Keep in mind that you're talking to the owner of a Canon 5D which was my
choice when I saw how small the sensor was on the E-things. It doesn't
matter how good the E-things get, they'll always be behind on
performance relative to a full frame 35mm size sensor, just as a 35mm
size sensor will always be behind relative to a 645 sensor.
All that said, based on the specs of the E-5, I don't think Olympus has
done a bad job. But I do believe they made a bad design decision on the
4/3 sensor. I suspect the E-5 may be the end of the line for 4/3 except
for micro 4/3.
Olympus is too small to develop their own sensors. They'll always have
to be content with what the larger market provides for them.
Chuck Norcutt
On 9/14/2010 9:44 AM, Dawid Loubser wrote:
> Chuck, Olympus could at least have tried to match or exceed *one* of
> the parameters of image quality offered by even the lowest-specced
> Canon or Nikon DSLR. As it stands, pretty as the colours may be,
> image noise, resolution, dynamic range are all well below what is
> possible from even a bottom-of-the-line plastic DSLR from the other
> manufacturers. The official example images (I know, I know, they are
> probably not really representative, as they never are...) are
> disappointing in comparison to what I got from my Canon DSLR made in
> 2004. They really should have caught up by now!
>
> Or they could have built in a single "must-have" feature which,
> despite sub-par image quality relative to the competition, would have
> made the camera desirable. For example, an innovation in dynamic
> range. Or high capture speed made possible by that tiny tiny mirror
> in that gigantic body.
>
> True story: I recently showed a scan of Fuji Provia slide film to my
> colleague, an experienced E-3 user. The light was quite challenging.
> He immediately commented on how he would have had to do a multi-shot
> HDR merge to not have blown the highlights, "to get a shot like
> that". And this is in comparison to slide film!
>
> Now, this is probably not true (I hope and believe the E-3 can do
> better than Provia) but it shows how tortured E-3 users have been in
> terms of dealing with poor dynamic range. Since Olympus filed some
> patents related to high dynamic range a couple of years ago, one
> would have hoped that some of this would have made it into the E-5 by
> now?
>
> No. The E-5 is like a Leica M8 (image-quality-wise, I'm sure it's a
> much better camera in terms of performance and durability): Far below
> what is possible from other systems at much lower cost, the only
> reason for use being a heavy investment into expensive lenses.
>
> Well, guess what? There are many other options available to put
> those Zuiko Digital lenses in front of... Unfortunately, ironically,
> the E-5 probably has the best image quality of the lot.
>
> But the system just doesn't make any kind of economic sense anymore.
> I'm sure it's a dandy camera, but one always has to keep current
> trends into account.
>
> When I got my 1D MkIIN a couple of years ago (2005), the image
> quality was almost unsurpassed. The dynamic range and per-pixel
> detail was astounding. The high ISO performance legendary.
>
> Even though this bulky camera is still a wonderful picture maker
> today (but no longer in my hands...) does it stack up to what is
> available at lower cost today? Not really, no. A Pentax K-7 pretty
> much beats it, at less than a fifth of the price, in all parameters
> of image quality.
>
> Canon would not be lauded today for bringing out a 1D MkIIM which
> has the same low-resolution sensor, same huge body, same excellent
> viewfinder, as the model they sold until 2007, with merely an added
> movie mode, and a higher-res LCD, and a fake HDR "art filter".
>
> So, neither should Olympus have. They seriously dropped the ball
> with the E-5, alienated most of their customers and fans (is anybody
> seriously proud of this camera??), and is clearly making a statement
> regarding what to expect for the Four Thirds system.
>
> </rant>
>
> On 14 Sep 2010, at 2:45 PM, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
>>
>> A bit late perhaps but I'm not sure what else they could have
>> done.
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|