7-14 vs panorama...just 4 fun.

[Blu-By-U]

just having some fun here...ok.

This 2 shots are taken with the 7-14 at an Olympus roadshow.




SQ and not reduced for posting. (not sure if photobucket did some resizing)

This a a series of shots taken there with the 14-54 held vertically. It's then join with a panorama software.


and reduced to 50% for posting.

So what do you think?

[microcosm]

Definitely pano shot because perspective distortion is kept to the minimum, if not, none. The 7-14mm, on the other hand, can make things very dramatic... depending on how you want to use it and what kind of results you want to achieve.

If you want to shoot a building and make it feel majestic, the dramatic perspective of the 7-14 will work wonders where the pano from 14-54 will not be able to produce.

Just my two cents.

[Blu-By-U]

Oh yes..if Cjtune is here, please point out all them banding lines!!! kekekeke. Horrible is it not??

[cjtune]

Originally Posted by Blu-By-U Oh yes..if Cjtune is here, please point out all them banding lines!!! kekekeke. Horrible is it not??

I noticed them immediately! Those diagonal patterns on the white walls and carpeting!

It's the most severe in the first picture. The first picture you took after a cold startup?
The last time I had my E-330 that was banding badly, I observed that usually the pictures taken, at high ISO and at dim lighting/exposure, in the first 5 minutes or so after a cold startup has the worst bandings. But even after that, the severity of banding still may not be acceptable.

[scenar]

Originally Posted by Blu-By-U Oh yes..if Cjtune is here, please point out all them banding lines!!! kekekeke. Horrible is it not??

my goodness...how does olympus get away with this kinda thing??

[drakon09]

Originally Posted by scenar my goodness...how does olympus get away with this kinda thing??

Simple, it seems that only cjtune and blu is suffering from this problem, by some stroke of bad luck. No where else have I seen complaints about banding.

[cjtune]

Originally Posted by drakon09 Simple, it seems that only cjtune and blu is suffering from this problem, by some stroke of bad luck. No where else have I seen complaints about banding.

Yes, funny how Blu and me seem to be the only regional sufferers of this problem. Very strange too given that the probabilities don't really add up: I have handled 5 E-330 bodies and I found the really bad diagonal-ish bands on 2, and mild bands on 3. I got to keep one of the milder-afflicted units in the end, in exchange for my badly-affected original body.

There have been other complaints online -you can probably try searching the DPReview forum for a start.

[cjtune]

Anyhow, why hasn't Oly Malaysia done anything to address that problem on Blu's unit?
Last I read here, he had sent it in for servicing like... months ago.

[hongsien]

Originally Posted by microcosm Definitely pano shot because perspective distortion is kept to the minimum, if not, none.

Perpective and distortion are two different things........

I don't see any distortions in the above pics.

HS

[VSonic06]

Prefer the panoramic version.

The diagonal banding really sticks out like a sore thumb. Oly still doesn't want to change it?

[Blu-By-U]

Sad to say, Olympus Malaysia is still in the dark. They do not know what is happening and Japan Oly have not replied either.

That was the first 2 shots straight off the camera. I got a whole bunch of pictures almost all with banding. and they are not to say taken from a cold start but even 15 minutes into shooting with the LV on.

[wind30]

Originally Posted by drakon09 Simple, it seems that only cjtune and blu is suffering from this problem, by some stroke of bad luck. No where else have I seen complaints about banding.

mmm.. maybe not many E330 owners around. For my case, I never shoot at ISO1600.... ,ISO800 is the top I go.

For the E300 I usually go to only ISO400 only.

Maybe I will go on shoot a few more ISO1600 on my E330 just to see if there is banding

[Blu-By-U]

Please try it for me.

[wind30]

I shot a ISO1600 at -1eV still no bands leh

Out of cam jpeg at here

http://pisduck.com/e330/band.JPG

[Blu-By-U]

I found an easier way...ISO1600. Manual mode, Speed 1/30 or slower and aperture to full open. then shoot a near object which leaves a lighted out of focus background. This never fails. Oh yes WB to warm/tungsten is even better.

cjtune...go look...hate to tell you this wind30...I can see them bands..just that it's not that prominent.

