I would have bought the E410 if it had been five megapixels, because it is all I need. I live in a country where only the Emperor has walls big enough to display 16 x 20 inch prints, and then he isn't tall enough to see the top of them. I just don't need more. But if I did, I very much doubt that I would be using Olympus cameras.
A good friend in Japan, who has been an Olympus user (and still is), and who borrowed my E410 to do a higher res job that his E1's allowed, has just purchased a Nikon D200, and Nikon high end flash. And he is slowly discovering the flexibility that it offers him, compared to the E1, and certainly the E410. There are good reasons beyond marketing that make pro's turn to those camera companies, Canon and Nikon. 95 % of pro's use them, and although many of them probably are stupid, for various reasons, not 95% of them.
And just to finish, about the desperate need for high ISO performance, I think that will always have an element of compromise about it, especially with a 4/3rds sensor. But we have to think about why we want that, and whether we want it, or the customer demands it. Shooting on low light, with no additional lighting provided by the photographer, is pretty much a digital age thing. The results were generally so awful with high ISO film that we just didn't do it, unless it was especially for the effect. So 3200 ISO, and 1600 ISO commercial jobs are new ground. So customers need to know that it won't look as colorful, as sharp, as clean as 100 ISO shot in sunlight. If for some reason they expect that, then somebody isn't doing their job properly. And finally, to illustrate that, and I know you have seen this, but this is a wedding photograph I took with the E-1. It is noisy, the color is not great, it was underexposed as a jpeg, and coaxed up to this degree of lightness. But the bride, and her mother, love it. It is their favorite by a mile, out of all of her wedding pictures. She knows nothing of the noise, the color, etc. She just sees what it represents, and who it represents. So we might be wanting things for us, not for them.
--
rayk
) 
