Olympus resolution and sensor future ?

[gilo212]

Dear fellow M4/3 lovers,


Me, like you, loves the system a lot. I actually born into it and started my photography 3 years ago into the first em5. Now upgraded to the mkii.We all know how using olympus system is a lot of fun, and the quality is good too.


But recently in the appearing of new mirrorless cameras, like the NX1, the question of resolution is raised up again.When already few alternatives that offers better image quality are available i would like to ask those that knows and understand the physics behind and the probability of olympus coming in the future with a better resolution camera? Is it even possible with the current PRO lenses that is already exist?


Its no doubt that the glass available is the most diverse and top notch, but if olympus is not coming in the near future with a better sensor and resolution, its just clearly stays behind... and for professional purposes better alternatives are already there...

Thanks for those that can shed some light on the issue,
Gil.

 

[Guy Parsons]

Dear fellow M4/3 lovers,

Me, like you, loves the system a lot. I actually born into it and started my photography 3 years ago into the first em5. Now upgraded to the mkii.We all know how using olympus system is a lot of fun, and the quality is good too.

But recently in the appearing of new mirrorless cameras, like the NX1, the question of resolution is raised up again.When already few alternatives that offers better image quality are available i would like to ask those that knows and understand the physics behind and the probability of olympus coming in the future with a better resolution camera? Is it even possible with the current PRO lenses that is already exist?

Its no doubt that the glass available is the most diverse and top notch, but if olympus is not coming in the near future with a better sensor and resolution, its just clearly stays behind... and for professional purposes better alternatives are already there...

Thanks for those that can shed some light on the issue,
Gil.

The first question is - why do you need more than 16MP?

Regards...... Guy

 

[Ribbit74]

24MP would have greater headroom for cropping, I suppose.

Could they do a BSI 24MP sensor with the same sensitivity and dynamic range as the 16MP?

Or maybe they could use a new BSI 16MP sensor with better high ISO performance and dynamic range than existing ones? I would actually prefer that instead. We'll see what's in the EM10-mkII when the time comes.

 

[Peter Del]

24MP would have greater headroom for cropping, I suppose.

Could they do a BSI 24MP sensor with the same sensitivity and dynamic range as the 16MP?

Or maybe they could use a new BSI 16MP sensor with better high ISO performance and dynamic range than existing ones? I would actually prefer that instead. We'll see what's in the EM10-mkII when the time comes.

If Olympus do bring out a new, higher resolution sensor, surely they will put it in the E-M1 mk2, not E-M10.

Peter Del

 

[jcr4486]

Agree, I do not need more resolution (not that it could not be better in some cases, but just after the next issue), just need less noise in low light !

so, first solve the noise issue in low light / higher iso, than talk with us to increase resolution, but really just after solving the first issues.

 

[koprol]

I like the best possible system as anybody. But all systems are always a compromise. The m43 system is good at low weight. I handled a samsung nx1 with a 16-55 mm lens and that thing is heavy! And that's said by a guy owning an em1 with 12-40 lens.

So the highest pixelcount is not the top priority for me. I do nig want to take to much weight with me.

 

[ThePhilips]

I personally do not need more resolution.

I'd rather prefer if manufacturers have worked more on something like 12MP Foveon-like sensor usable at ISO 3200, fast AF and decent burst rate.

20MP? more? Most images are low res anyway. Cropping? How much time one spends looking at a high res image with the intent of cropping a small part of it? Rarely. Most unsuccessful shots end up filtered out very early. Most successful shots need only a moderate cropping.

I'd rather take fewer, higher quality pixels, undamaged by the Bayer demosaicing, over many damaged pixels. Some of the high-res shots from the E-M5/2 were pretty revealing. This is the Foveon quality, but instead of the high ISO handicap, E-M5/2 has the shutter speed handicap. It is progress. But baby-step progress.

Dear fellow M4/3 lovers,

Me, like you, loves the system a lot. I actually born into it and started my photography 3 years ago into the first em5. Now upgraded to the mkii.We all know how using olympus system is a lot of fun, and the quality is good too.

But recently in the appearing of new mirrorless cameras, like the NX1, the question of resolution is raised up again.When already few alternatives that offers better image quality are available i would like to ask those that knows and understand the physics behind and the probability of olympus coming in the future with a better resolution camera? Is it even possible with the current PRO lenses that is already exist?

Its no doubt that the glass available is the most diverse and top notch, but if olympus is not coming in the near future with a better sensor and resolution, its just clearly stays behind... and for professional purposes better alternatives are already there...

Thanks for those that can shed some light on the issue,
Gil.

 

[OrdinarilyInordinate]

I would say good lenses make a much greater difference than more pixels. I was initially concerned going down in resolution from a 24MP sensor in a Nikon DPR to a 20.3MP Samsung mirrorless, and now 16MP E-M1. My concerns were completely unfounded, as I've learned that an AA filterless sensor + high resolution lens = plenty of cropping headway. I use a 27" 2560x1440 monitor, and cropping even 100% or a bit more can look very good. I frequently crop object and flower photos, if my lens doesn't focus closely.

