Olympus E510 has poor dynamic range? Not any more.

Discussion in 'Olympus' started by Maat, Aug 28, 2008.

  1. Maat

    Alan Hoyle Guest

    Getting FX- or EF-only lenses for a non-full-frame camera is not an
    inexpensive proposition.

    Let's say you want to cover the 28-300mm full-frame equivalent range
    on an APS body with lenses that you won't have to replace if you get a
    full-frame body.

    With Nikon or Canon, you're suddently talking about a big initial
    outlay expenditure if you insist on sticking with EF or FX lenses, as
    the least expensive FX/EF lenses that cover the necessary 17-18mm
    wide-end are $700 (for the Canon EF 17-40 f/4L) or $1500 (Nikkor 17-35
    f/2.8 ED).

    The long end is much easier to accomodate with several options that
    start at 70/80mm to 200/300mm in both C&N systems for $500 and up
    ($1000 and up if you insist on VR/IS). And even in this case, you're
    still left with a void in the middle focal distances (35-70mm) that
    you'll need to fill with a third, not-inexpensive lens.

    If you're willing to compomise with DX or EF-S lenses you can
    certainly get less expensive options, but if the whole point is "I
    won't need to replace my lenses if I get a full-frame body" the
    entry-costs are quite high. You're stuck getting 3 expensive FX/EF
    lenses, or compromising and getting at least one APS-only lens that
    you'll have to replace if you ever get that big sensor body.

    -alan
     
    Alan Hoyle, Aug 29, 2008
    #41
    1. Advertisements

  2. Maat

    ASAAR Guest

    The Fuji pros (mostly wedding photographers, I'd guess) all
    recognize that the S5 is much noisier than the D300, but don't seem
    to care very much. I guess that they don't produce many very large
    prints, or if they do, may shoot those with something other than the
    S5.

    They'd love it. I might also, but by the time Fuji produces
    anything like that, if they ever do, Nikon will probably have
    leapfrogged beyond . . .

    Or by their Speedlights. Wedding pros though, are more likely to
    have more elaborate, higher power lighting systems, which can cause
    burns, but not in the same way. Olympus's DSLR situation doesn't
    seem as dire as Fuji's, especially if they don't take too long
    getting out some M4/3 goodies.
     
    ASAAR, Aug 29, 2008
    #42
    1. Advertisements

  3. Maat

    ASAAR Guest

    Whether that's true or not (I've only seen descriptions of
    F-sequences and F-series that start with 0,1,1,2...), nit picking
    correction wasn't my intent, nor should it have been yours. Not
    getting that intent is understandable, give that I didn't also
    append "<g>" or a smiley, but I prefer not to overdo the hints. It
    was an attempt to take a cue from your "<g>" and continue the nerd
    humor a tiny bit. Unfortunately, we couldn't expect Fuji to replace
    an S1 with the new version also being called S1, so I added the 's',
    a la Nikon's D70s. A good/valid Fuji Fibonacci sequence would be
    represented by S0, S1, S1, S2, S3, S5 ... but being that anal would
    spoil what little humor existed. Not a real knee-slapper, that.
     
    ASAAR, Aug 29, 2008
    #43
  4. Maat

    D-Mac Guest

    I used an S5 for weddings as a replacement for a 5D that went swimming.
    I later bought a couple of D300s and a D3 as I moved the studio away
    from Canon gear altogether. I have no commitment to any brand. I use
    whatever I think does the job.

    Recently I bought a SD14 Sigma because under some conditions the image
    quality allows me to make enlargements to 1 metre high x 1.2m wide with
    more detail and sharpness than with a 10Mp image from Nikon or Canon (CMOS).

    The noise in Fuji images is very acceptable stuff. Unlike Canon and Sony
    noise which I think is about as bad as it gets. The point Anal raised
    about big enlargements demonstrates his short memory span.

    I frequently enlarge S5 images to life size portraits and print them on
    canvas. No one who has ever seen an enlargement of mine - from any brand
    of camera can claim noise is an issue unless I chose to make it one.

    Film grain and noise that mimics it adds a texture to an image that
    probably resulted in people calling digital files "plastic".
     
    D-Mac, Aug 30, 2008
    #44
  5. Maat

    ASAAR Guest

    It's not that they consider the S5 to be especially noisy, and
    they really like the sensor/firmware that gives them the DR and
    color that they want. As a group they seem remarkably free of
    fanboy enthusiasm and readily admit to the D300's speed, lower noise
    and other advantages. If not for feeling that Fuji won't soon (if
    ever) offer anything to replace the S5, I'm sure many of the ones
    that switched to Nikon's new DSLRs would have been more patient.

    Did you really mean HDR? Fuji's DR benefits, from what I've read,
    is mostly advantageous for getting the white detail, but doesn't do
    as well as the D300 or D3 for getting the detail and subtle shades
    out of the darker areas. If you meant HDR, I think that would be
    too labor intensive for most wedding pros, whether pieced together
    from multiple shots or emulated from a single RAW image. They
    necessarily churn out volume, and could hardly afford to put in any
    Ansel-like time and effort except for a very small number of photos.
     
    ASAAR, Aug 30, 2008
    #45
    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.