Olympus E-system, one person's opinion

Discussion in 'Olympus' started by RichA, May 28, 2005.

  1. RichA

    JPS Guest

    In message <>,
    Well, truth be told, any DSLR you can currently buy new has low noise at
    ISO 100, with a normal exposure, and transfer curve in the RAW
    conversion, but if you want to drag the shadows or under-exposure up
    into visibility (to match the human eye/brain response), the noise
    difference will start to show.
    --
     
    JPS, May 30, 2005
    #21
    1. Advertisements

  2. RichA

    JPS Guest

    In message <>,
    Part of the reason for that may be that technical issues are often
    obscured by composition. People are prone to ignore technical problems
    when the composition is interesting.
    --
     
    JPS, May 30, 2005
    #22
    1. Advertisements

  3. RichA

    Stacey Guest


    IMHO other technical issues like how easily highlights are blown or poor
    color saturation are just as easily obscured in these tiny sniplets that
    the noise nerds post.
     
    Stacey, May 30, 2005
    #23
  4. RichA

    Alan Browne Guest

    Brion K. Lienhart wrote:

    It's a fact that larger sensors have a S/N advantage over smaller.

    The doubt is raised regarding the future.

    If somebody locks into the Oly system now, then he will experience that
    future for bettor or worse.

    Cheers,
    Alan.
     
    Alan Browne, May 30, 2005
    #24
  5. RichA

    Alan Browne Guest

    The best images will come from camera systems that have the most trade
    space for the photographer to work with. The 4/3 today has less trade
    space than a Canon 20D, D70, *istD or K-M 7D (and others).

    As pix desnities go up, that trade space will narrow.

    Cheers,
    Alan.
     
    Alan Browne, May 30, 2005
    #25
  6. RichA

    Alan Browne Guest

    I've only had two issues with the Oly 4/3 for SLR's:

    1) Lenses are not the Oly promissed panacea of value. eg: very good to
    excellent lenses, but the price is high.

    2) They are currently noisy. How will they fare in the future as Pix
    densities go up.
    Specifically? If most people shoot at ISO 100/200, then the current Oly
    4/3 in the E300 is more than decent enough. What I did point to,
    specifically, were the current noise measurements at dpreview which put
    Oly at a clear margin above others in noise.
    We all hope that Oly finds a better sensor.
    This has nothing to do with photographic quality.

    Max 7D on that card: about 6.5 MB/s. I shoot at a rate of about 25
    frames per hour. Even if I shot 10 frames / minute, I would have a 3:1
    safety margin. Just does not apply to me at all. An exceptional case
    was a fashion show a few months ago where I would shoot volleys of 3 to
    6 frames within about 20 seconds, and then wait for the next model. No
    problem at all.

    It's an issue for those who shoot "machine gun" style. Some nature
    photogs. Some sports shooters. Some other special applications.

    Sorry, for me (and most shooters) that's a non starter. Like 2s startup
    time v 1 sec. startup time. Not a useful point of discussion. But keep
    digging.

    Cheers,
    Alan
     
    Alan Browne, May 30, 2005
    #26
  7. RichA

    Alan Browne Guest

    Not at all.

    As far as I know, excepting a few Fujifilm cameras such as the S3,
    highlight behavior is pretty much the same DSLR to DSLR. The Fujifilm
    S3 (extra dynamic range) sensors are the the only ones equipped to
    control highlights well.

    I have had some funnies regarding highlights that confirm some of JPS'
    observations about histogram implementation. Most recently,
    photographing some woodwork, the highlights off of one facet of the
    (pale) wood were blown depite all metering and histogram checks to
    prevent it. Required a return to shooting and a full stop down to
    correct it and a fill reflector on the other side as a consequence of
    the aperture correction. (Also shot frames with the woodwork turned to
    reduce that specific highlight).

    Cheers,
    Alan
     
    Alan Browne, May 30, 2005
    #27
  8. RichA

    Stacey Guest

    Who's raising this "doubt"? It's only people who use another system.

    Given olypus has already said they are working on 2 new dSLR's they plan to
    release this fiscal year and have 3 new lenses, why would a user "doubt"
    the future? What exactly has minolta comited to in any press releases as
    far as dSLR's for this year? An 8-10MP version? Any new optics? Where is
    the future in the minolta dSLR line going beyond your speculation....
     
    Stacey, May 30, 2005
    #28
  9. RichA

    Stacey Guest

    LOL So we're back to -high ISO noise spec- is the only spec that matters to
    anyone..
     
    Stacey, May 30, 2005
    #29
  10. RichA

    Alan Browne Guest

    No DSLR announced, but several high end "G" lenses last year and a few
    lenses late last year and early this year. (A couple of those dedicated
    to 'digital' cropped, alas).

