Ok, I just purchased a F30 today for my young son. Yes, it is for him :-) He
is going to take it to Bejing for a 5 days trip for a music performance (he
is playing flute) and he want a samller DC.
Instead of a long review I try to make a short comparison of the image
quality form my point of view:
For measurable noise the F30 is really better than E1 at high ISO but it is
mainly due to built-in noise reduction.
The oversharpening of F30 start to hurt the image quality even at ISO100
(ok, it is slight) same as Olympus C5050 at default mode but with C5050 I
can turn it lower or even off at RAW mode.
The built-in noise reduction of F30 starting to hurt the image quality at
ISO400, see the loss of details on the left of the image (details behind the
transparent fan), E-1's image looks better here. I really don't like this
kind of noise reduction, it make the scene un-natural, the high contrast
details looks very sharp but the lower contrast one looks muddy. This is
extremely bad for forest shoots but ok for outdoor most likely you can use
low ISO.
The image from F30 looks nice at first glance but I really wish it can give
me two extra controls, one is the sharpness level and the other is the
option to turn off the noise reduction. But seems that it is not available
anywhere.
Here is the samples from ISO 100-3200, tripod, self-timer, F30 at highest
quality mode, E-1 at RAW converted with SILKYPIX and save as JPEG with
Photoshop (ISO100-400 with some sharpening):
(the F30 images are around 3MB each and the E-1 images are 1-2MB each)
http://www.accura.com.hk/F30VE1/F30-100.jpg
http://www.accura.com.hk/F30VE1/F30-200.jpg
http://www.accura.com.hk/F30VE1/F30-400.jpg
http://www.accura.com.hk/F30VE1/F30-800.jpg
http://www.accura.com.hk/F30VE1/F30-1600.jpg
http://www.accura.com.hk/F30VE1/F30-3200.jpg
http://www.accura.com.hk/F30VE1/E1-100.jpg
http://www.accura.com.hk/F30VE1/E1-200.jpg
http://www.accura.com.hk/F30VE1/E1-400.jpg
http://www.accura.com.hk/F30VE1/E1-800.jpg
http://www.accura.com.hk/F30VE1/E1-1600.jpg
http://www.accura.com.hk/F30VE1/E1-3200.jpg
Here is the last one, E1-ISO1600 processed with Neatimage.
http://www.accura.com.hk/F30VE1/E1-1600n.jpg
Compare with the F30 image, which one do you like?
C.H.Ling
----- Original Message -----
From: "Moose" <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <olympus@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, July 02, 2006 2:35 PM
Subject: [OM] F30 review, but partly on topic [was Protective Filters]
SNAP.
>
> "Photo quality was very good, especially in terms of high ISO
> performance. The F30 isn't quite as clean as a digital SLR, but it's way
> better than your typical fixed lens camera. You can print 8 x 10's (and
> maybe larger) all the way through ISO 800, with smaller prints at ISO
> 1600."
>
> - The problem here is simple, this guy likes high end DSLRs, uses them
> and is unconsciously comparing the F30 to them. But sloppy
> thinking/writing again, which makes the F30 sound like it is noisier
> than it is.
>
> I just did some comparison shots with a lesser DSLR, the only one I
> have, the 300D. I picked a subject that has the advantage of being right
> where I sit at the computer. I also think it's good because it includes
> some OM gear and a wide range of brightness, colors and textures. My
> conclusion is that the two cameras are different, but about equal at iso
> 3200, with the 300D showing a little more detail and noise in most
> areas, the F30 showing better texture in the camera case leather and
> showing that there is something above the books, where the 300D just
> loses it.
>
> It looks to me like the F30 simply has less noise at iso 1600, 800 and
> 400, by a small, but noticeable amount. I'm not sure what is going on
> with the 300D at 800 and 400, but that's what I got. Don't put too much
> emphasis on sharpness, as they are very different lenses shot at
> different f-stops and I just used the default sharpness settings on both
> cameras. Sharpness could undoubtedly be improved upon in both. I'm
> actually glad I didn't pay any attention to color balance, as it made it
> easier for me to keep the images straight.
>
> If you agree with my reading of my test shots, it's clear that the
> diminutive F30, with its tiny sensor, has lower noise than an E-1 and
> may well out resolve it! Whatever Fuji is doing, they are out there in
> amazing land. Anyway, judge for yourself. It's a 1.1 mb file, but I
> don't know how else to show what it's supposed to show
> <http://moosemystic.net/Gallery/tech/F30Noise.htm>.
>
> And back to the review, based on what size images can be printed from
> the 300D and E-1, he is clearly way too conservative in the print sizes
> he says can be made from the different iso settings on the F30.
SNAP
>
> (Do you think he likes it?)
> Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|
