If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#81
|
|||
|
|||
DSLR lenses
MarkH wrote:
I am a little confused at this post though, I thought you were talking about how good your 5050 was and how it suited your needs better than a D-SLR. But now you are talking about replacing it with a noisier camera that does not have a f1.8 lens. I used my own camera as an example in my post (10D) and you are arguing that your postings only applied to the 300D or D70, but the 300D has the same sensor as my 10D and close to the same noise levels - what applies to the 10D also applies to the 300D. What makes you think that the 8080 is more noisy than the 5050 ? Pixel size is the same for both cameras (around 3 micrometer) and Olympus incorporated advanced noise reduction processes into the 8080. According to the dpreview data noise levels for the 300D at ISO 400 are more or less the same as for the 8080 at ISO 100 (around 2 for the standard deviation). The D70 is a bit more and starts only at ISO 200, but I would still prefer it over the 300D. -- Alfred Molon ------------------------------ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Olympus_405080/ Olympus 5050 resource - http://www.molon.de/5050.html Olympus 5060 resource - http://www.molon.de/5060.html Olympus 8080 resource - http://www.molon.de/8080.html |
#82
|
|||
|
|||
DSLR lenses
In message ,
Alfred Molon wrote: According to the dpreview data noise levels for the 300D at ISO 400 are more or less the same as for the 8080 at ISO 100 (around 2 for the standard deviation). That may reflect noise-reduction in the camera, which also reduces detail. Someone posted an example of how noise-free their P&S was the other day, and the image looked like it was simply stripped of all high-res detail, and I could clearly see soft blotches of color cast all over the image. -- John P Sheehy |
#83
|
|||
|
|||
DSLR lenses
Alfred Molon wrote in
: MarkH wrote: I am a little confused at this post though, I thought you were talking about how good your 5050 was and how it suited your needs better than a D-SLR. But now you are talking about replacing it with a noisier camera that does not have a f1.8 lens. I used my own camera as an example in my post (10D) and you are arguing that your postings only applied to the 300D or D70, but the 300D has the same sensor as my 10D and close to the same noise levels - what applies to the 10D also applies to the 300D. What makes you think that the 8080 is more noisy than the 5050 ? Pixel size is the same for both cameras (around 3 micrometer) and Olympus incorporated advanced noise reduction processes into the 8080. Actually I may have been incorrect here, I didn’t check the relative pixel pitch and may have made a wrong assumption. The other points I make I still stand behind. However if you combine the f2.4 max aperture with a larger sensor then you will get a shallower DoF with the 8080 then your 5050, so you don’t get quite the same performance in hand held low light. According to the dpreview data noise levels for the 300D at ISO 400 are more or less the same as for the 8080 at ISO 100 (around 2 for the standard deviation). The D70 is a bit more and starts only at ISO 200, but I would still prefer it over the 300D. And the 10D noise is slightly less than the 300D, still around 2. The important fact is the 300D is slightly less noisy at ISO 400 then the best that the 5050 or the 8080 are capable of. The 300D still has 2 more ISO settings below that that give an even cleaner image. This is due to the greater light collecting ability of the larger sensor, this is a distinct advantage in many situations. In my opinion the 300D is a better camera (as long as we ignore price, weight and size). I also can’t see how the 28-140mm zoom equivalent on the 8080 could come close to what you can do on a D-SLR with current glass available to cover 19-1920mm zoom equivalent without using teleconverters. As long as fans of the 8080 are happy to claim that they find the results good enough for their purposes I am happy. When they start trying to tell the world that the camera they like is better than more expensive D-SLRs then I am happy to insert my opinion. -- Mark Heyes (New Zealand) See my pics at http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~markh/ "There are 10 types of people, those that understand binary and those that don't" |
#84
|
|||
|
|||
DSLR lenses
Alfred Molon wrote in