[cjtune]

Originally Posted by Blu-By-U I found an easier way...ISO1600. Manual mode, Speed 1/30 or slower and aperture to full open. then shoot a near object which leaves a lighted out of focus background. This never fails. Oh yes WB to warm/tungsten is even better. cjtune...go look...hate to tell you this wind30...I can see them bands..just that it's not that prominent.

Yeah, he got the mild banding one. Just like mine.

[drakon09]

Guess we'll need to see high ISO samples from the E410 to see whether this banding thing is endemic to NMOS.

[tomcat]

Originally Posted by Blu-By-U I found an easier way...ISO1600. Manual mode, Speed 1/30 or slower and aperture to full open. then shoot a near object which leaves a lighted out of focus background. This never fails. Oh yes WB to warm/tungsten is even better. cjtune...go look...hate to tell you this wind30...I can see them bands..just that it's not that prominent.

The diagonal bandings in your 1st shot are very obvious... stretching right across the entire frame. I don't see the same in wind30's shot. What I do see are noise and/or jpeg artifacts. When view full sized, there are no distinct bands at all. I'm sure if your shot was viewed full sized, the bandings would be just as if not more obvious. I think if such noise artifacts are not acceptable, then the current Olympus DSLRs are probably not for you. Maybe should consider changing to Canon DSLRs ?

Anyway, here's an ISO 1600 -1EV shot from the L1...


The texture of the ceiling is quite uneven by the way and it shows up in the shot.

And this is the same subject taken with a Canon 20D at the same exposure level ie ISO 1600 -1EV....


I think if you stare hard enough at the Canon 20D shot, it might be possible to see faint 'bands' too

[cjtune]

Originally Posted by tomcat I think if you stare hard enough at the Canon 20D shot, it might be possible to see faint 'bands' too

Actually, some batches of 20D's do show bad banding too. Typical triggers is pretty much the same as the E-330's: high ISO, negative EV bias, shadow regions. But most 20D's do not band, and their owners go to great lengths to show that theirs don't, in response to complaints from owners of 20D's that do. At least Canon acknowledges it and tried to fix it via new firmware releases. I do not believe that Olympus is unaware of the E-330's banding issue. Not sure how and if Canon gave one-to-one exchanges to the afflicted 20D owners or just swept them under the carpet. But if the majority does not face such a problem, then how difficult will it be to help the minority that has? Surely there must be far more good camera bodies being produced than bad ones that somehow pass through QC to make exchanges possible?

I think it comes back to a manufacturer's regard for customer satisfaction, and not about customers turning loyalties to different brands every different year. You could keep voting for different political parties if you're unsatisfied with the current one. But there's not much point if the alternative parties are just as lousy. Perhaps the better answer would be to try induce change within the current party somehow?

[microcosm]

Originally Posted by cjtune Actually, some batches of 20D's do show bad banding too. Typical triggers is pretty much the same as the E-330's: high ISO, negative EV bias, shadow regions. But most 20D's do not band, and their owners go to great lengths to show that theirs don't, in response to complaints from owners of 20D's that do. At least Canon acknowledges it and tried to fix it via new firmware releases. I do not believe that Olympus is unaware of the E-330's banding issue. Not sure how and if Canon gave one-to-one exchanges to the afflicted 20D owners or just swept them under the carpet. But if the majority does not face such a problem, then how difficult will it be to help the minority that has? Surely there must be far more good camera bodies being produced than bad ones that somehow pass through QC to make exchanges possible? I think it comes back to a manufacturer's regard for customer satisfaction, and not about customers turning loyalties to different brands every different year. You could keep voting for different political parties if you're unsatisfied with the current one. But there's not much point if the alternative parties are just as lousy. Perhaps the better answer would be to try induce change within the current party somehow?

But the same goes for the E-330. I don't get it. Mine didn't. (While I had it).