On 7/22/21 3:00 PM, Ken Norton wrote:
That's what I discovered when I compared E-M5 II, E-1, E-300 and E-400. Yes,
some differences, but close knit family.
I don't know how the E-M1 bodies do in this regard, but the E-M5ii
certainly has "the look". For those who think it's just a matter of
adjusting sliders in LR, while true, some cameras get there right up
front, where others need to have a lot of slider movement to get
there. And even at that, there are native differences in the way the
sensors "see". It reminds me of the difference between Fujichrome
Provia and Kodak Ektachrome 64. While you can adjust curves to get
some stuff to match, the way the films saw and interpreted the colors
in the scene are different. This was always evident in tree bark in
the northwoods.
AG Schnozz
Ken,
As one who buys cheap, and used, I have the basic E-M1. I use it and
the E-1 more or less interchangeably. The E-M1 has more pixels, while
the E-1 has better color but is heavier. I may be the only one on the
list still choosing these cameras (except for your occasional use of the
E-1, of course), but they work for me. I'll let you and Moose learn
about all the new bells and whistles. At 91, my memory doesn't need
more challenges!
--
Jim Nichols
Tullahoma, TN USA
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|