The other day, I was out on a walk with a friend, and he wanted his photo taken on a small pile of snow while it was 60F out and sunny. I had my E-M1 with a 12-40mm lens. Instead of framing just him on the large snow pile, I did more of a wide angle shot to take in the park we were in and a nearby bench. Later at home, I've made 2 versions of the photo: full photo in landscape mode and one cropped in portrait mode, maybe 40% at most of the total original image (to get the person on the snow, isolated). Both looked equally good, and I could easily do an 8x12" print of the latter. My Sigma 60mm is another very high resolution lens that makes cropping for pseudo telephoto very easy.

I'd only worry about cropping significantly at high ISO.

 

[Sabatia]

The current crop of m4/3 sensors are fully capable of fulfilling 95% of professional needs and 98% of amateur needs. But in the current very competitive marketplace, to stay competitive m4/3 needs higher resolution. Thus a resolution increase is only marginally related to improving image quality--its primarily a business necessity. I fully expect to see Oly increasing resolution by the next Christmas buying season.

 

[Ben Herrmann]

...not at the expense of overall image quality. I have a somewhat more positive outlook on having more MP's based on what I've seen from the much smaller Sony 1" sensor and what they've been able to do with that performancewise.

But I don't want it if it means a reduction in IQ - meaning worse at higher ISO's. Common sense would indicate that most of us would have better IQ - i.e. better DR, much cleaner high ISO capabilities at 6400 and above. But again, from what I've seen them do with 20 MP's on that Sony 1" sensor, it would would seem logical that the specs for a 4/3 sensor at 20 MP's would be greatly improved all the way around (but only time will tell).

So, I personally (the way I feel - not anyone else who wants to argue the point) is that a 20 MP sensor is right around the corner (and much welcomed) and hopefully, it will have superb IQ all the way around. I do lots of cropping and having the extra MP's really helps.

 

[ttan98]

Dear fellow M4/3 lovers,

Me, like you, loves the system a lot. I actually born into it and started my photography 3 years ago into the first em5. Now upgraded to the mkii.We all know how using olympus system is a lot of fun, and the quality is good too.

But recently in the appearing of new mirrorless cameras, like the NX1, the question of resolution is raised up again.When already few alternatives that offers better image quality are available i would like to ask those that knows and understand the physics behind and the probability of olympus coming in the future with a better resolution camera? Is it even possible with the current PRO lenses that is already exist?

Its no doubt that the glass available is the most diverse and top notch, but if olympus is not coming in the near future with a better sensor and resolution, its just clearly stays behind... and for professional purposes better alternatives are already there...

Thanks for those that can shed some light on the issue,
Gil.

The first question is - why do you need more than 16MP?

Regards...... Guy

You are an engineer you should know, it's the nature of the technology, you can't avoid or stop it. In the not distance you will be shooting real 24 then 36Mp images in m4/3. You will be still around then and If you don't like it don't buy it. It's that simple.

 

[agachart]

18-26mp GeoMembrane Sensor ~ Organic + micro splitter made by TowerJazz

 

[Ben Herrmann]

That sounds like an edible sensor ;-)

 

[junk1]

I happened to be thinking about this earlier today. I hope at most the next increase is 10% at most - so around 17.5MP. I couldn't care less though if they kept it at 16MP for a few more years, as long as SNR keeps improving.

I'd rather they work on faster video rates for creating super slow motion video than to cram more pixels that are not needed and would be so hard to notice (ever notice the diminishing returns of adding more pixels? The lenses can only resolve so much detail, and noise in the sensor also lowers/limits the resolution).

Even just 12MP (my SLR) is a lot for cropping, 16MP is more then enough. I doubt many are using m43 for professional usage, it is designed to be small yet have very good image quality.

Of course a camera with a larger sensor can have more pixels yet have the same or lower noise levels. A full frame will be even better! and medium format even better!

On a per-pixel basis, the Sony 16 MP sensor that Olympus uses is awesome. The newer Panny GM1/GM2 sensor is still not quite as good as the Sony sensor used in the E-PM2/PL5 (based on DxoMark).

 

[Airmel]

So, I personally (the way I feel - not anyone else who wants to argue the point) is that a 20 MP sensor is right around the corner (and much welcomed) and hopefully, it will have superb IQ all the way around. I do lots of cropping and having the extra MP's really helps.

Just curious, what method of analysis did you use to come up with 20mp? Was it simply the fact that it crosses the 20mp threshold and therefore sounds better?

As many have pointing out before, the megapixel wars illustrate a fine example of the law of diminishing returns. A jump from 16mp to 20mp will yield a negligible 11% increase in resolution, at the expense of a 25% increase in processing cost (think operation speed) and storage space.

The very fact that we are discussing sensors in terms of megapixels rather than actual resolution means that we have been conditioned to think about these things in terms that favor marketing, not science.

Olympus has made it clear that they will not entertain the notion that more megapixels are better unless the associated hit in IQ can be minimized. I am thankful that they take such a position.

