Garth Wood wrote:
> Winsor:
>
> Thanks for the reply. It was clear.
I'm not sure it was a directly to the point as I would have been: It's
the dynamic range that the sensor system is capable of capturing that
determines the limits, always, you may be sure, less than the range
possible within the number of bits in RAW output.
Also, Winsor's take on tonal resolution, while perhaps theoretically
correct, is in practice limited by the resolution of the A/D converter
and the micro linearity of the analog part of the sensor system.
> However, it still didn't answer the gist of the question, i.e., what's the
> evidence that the new Panny sensor in the 410/510 etc. has a smaller DR than
> the old Kodak in the E-1?
>
> Does anyone know?
>
I don't know for sure, although the E-1 has a 14 bit A/D converter, I
believe, vs. the 12 bit more common in other cameras and in all the
other E-thingies so far. That might imply that it was designed to
produce greater dynamic range.
Unfortunately, dpreview wasn't measuring dynamic range back when the E-1
was tested. However, the test of the E-410 shows less range than the
E-330 and contemporary competitor 400D and D40x bodies, so I think it is
safe to assume it is also less than the E-1. While they aren't perfect,
or perhaps as comprehensive as one might wish, the dpreview dynamic
range tests are the best out there that I know of by a fair margin.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/OlympusE410/page17.asp
I don't think it matters much for many subjects, but I was recently
photographing waterfalls in deep woods with dappled sunlight. Huge
brightness range and one can't bracket and combine exposures, since the
water is ever changing. And a fairly high iso is necessary for shots
that stop the water and have decent DOF. Here, a camera with a higher
inherent dynamic range capability is going to allow better results.
If it makes you feel any better, the K10D is about the same as the E-410.
Moose
>
> Garth
>
> P.S.: I just pulled the trigger on the E-410 in any event. I've come
> to the conclusion that, over the medium term, I'll have to become a
> two-system guy -- probably a full-frame (the successor to the Canon 5D,
> used with my stable of Oly OM Zuikos) and possibly the E-3 if it's up to
> snuff. For now, the 410's a "bridge" camera, and the fact that it's
> small, light, and takes all my legacy glass isn't a bad thing. I'm
> waiting for the battery to finish charging, after which I'll start
> taking some test shots with legacy glass as well as the one Digital
> Zuiko (14-54mm) I own... And if my wife likes it, I can always give the
> 410 to her. ;-)
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|