4/3 System Discussion - What I like and hate about it... and more...

[microcosm]

Starting this thread because drakon09's original thread was starting to get more discussions than drakon09's sharing.

For me, I love Olympus and ZD lens first, and did not give a hoot about 4/3 in the beginning. But when the format began attracting Leica, I started to see the potential of what this consortium can bring to the format.

So you can say it was the lens that first got my attention, then the feel of the Olympus body (the E-1), then the innovations behind Olympus, then the 4/3 System, because of Leica's (Panasonic) participation.

What about you?

[Blu-By-U]

LifeView for me. What I don't like is the way Olympus Malaysia's service or maybe even the whole aftersales service is handled. I complained to Olympus Malaysia on the banding and nothing is done. I then complain to the international service from the Olympus Web page and a Mr Hyodo replied..he ask the camera to be sent back in for service but nothing was done and no solution was given. After I mention that a similar case was recorded here, there was no further news from Olympus Malaysia.

Even how much I love my E-330 and the lifeview, I would gladly give it all up for a better service.

[drakon09]

I feel for you Blu. Over here in SG, we are in contact with the Oly SG product manager so we can refer to him if there's any problem. What I think the mytikas fellas can do you is to bring it up to him and hopefully the SG side would bring it up to the MY side.

[microcosm]

Originally Posted by drakon09 I feel for you Blu. Over here in SG, we are in contact with the Oly SG product manager so we can refer to him if there's any problem. What I think the mytikas fellas can do you is to bring it up to him and hopefully the SG side would bring it up to the MY side.

Note that Oly offers international warranty even for camera bodies... and I have always sent mine for service in Taiwan (personal preference as the Japs are there). So Blu, you can send your camera to SG for servicing. Since your sis resides over here right?

[Blu-By-U]

Not much can be done as Oly Malaysia and Oly Singapore are 2 different companies. So unless I bring it to Oly Singapore to complain..but then I need a singapore address for it.

[espion]

What caught my eye for Oly was $$$ :-)

I was gunning for Canon all along until I read about the E300 on dpreview. Then hesitated a little, but goal still unchanged. Then came E500 and I have no more reason for Canon.

Then I got to know ZD.

Now I think I am hooked.

The complains are:

- sensor - poor high ISO - the E510 have changed to CMOS, maybe that will help. Although I dun shoot beyond ISO400, there are times ISO1600 is a do or die thing, ie without it you cant get your image, eg catching a butterfly in midflight.

- auto focus - the centre cross focus is good, but sometimes you need the focus elsewhere. Maybe just the L and R cross sensitive - but I really dun know if that is possible. But do I need 11 or 15? I dunno, cos I have not used it. I have tried manual focus on the E330 liveview. It helped a lot for macros where indeed precise focus is very important.

- more fps

The thing "digital" for Oly is their metering. If "digital" means digital capture and processing, then I think the metering is optimised to capture maximal data for maximal flexibility in post processing.

When I started I carried over habits from film days, and will do EV correction so that pic looked good on the film/preview screen. But I realised if I do that I am not optimising the sensor collection. And also I realised that the matrix metering almost always maximise sensor collection. And I must see the picture not as it seems on the preview screen but after post processing. Now I hardly used anything else except for spot for special situations.

Of course all these have nothing to do with four thirds. Or does it?

[wind30]

what I liked about oly

1) light in weight.
2) more DOF
3) live view
4) dust buster

don't like
1) not cheap ultra wide
2) dynamic range not as high as fuji

[drakon09]

Actually CCD sensors produce less noise than MOS-based sensors.

How Canon went around it was clever engineering; they eliminated noise at the pixel end, and not after the image was captured.

Most high-resolution imaging are still done by CCDs.

[espion]

Originally Posted by wind30 what I liked about oly 1) light in weight. 2) more DOF 3) live view 4) dust buster don't like 1) not cheap ultra wide 2) dynamic range not as high as fuji

Maybe the dust busting is the unsung hero. Because we dont get dust so we dont noticed its importance and significance.

I have seen really awful dust - even after cleaning - on a Canon. It seems ok out of cam, but when you finesse the contrast in the pic, suddenly all the dust pops up, likely huge ugly sores.

And dust busting is digital photography, something irrelevant for film.

High dynamic range is certainly a big wish too. But if the output is the computer and for web use, then the dynamic range of monitors have to improve too for you to see it. HDR is a good alternative until then.

[espion]

Originally Posted by drakon09 Actually CCD sensors produce less noise than MOS-based sensors. How Canon went around it was clever engineering; they eliminated noise at the pixel end, and not after the image was captured. Most high-resolution imaging are still done by CCDs.

OK. Didnt know that. Always thot Canon better hi ISO is due to their CMOS sensor.

So why did E510/410 went the CMOS way? That "clever engineering" is in them too?

[Mikefellh]

Quote: But when the format began attracting Leica, I started to see the potential of what this consortium can bring to the format.

OK, but so far (as I know it) Leica hasn't sold their lenses separately...just as the kit.

The Leica's are far pricier than the Zuikos of similar focal length.

If future higher-end Oly's have IS, it would make Leica's OIS redundant.