--
AirMel
http://www.mel-photo.com
There are 10 types of people in this world.
Those that know binary and those that don't.

 

[TomFid]

So, I personally (the way I feel - not anyone else who wants to argue the point) is that a 20 MP sensor is right around the corner (and much welcomed) and hopefully, it will have superb IQ all the way around. I do lots of cropping and having the extra MP's really helps.

Just curious, what method of analysis did you use to come up with 20mp? Was it simply the fact that it crosses the 20mp threshold and therefore sounds better?

43rumors has already reported 20mp 4/3 sensors. Unclear if they're relevant to PanOly though.

 

[joeletx]

The first question is - why do you need more than 16MP?

Regards...... Guy

I used to share that same thought when I owned the E-5 at 12MP; while the E-5 with the right lens can pull out a reasonably great images, it did not give me any head room for crop. One can argue that it would make a better photographer out of you because you planned your shots each time. But even Olympus could not resist, stopped making excuse and raised the bar by introducing the E-M5 with 16MP. I did not think it would make markedly difference until I bought my first mirror less, the E-M1 a year and a half ago. I sold both the E-3 and the E-5 a couple of months after the E-M1 purchase. I kept all the 4/3 lenses and never regret the selling. The marginal increase in MP did so much to Olympus OMD series that it would be foolish for Olympus not to follow the new found performance and IQ boost and improve furthermore. Samsung is doing great thing here with the new NX1 with BSI sensor type and there is no reason why Olympus would not pursue to raise MP.

 

[pede59]

Dear fellow M4/3 lovers,

Me, like you, loves the system a lot. I actually born into it and started my photography 3 years ago into the first em5. Now upgraded to the mkii.We all know how using olympus system is a lot of fun, and the quality is good too.

But recently in the appearing of new mirrorless cameras, like the NX1, the question of resolution is raised up again.When already few alternatives that offers better image quality are available i would like to ask those that knows and understand the physics behind and the probability of olympus coming in the future with a better resolution camera? Is it even possible with the current PRO lenses that is already exist?

Its no doubt that the glass available is the most diverse and top notch, but if olympus is not coming in the near future with a better sensor and resolution, its just clearly stays behind... and for professional purposes better alternatives are already there...

Thanks for those that can shed some light on the issue,
Gil.

You talk a lot about how much fun it is to use the system. Would you have more fun if you had 8 or 10 MP more?

Higher resolution cameras are around since quite a while now. I had a Sony NEX7 before i bought en EM1 so 24 instead of 16MP. I am not averse to higher resolution but it is not the primary factor. For some people it may be.

I initially fell in love with the EM1 because of how it felt when i got it in my hands. How it handled. I had concerns with IQ and resolution so i compared. The thing is that if you constantly crop or print very large then you may need more MP. I rarely print and if i do then typically no larger than 8x11 .. at those sizes 16MP are more than enough.

Still ... Olympus like anyone else will have to look for improved sensors. Not sure how far they will go, we will see.

What i am looking for right now to add fun is the 300mm f4 lens. And maybe i break down and buy the 40-150 2.8 as well.

 

[Great Bustard]

The first question is - why do you need more than 16MP?

Regards...... Guy

I used to share that same thought when I owned the E-5 at 12MP; while the E-5 with the right lens can pull out a reasonably great images, it did not give me any head room for crop. One can argue that it would make a better photographer out of you because you planned your shots each time. But even Olympus could not resist, stopped making excuse and raised the bar by introducing the E-M5 with 16MP. I did not think it would make markedly difference until I bought my first mirror less, the E-M1 a year and a half ago. I sold both the E-3 and the E-5 a couple of months after the E-M1 purchase. I kept all the 4/3 lenses and never regret the selling. The marginal increase in MP did so much to Olympus OMD series that it would be foolish for Olympus not to follow the new found performance and IQ boost and improve furthermore. Samsung is doing great thing here with the new NX1 with BSI sensor type and there is no reason why Olympus would not pursue to raise MP.

That's exactly it. However, there are still those that feel resolution is unimportant and the hassle of dealing with larger image files is simply not worth it. Of course one can always shoot small jpgs or select a smaller output size in a RAW conversion, so...

 

[s_grins]

Dear fellow M4/3 lovers,

Me, like you, loves the system a lot. I actually born into it and started my photography 3 years ago into the first em5. Now upgraded to the mkii.We all know how using olympus system is a lot of fun, and the quality is good too.

But recently in the appearing of new mirrorless cameras, like the NX1, the question of resolution is raised up again.When already few alternatives that offers better image quality are available i would like to ask those that knows and understand the physics behind and the probability of olympus coming in the future with a better resolution camera? Is it even possible with the current PRO lenses that is already exist?

Better resolution camera is the camera that just got a high score from DPR and DxO. Follow DPR and all sorts of rumors, my friend.

Its no doubt that the glass available is the most diverse and top notch, but if olympus is not coming in the near future with a better sensor and resolution, its just clearly stays behind... and for professional purposes better alternatives are already there...

Thanks for those that can shed some light on the issue,
Gil.