: MarkH wrote: I am a little confused at this post though, I thought you were talking about how good your 5050 was and how it suited your needs better than a D-SLR. But now you are talking about replacing it with a noisier camera that does not have a f1.8 lens. I used my own camera as an example in my post (10D) and you are arguing that your postings only applied to the 300D or D70, but the 300D has the same sensor as my 10D and close to the same noise levels - what applies to the 10D also applies to the 300D. What makes you think that the 8080 is more noisy than the 5050 ? Pixel size is the same for both cameras (around 3 micrometer) and Olympus incorporated advanced noise reduction processes into the 8080. Actually I may have been incorrect here, I didn’t check the relative pixel pitch and may have made a wrong assumption. The other points I make I still stand behind. However if you combine the f2.4 max aperture with a larger sensor then you will get a shallower DoF with the 8080 then your 5050, so you don’t get quite the same performance in hand held low light. According to the dpreview data noise levels for the 300D at ISO 400 are more or less the same as for the 8080 at ISO 100 (around 2 for the standard deviation). The D70 is a bit more and starts only at ISO 200, but I would still prefer it over the 300D. And the 10D noise is slightly less than the 300D, still around 2. The important fact is the 300D is slightly less noisy at ISO 400 then the best that the 5050 or the 8080 are capable of. The 300D still has 2 more ISO settings below that that give an even cleaner image. This is due to the greater light collecting ability of the larger sensor, this is a distinct advantage in many situations. In my opinion the 300D is a better camera (as long as we ignore price, weight and size). I also can’t see how the 28-140mm zoom equivalent on the 8080 could come close to what you can do on a D-SLR with current glass available to cover 19-1920mm zoom equivalent without using teleconverters. As long as fans of the 8080 are happy to claim that they find the results good enough for their purposes I am happy. When they start trying to tell the world that the camera they like is better than more expensive D-SLRs then I am happy to insert my opinion. -- Mark Heyes (New Zealand) See my pics at http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~markh/ "There are 10 types of people, those that understand binary and those that don't" |
#85
|
|||
|
|||
DSLR lenses
MarkH wrote:
However if you combine the f2.4 max aperture with a larger sensor then you will get a shallower DoF with the 8080 then your 5050, so you don’t get quite the same performance in hand held low light. Well, no. The 8080 starts at F2.4 and has a crop factor of 4, i.e. you get at F2.4 the same DOF as a 35mm camera at F9.6. The 5050 has a crop factor of 5 and gives you at F1.8 the same DOF of a 35mm camera at F9. But it's true that the 5050 performs better in low light than the 8080, mainly because of the larger aperture. -- Alfred Molon ------------------------------ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Olympus_405080/ Olympus 5050 resource - http://www.molon.de/5050.html Olympus 5060 resource - http://www.molon.de/5060.html Olympus 8080 resource - http://www.molon.de/8080.html |
#87
|
|||
|
|||
DSLR lenses
wrote:
According to the dpreview data noise levels for the 300D at ISO 400 are more or less the same as for the 8080 at ISO 100 (around 2 for the standard deviation). That may reflect noise-reduction in the camera, which also reduces detail. I suspect that the Canon 300D applies a lot of advanced noise reduction too. I heard somebody complain about softness in 300D images the other day. -- Alfred Molon ------------------------------ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Olympus_405080/ Olympus 5050 resource - http://www.molon.de/5050.html Olympus 5060 resource - http://www.molon.de/5060.html Olympus 8080 resource - http://www.molon.de/8080.html |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
New Leica digital back info.... | Barney | 35mm Photo Equipment | 19 | June 30th 04 12:45 AM |
[Survey] -Prime Lenses in the kit -results | Orville Wright | In The Darkroom | 69 | June 29th 04 02:38 PM |
[Survey] -Prime Lenses in the kit -results | Orville Wright | Medium Format Photography Equipment | 67 | June 29th 04 02:38 PM |
Why go dSLR? | Bob | Digital Photography | 69 | June 27th 04 07:22 PM |
Asking advice | Bugs Bunny | Medium Format Photography Equipment | 69 | March 9th 04 05:42 AM |