Olympus DLSR Questions

[fruitybix]

hi folks,

As you may know by now, Olympus will be releasing the new 4/3 system this September

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0306/03062403olympuse1.asp

Could anyone tell me what these means? What is the meaning of "full frame transfer", as opposed to "full frame", which i understand to imply a focal magnification of 1:1.

Also, what is this supposed to mean?

"Sensitivity range of ISO 100 - 800 plus 1600 and 3200 with 'ISO BOOST' "

Thanks!!

[kahheng]

Quote: Originally posted by fruitybix hi folks, As you may know by now, Olympus will be releasing the new 4/3 system this September http://www.dpreview.com/news/0306/03062403olympuse1.asp Could anyone tell me what these means? What is the meaning of "full frame transfer", as opposed to "full frame", which i understand to imply a focal magnification of 1:1. Also, what is this supposed to mean? "Sensitivity range of ISO 100 - 800 plus 1600 and 3200 with 'ISO BOOST' " Thanks!!

http://www.olympusamerica.com/e/

FFT is basically how the CCD is designed to work. It's the CCD technology TYPE. See the link for details. There's also another technology type called "Full Frame" which doesn't mean the same as "near or same size as 35mm film frame".

A good page that explains CCD types is here:

http://www.fis.unipr.it/~fermi/PagIn...ArchitCCD.html

I think you should take "ISO Boost" as a fancy term for saying that you do have ISOs on the E-1 higher than 800, but that the performance in this settings will not be as good as the lower ISO settings. No different from how the pro Nikon D1x ISO system works. Nikon places the higher ISOs in a "boost" setting that's harder to get at to discourage the user from using them (what other reason can there be for doing that? I can think of none).

As a previous D1x owner, and a current S2 Pro owner, I can tell you that if you're after extremely good noise quality, anything higher than 400 should generally be avoided (for the dslr cameras available now - I say "now" because technology may improve).

I find myself having to run Quantum Mechanic for anything beyond 400 on the S2. "Color noise" is indeed objectionable at these settings, and the S2 is considered to be pretty darn good already for it's higher ISO performance.

[fruitybix]

thanks mate!

[StreetShooter]

Quote: Originally posted by kahheng As a previous D1x owner, and a current S2 Pro owner, I can tell you that if you're after extremely good noise quality, anything higher than 400 should generally be avoided (for the dslr cameras available now - I say "now" because technology may improve). I find myself having to run Quantum Mechanic for anything beyond 400 on the S2. "Color noise" is indeed objectionable at these settings, and the S2 is considered to be pretty darn good already for it's higher ISO performance.

*ahem*

(ISO 1600)

[kahheng]

Quote: Originally posted by StreetShooter *ahem* (ISO 1600)

And your point is?

(Really, what would a teensy jpeg prove?)

[YSLee]

Maybe it's a crop! aha!

[Darren]

Quote: Originally posted by kahheng And your point is? (Really, what would a teensy jpeg prove?)

kahheng, I think what Streetshooter was trying to say (in his own inimitable way) that Canon's CMOS sensors (D30, D60, 10D) already far surpass of the current crop of CCD's capabilities in providing relatively noise-free images at ISO settings that will make other DSLRs vomit out their CF cards.

Even with the teensy jpeg, I think its fair to say that the image is fairly noise-free at ISO 1600 (and I can't say the same for an image taken at the same ISO on the Nikon D1x as I have tried before and the noise is much more pronounced even when viewed as a small jpeg).

[kahheng]

Quote: Originally posted by Darren kahheng, I think what Streetshooter was trying to say (in his own inimitable way) that Canon's CMOS sensors (D30, D60, 10D) already far surpass of the current crop of CCD's capabilities in providing relatively noise-free images at ISO settings that will make other DSLRs vomit out their CF cards. Even with the teensy jpeg, I think its fair to say that the image is fairly noise-free at ISO 1600 (and I can't say the same for an image taken at the same ISO on the Nikon D1x as I have tried before and the noise is much more pronounced even when viewed as a small jpeg).

As a previous D1x owner, I completely agree. (Are you the fella I sold my camera to?)

Personally, I still can't accept pictures from any current dslr beyond ISO 800 (which I won't even use unless I really have to). It's a matter of how much you can tolerate.

I have seen the 1600 stuff from full sized 10D images. I'd still run Quantum Mechanic to kill the blotchy colour noise. It's still too ugly for my taste (dark shadow areas are esp. bad IMO).

Canon has indeed done remarkably well with CMOS sensors (and kudoes to them really) and getting smooth, low noise images from them. But I have found the dynamic range of CCDs still superior, esp. if implemented properly, a la, the S2 Pro.