Which OM-1 spec is closest to your "wow"

[SrMi]

All these super high specs are all well and good but they do not mean too much to the 'general photographer' ... which, dare I say, is most of us whether some know it or not !.

I, like most (many), do not do (much) sports or video ... the state of play as it stands is quite good enough for me.

99% of my photography is landscape, cityscape, groups of people and interiors.

A 20% boost in pixels to 24Mp, would mean more to me. Similarly, manufacturer targeted better dynamic range and shadow performance at High ISOs would be wonderful.

Right now, I'm picking up Nikon or Fuji to cover that. For weight, size and price, I would like to go back to u4/3rds ... not sure that will ever be possible. Pity.

FWIW.

A 20% boost in resolution will give you only 9% more pixels in linear dimension (print or screen). So, IMO, 30MP would be a meaningful step up in resolution (20% increase in linear dimension).

I agree the Sony 1" sensor which has half the area of m43 also has 20mp and at low ISO the results are very good. At high ISO, higher MP sensors when output at the same size have very similar noise performance . A lower true base ISO would be better as well

For landscape, LiveND will give you similar DR as with full-frame sensors. I hope that the new sensor improves LiveND usability.

Most of us landscape guys already have ND filters If they can speed up the pixel shift imagery significantly that could be a huge advantage

LiveND uses frame averaging. Therefore, it reduces noise/increases DR. An ND filter cannot do that.

IMO, LiveND works better than HDR as movement (ghosting) is not an issue. In addition, LiveND improves DR more than pixel shift.

 

[AURA PA]

All these super high specs are all well and good but they do not mean too much to the 'general photographer' ... which, dare I say, is most of us whether some know it or not !.

I, like most (many), do not do (much) sports or video ... the state of play as it stands is quite good enough for me.

99% of my photography is landscape, cityscape, groups of people and interiors.

A 20% boost in pixels to 24Mp, would mean more to me. Similarly, manufacturer targeted better dynamic range and shadow performance at High ISOs would be wonderful.

Right now, I'm picking up Nikon or Fuji to cover that. For weight, size and price, I would like to go back to u4/3rds ... not sure that will ever be possible. Pity.

FWIW.

A 20% boost in resolution will give you only 9% more pixels in linear dimension (print or screen). So, IMO, 30MP would be a meaningful step up in resolution (20% increase in linear dimension).

I agree the Sony 1" sensor which has half the area of m43 also has 20mp and at low ISO the results are very good. At high ISO, higher MP sensors when output at the same size have very similar noise performance . A lower true base ISO would be better as well

For landscape, LiveND will give you similar DR as with full-frame sensors. I hope that the new sensor improves LiveND usability.

Most of us landscape guys already have ND filters If they can speed up the pixel shift imagery significantly that could be a huge advantage

LiveND uses frame averaging. Therefore, it reduces noise/increases DR. An ND filter cannot do that.

IMO, LiveND works better than HDR as movement (ghosting) is not an issue. In addition, LiveND improves DR more than pixel shift.

Correct - you end up with high quality 20MP RAW that can be shot (usually) hand-held without the strange HDR ghosting and look. I wonder how big that would stand up to printing. We have print lab on site, I may run some samples though and examine at A0.

 

[Art_P]

But a new feature here and an improvement there... it adds up.
I'd be happy with improved low light performance, AF tracking, HHHR and HHHDR.

 

[James Stirling]

All these super high specs are all well and good but they do not mean too much to the 'general photographer' ... which, dare I say, is most of us whether some know it or not !.

I, like most (many), do not do (much) sports or video ... the state of play as it stands is quite good enough for me.

99% of my photography is landscape, cityscape, groups of people and interiors.

A 20% boost in pixels to 24Mp, would mean more to me. Similarly, manufacturer targeted better dynamic range and shadow performance at High ISOs would be wonderful.

Right now, I'm picking up Nikon or Fuji to cover that. For weight, size and price, I would like to go back to u4/3rds ... not sure that will ever be possible. Pity.

FWIW.

A 20% boost in resolution will give you only 9% more pixels in linear dimension (print or screen). So, IMO, 30MP would be a meaningful step up in resolution (20% increase in linear dimension).