Many consumer Oly users never go beyond the standard lenses, this Oly user included (except for the kit lenses, the only lenses I've bought were OM lenses).

I mean it is great that Leica is producing 4/3, but except for pros and the high-demanding most won't buy them.

[drakon09]

Originally Posted by espion OK. Didnt know that. Always thot Canon better hi ISO is due to their CMOS sensor. So why did E510/410 went the CMOS way? That "clever engineering" is in them too?

The actual architecture of the LiveMOS chip to my knowledge has not been published yet, so I cannot say whether noise is cut at the pixel end.

The primary reason why the new Oly cams are going MOS is because of LiveView. Apparently, CCDs heat up too quickly and are not suitable for LiveView.

[Mikefellh]

Originally Posted by espion OK. Didnt know that. Always thot Canon better hi ISO is due to their CMOS sensor.

Only thanks to the aggressive noise reduction required by CMOS imagers.

[drakon09]

Originally Posted by espion Maybe the dust busting is the unsung hero. Because we dont get dust so we dont noticed its importance and significance. I have seen really awful dust - even after cleaning - on a Canon. It seems ok out of cam, but when you finesse the contrast in the pic, suddenly all the dust pops up, likely huge ugly sores. And dust busting is digital photography, something irrelevant for film. High dynamic range is certainly a big wish too. But if the output is the computer and for web use, then the dynamic range of monitors have to improve too for you to see it. HDR is a good alternative until then.

Yes, dust is a problem - it is whether people want to admit it or not. At this point in time I really cannot see myself sending the cams in for sensor cleaning once a month for 20 bucks a pop and a few hours wasted waiting for them. So SSWF is a real godsend.

Where DR is concerned, you could have two sensors, one capturing high key, the other capturing low key and then processing the two together. However, speed will suffer, the electronics need to be faster, overall costs will rise - you will get one very expensive camera. Not many out there are willing to pay that much more for improved DR.

[NMSS_2]

Pro

sharpness edge to edge (digital advantage)

excellent optic quality - if you know which lenses to get.

IQ

cheaper high grade "lenses" that is comparable to pro-lenses from other camps (i might be wrong in this?)

good quality feel for its lenses.

good body construction for most of the bodies even for their entry level cameras (although, i felt a slight downgrade when i was upgrading from e-300 with e-330)

dust buster


Cons

Noise reduction. Oly is getting better with noise control while retaining details but they can be better in this aspect.

slow focusing for those with wider range. take for example 50-200 or 50mm, they will need a focusing range limiter on these types of lenses for either close-range, mid-range or >10m. simply hate it when these lenses go bonker just because they didnt lock on any contrast based subject.

focusing issues. Given that they are coming out with faster focusing lenses(SWD), it wouldn't help much if they cant lock on to the subject.

more focusing points. as mentioned by espion earlier. perhaps we need a button to activate eye-motion lock or single centre AF.

lack of cable release for several models. "So are they telling us, oly cameras are not suitable for those type of shoots?"

Grip! please....... grip please, for the sake of easier camera handholding techniques and the "fake promise" of faster focusing.

lack of AF tracking that was used for higher end canon cameras for sports or moving subjects.

DR..... yes it is good but need something better.

lack of curve- ok..........., something that other camps have and i have be dreaming about.

lack of bigger and brighter viewfinder. unless i can rely on the af to do the focusing for me, i will still need bigger and brighter viewfinder to do focusing.

bokeh limiting factor due to sensor size........ i will need full frame or digital back for this. (checking my spare change)

sensor- they cant improve on something they cant produce, reliance on other chip makers has lead to delays and sub-standard. btw i want my fovean !

_____________

Not that Olympus is not good but they can be better. Given that Olympus has always been innovative, i will wait for their improvement.

[drakon09]

But Foveon is in trouble.

As long as they cannot get a high resolution sensor out, they are as good as dead.

The SD14 is not exactly earthshaking...

[NMSS_2]

Originally Posted by drakon09 As long as they cannot get a high resolution sensor out, they are as good as dead.

[wind30]

Originally Posted by espion High dynamic range is certainly a big wish too. But if the output is the computer and for web use, then the dynamic range of monitors have to improve too for you to see it. HDR is a good alternative until then.

It is not really for HDR images as per say but more flexibility in shooting landscapes/scenary. I don't use ND grad filters so high DR is very very useful. Basically it is to have good exposure for both foreground and sky using a single RAW file.

[wind30]

Originally Posted by drakon09 Actually CCD sensors produce less noise than MOS-based sensors. How Canon went around it was clever engineering; they eliminated noise at the pixel end, and not after the image was captured. Most high-resolution imaging are still done by CCDs.

Actually it is really very clever and I think Canon is the only one who managed to have actually lower noise without sacrificing detail. All the rest like sony/oly/nikon is basically working on the final image file I think.

[Kid Shotter]

Why i am using Olympus??Because i got it cheap(Used one)!!Only RM 1800.Then,E300 seat aside for one year and 1-2 months(No intrest in photography until recently the bug hit me).Also,Olympus tele lens weight and aperture is impressive.Dust buster.But the noise is so heavy.AF hunt a lot.