    It is true that Minolta's DSLR future is not certain. Nobody knows
    either way, and Minolta have been famously tight lipped, as they've
    always been over future plans and models. The only 'hint of trouble'
    are the words in their recent 5 yr plan that indicate waning interest in
    consumer imaging. They do mention "high added value" pursuits, which
    hopefully means DSLR's and attendant optics and accessories.

    Having said that, I hope to see an announcement for the next PMA
    regarding a digital body.

    I just fear it will be a "5D" (repeat of the 7D at 6 or 8 Mpix or
    without A-S, and other high end features removed).

    I would love for it to be a "8D" (Say the 10 Mpix that Leica are using
    in 1.37x crop on an A-S) or a "9D" with full frame (though perhaps
    without A-S given the larger sensor size).

    We'll see.

    But, in the unlikely event that I have to abandon Minolta for digital, I
    will look mostly at Canon.

    Cheers,
    Alan.
     
    Alan Browne, May 30, 2005
    #30
  11. RichA

    Alan Browne Guest

    Please show me how CF write speeds improve your photography. Do you
    shoot bursts of shots often? For necessity?

    Or please state every important photographic system spec item that
    matters to you.

    Cheers,
    Alan
     
    Alan Browne, May 30, 2005
    #31
  12. RichA

    Trapezium Guest


    ----------

    As luck would have I visited a stately home/museum today, and found when I
    arrived that flash photography was verboten (damages the paintings, or so
    they said)

    What's more, the sun blinds were pulled down and parts of the interior were
    quite dark. Happily, I was able to use ISO 800 (and 1600 for a few shots)
    secure in the knowledge that the results wouldn't be plagued by excessive
    noise.

    With an Olympus DSLR it would have been something of a wasted trip, I think.
    If people are restricted to the low ISO's that you call 'normal' they might
    as well be using a point & shoot camera.
     
    Trapezium, May 30, 2005
    #32
  13. RichA

    Bubbabob Guest

    I'd like to see SOMEONE think outside of the box a bit and introduce a 9
    Mpx camera with a square 3000x3000 format that would use most of the
    coverage of DX type lenses.
     
    Bubbabob, May 30, 2005
    #33
  14. RichA

    Stacey Guest

    Lets see the shots, my guess it was a wasted trip irregardless of the camera
    you were carrying.. ;-)

    I've rarely seen images shot in a museum that were in the least bit
    interesting. I'll be shocked if the ones you took were...

    Lets see what you got and I'll post some ISO1600 shots then see which ones
    are "a waste"..
     
    Stacey, May 30, 2005
    #34
  15. RichA

    Stacey Guest

    Good detail in highly saturated colors and optics that are sharp enough for
    the sensor density being used are a couple of starters..
     
    Stacey, May 30, 2005
    #35
  16. RichA

    Frederick Guest

    There might be a problem getting a mirror to fit between the back of the
    lens and the sensor on a DSLR.
    But a ZLR with a DX lens mounts, high mp square format, and decent
    viewfinder could be one hell of a camera.
     
    Frederick, May 30, 2005
    #36
  17. RichA

    Alan Browne Guest

    Excellent reply. Glad to see you're over the irrelevancies (to most
    users) of things like CF card write rates.

    Why "highly saturated colors"?

    Cheers,
    Alan
     
    Alan Browne, May 31, 2005
    #37
  18. RichA

    Stacey Guest

    Because I like em! Seen way too many digital flower shots with zero detail
    if the image has anywhere near the actual color saturation of the flower or
    other highly saturated colored objects.

    There are many digicams that would blow this into a mass of detailess
    purple. I know cause I've used a couple that would.

    http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2005-1/937049/web2flower.jpg
     
    Stacey, May 31, 2005
    #38
  19. RichA

    Alan Browne Guest

    Yellows can be tricky too.
    I use a shoot through umbrella to cast a softlight onto the flowers and
    bring the contrast down. Much more pleasing than a "loud" photo like
    this, OTHO the slightest breeze will ruin the shot. Difused flash works
    well too, but is often a pain to set up in the field where you have to
    block the sunlight and get the flash onto the subject.

    I suppose the flower type should determine this, harsh/hard/contrasty
    flowers best show their character in hard light; gentle/soft/creamy
    flowers look best in a soft difused light.

    Cheers,
    Alan
     
    Alan Browne, May 31, 2005
    #39
  20. RichA

    Jeremy Nixon Guest

    Nonsense. The best images will come from cameras used by the best
    photographers.
     
    Jeremy Nixon, May 31, 2005
    #40
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.