On 7/1/2018 7:58 AM, Jim Nichols wrote:
It's not the QUANTITY of the MPs, it's the QUALITY!
I'm still not entirely convinced. And I'm not interested in comparing to Canon and Fuji cameras, as I have no interest,
at this juncture, in owning either. My questions are more along the lines of "What do I gain or lose by moving from the
Kodak CCD sensor in the E-1 to the CMOS sensors in the current Oly cameras?"
Herewith a comparison of E-1, E-300 and E-M5 II, converted in ACR/LR and in the Oly software.*
<http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/tech/Sensor%20Color/_B050014comp.htm>
No processing after conversion, all default settings for conversion.
With the E-1, there's a distinct difference between ACR/LR and Oly Master 2. It's hard to say from this distance in time
which is more accurate, although I tend to prefer Master 2.
E-M5 II with ACR/LR is quite close to E-1, M2, and the differences with V3 seem to be of curve, more than color. The
E-M5 II ACR/LR version looks to me the best for further processing.
I bought the E-300 mostly because it was the last Kodak sensor, and has a few more Mpickles than the E-1, so I was
curious. It was also very cheap, bundled with the 14-54.
I'm not sure what happened here, with one blossom changing from purple tones to
pink ones. More testing, I suppose.
I chose this subject for likely difficult to reproduce natural colors. Based on this one test, I can't see any color
rendition advantage of E-1 over E-M5 II. It seems to me that Oly has done a good job of retaining their 'look'.
Testy Moose
* These JPEGs have an aRGB ICC profile. That should work fine with the mainstream browsers and recent displays. They
look the same to me in PS and in the browser.
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|