I agree the Sony 1" sensor which has half the area of m43 also has 20mp and at low ISO the results are very good. At high ISO, higher MP sensors when output at the same size have very similar noise performance . A lower true base ISO would be better as well

For landscape, LiveND will give you similar DR as with full-frame sensors. I hope that the new sensor improves LiveND usability.

Most of us landscape guys already have ND filters If they can speed up the pixel shift imagery significantly that could be a huge advantage

LiveND uses frame averaging. Therefore, it reduces noise/increases DR. An ND filter cannot do that.

In fairness I have never used the feature not having owned a body that does it . I was thinking of it along the lines of the built-in ND filters used mainly for video on some cameras . I have seen quite a few posts mentioning it as a feature but could not find any comparison shots , say with and without live ND or the old fashioned way combining multiple shots in post processing

Looking at the manual for the E-M1 III { p159} there are quite a lot of restrictions on the feature. Hopefully an area where the speed of the new cameras processor may come into play

IMO, LiveND works better than HDR as movement (ghosting) is not an issue. In addition, LiveND improves DR more than pixel shift.

I tend to shoot landscapes with FF and mainly use a graduated filter . But , if there was a way to replicate this without using not exactly cheap filters , with less shooting restrictions than the current version, count me in

--
Jim Stirling:
It is undesirable to believe a proposition when there is no ground whatever for supposing it true” Russell
Feel free to tinker with any photos I post

 

[SrMi]

All these super high specs are all well and good but they do not mean too much to the 'general photographer' ... which, dare I say, is most of us whether some know it or not !.

I, like most (many), do not do (much) sports or video ... the state of play as it stands is quite good enough for me.

99% of my photography is landscape, cityscape, groups of people and interiors.

A 20% boost in pixels to 24Mp, would mean more to me. Similarly, manufacturer targeted better dynamic range and shadow performance at High ISOs would be wonderful.

Right now, I'm picking up Nikon or Fuji to cover that. For weight, size and price, I would like to go back to u4/3rds ... not sure that will ever be possible. Pity.

FWIW.

A 20% boost in resolution will give you only 9% more pixels in linear dimension (print or screen). So, IMO, 30MP would be a meaningful step up in resolution (20% increase in linear dimension).

I agree the Sony 1" sensor which has half the area of m43 also has 20mp and at low ISO the results are very good. At high ISO, higher MP sensors when output at the same size have very similar noise performance . A lower true base ISO would be better as well

For landscape, LiveND will give you similar DR as with full-frame sensors. I hope that the new sensor improves LiveND usability.

Most of us landscape guys already have ND filters If they can speed up the pixel shift imagery significantly that could be a huge advantage

LiveND uses frame averaging. Therefore, it reduces noise/increases DR. An ND filter cannot do that.

In fairness I have never used the feature not having owned a body that does it . I was thinking of it along the lines of the built-in ND filters used mainly for video on some cameras . I have seen quite a few posts mentioning it as a feature but could not find any comparison shots , say with and without live ND or the old fashioned way combining multiple shots in post processing

Looking at the manual for the E-M1 III { p159} there are quite a lot of restrictions on the feature. Hopefully an area where the speed of the new cameras processor may come into play

IMO, LiveND works better than HDR as movement (ghosting) is not an issue. In addition, LiveND improves DR more than pixel shift.

I tend to shoot landscapes with FF and mainly use a graduated filter . But , if there was a way to replicate this without using not exactly cheap filters , with less shooting restrictions than the current version, count me in

In my tests, ND16 gives me at least two stops of noise improvement and more than in HR mode.

The main limitation is created by the sensor readout speed (1/60 sec). A single frame cannot be faster than 1/60 sec (ND2: 1/30 sec, etc.) to have gapless frames. There are also issues with clipped highlights (discussed in this forum a while ago).

Only ISO200 makes sense for LiveND.

Frame averaging in the post is more cumbersome, but you have more options, e.g., aligning individual frames when shooting handheld.

 

[cpt kent]

Astro tracking, because it means built-in GPS

No built in GPS :-(