The E3 at ISO 3200

This is a 50% crop processed with Noise Ninja:
http://myolympus.org/document.php?id=13082
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0 and E3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

"Chris" wrote in message
...

"Alfred Molon" wrote in message
...
This is a 50% crop processed with Noise Ninja:
http://myolympus.org/document.php?id=13082


Not entirely sure what your point is - for a top of the range DSLR to
require a third party noise reduction facility (which 'plasticises' the
image) is hardly something to admire.

Every other manufacturer has now switched to CMOS for their better dslr's
and clean ISO 3200 is becoming more and more normal. Olympus will surely
be left behind thanks to the discredited 4/3 system - noise is the new
battleground for dslr's and Olympus have lost almost before the firing
starts.

So how exactly is the 4/3 system "discredited? I must have missed that
memo.

"Peter Stavrakoglou" wrote in message
...
"Chris" wrote in message
...

"Alfred Molon" wrote in message
...
This is a 50% crop processed with Noise Ninja:
http://myolympus.org/document.php?id=13082


Not entirely sure what your point is - for a top of the range DSLR to
require a third party noise reduction facility (which 'plasticises' the
image) is hardly something to admire.

Every other manufacturer has now switched to CMOS for their better dslr's
and clean ISO 3200 is becoming more and more normal. Olympus will surely
be left behind thanks to the discredited 4/3 system - noise is the new
battleground for dslr's and Olympus have lost almost before the firing
starts.

So how exactly is the 4/3 system "discredited? I must have missed that
memo.


Oh.....dear. Not another pointless argument reminiscent of trying to
persuade a loony that the earth is *not*, as he asserts, flat and that Elvis
is *not* actually appearing in a nightly cabaret spot on the far side of
Neptune?!!

Look - you can busy yourself with Noise Ninja as much as you please. It's
not actually harming anyone and it keeps you all off the streets - but
PLEASE, let's not try and pretend that 4/3 is anything other than a failed
marketing ploy and is a noisy pointless image system beloved of fanatics who
spend their lives trying to reinvent the wheel.

"Alfred Molon" a écrit dans le message de
...
This is a 50% crop processed with Noise Ninja:
http://myolympus.org/document.php?id=13082

noisy , shame on that 4/3 sensor

In article , Yvan Descartes says...

This is a 50% crop processed with Noise Ninja:
http://myolympus.org/document.php?id=13082

noisy , shame on that 4/3 sensor

That image is not noisy.
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0 and E3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

In article , Chris says...

Every other manufacturer has now switched to CMOS for their better dslr's
and clean ISO 3200 is becoming more and more normal. Olympus will surely be
left behind thanks to the discredited 4/3 system - noise is the new
battleground for dslr's and Olympus have lost almost before the firing
starts.

Full frame cameras have obviusly even lower noise levels, but the lenses
are 8 (eight) times as bulky and heavy. If you enjoy breaking your back
walking around with a backpack full of gear, go ahead.
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0 and E3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

Alfred Molon wrote:
[]
Full frame cameras have obviusly even lower noise levels, but the
lenses are 8 (eight) times as bulky and heavy. If you enjoy breaking
your back walking around with a backpack full of gear, go ahead.

Were that true, I would happily have bought 4/3, but sadly a 4/3 system is
not eight times lighter or eight times less bulky that a typical (DX) DSLR
system.

David

"Alfred Molon" wrote:
In article , Chris says...

Every other manufacturer has now switched to CMOS for their better dslr's
and clean ISO 3200 is becoming more and more normal. Olympus will surely
be
left behind thanks to the discredited 4/3 system - noise is the new
battleground for dslr's and Olympus have lost almost before the firing
starts.

Full frame cameras have obviusly even lower noise levels, but the lenses
are 8 (eight) times as bulky and heavy. If you enjoy breaking your back
walking around with a backpack full of gear, go ahead.

Right. One could get the 70-200/4.0 IS for the 5D, or the 35-100/2.0 for a
4/3 camera.

Same DOF at wide open, same sensitivity at wide open (since the 4/3 sensor
is 1/4 the area, it has the same noise as the 5D set to 4 times the ISO),
same zoom range (since 4/3 has a 2x crop factor).

Photographically, you can't tell the difference (unless you put up with a
slower shutter speed on the 5D to get the better dynamic range inherent in a
larger sensor).

But guess which is larger and heavier and more expensive (and doesn't have
IS).

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan

"Alfred Molon" wrote in message
...
In article , Yvan Descartes says...

This is a 50% crop processed with Noise Ninja:
http://myolympus.org/document.php?id=13082

noisy , shame on that 4/3 sensor

That image is not noisy.
--

Not a lot can be told from the image anyway, 50% crop, heavily processed, no
idea how well the shot was lit and no image from any other camera to compare
it to.

Cheers.

Pete

David J. Littleboy wrote:
"Alfred Molon" wrote:
In article , Chris says...
Every other manufacturer has now switched to CMOS for their better dslr's
and clean ISO 3200 is becoming more and more normal. Olympus will surely
be
left behind thanks to the discredited 4/3 system - noise is the new
battleground for dslr's and Olympus have lost almost before the firing
starts.
Full frame cameras have obviusly even lower noise levels, but the lenses
are 8 (eight) times as bulky and heavy. If you enjoy breaking your back
walking around with a backpack full of gear, go ahead.

Right. One could get the 70-200/4.0 IS for the 5D, or the 35-100/2.0 for a
4/3 camera.

Same DOF at wide open, same sensitivity at wide open (since the 4/3 sensor
is 1/4 the area, it has the same noise as the 5D set to 4 times the ISO),
same zoom range (since 4/3 has a 2x crop factor).

Photographically, you can't tell the difference (unless you put up with a
slower shutter speed on the 5D to get the better dynamic range inherent in a
larger sensor).

But guess which is larger and heavier and more expensive (and doesn't have
IS).

That looks to be $2,200, 8.4 inches long & weighs 3.6 pounds (1650g). My
Nikon is f/2.8, stabilized, 8.5 inches long, weighs a little less at
1430g and cost $500 less.