> Please, drivel On
I'm not sure I'd be able to stop even if asked. :)
I did a little testing last night to test my theories of testing and
what my next tests should be. I would have spent more time testing,
but my wife got testy.
That said, a couple things jumped out at me which are really worth exploring.
The E-1 has extreme levels of color noise in the pictures.
Fortunately, in Lightroom, it's child's play to eliminate it, so I
consider it mostly to be a non-issue except for the color integrity in
the shadows and at higher ISOs can suffer under artificial light.
Interestly, the CMOS based sensors give me almost the exact same
results WITHOUT clearing out the color noise in Lightroom. The same
traits are present in both. This tells me that the cameras are
effectively performing the same type of noise reduction in-camera that
Lightroom allows me to do to the E-1 files in the computer. I was
checking to see if the E-300 and E-400 follow the same characteristics
as the E-1 or are more like the CMOS cameras in regards to Lightroom
adjustments. I did not come to any conclusion yet.
It's weird because under some conditions the E-300 images are more
like the E-1, but in other conditions, the E-400 is. If there is any
one trait that seems to be apparent is the dithering is different
between the three. The E-1 has aggressive dithering added which
creates a nice noise balance at all brightness levels in the image,
whereas the E-400 looks to have a non-linear dithering added. Both are
a bit of a mystery until I do my next test.
This testing is a wonderful wintertime project when the outdoor
temperatures are -10F. I won't be doing any testing once it starts to
warm up.
AK Schnozz
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|