E-3 vs E-510

[shengliang1981]

As the E-3 price has went down quite a bit, I finally decided to get my E-3 the last the 2 days and managed to do some comparison with my E-510 today.

I was very disappointed when I find out that my new E-3 produces much softer images than my one year old E-510.

All the test images were shot in RAW format, on tripod with 2 seconds timer, and with noise filter turned off. The lens that was used is the ZD 12-60mm @ 60mm and F5.6. ISO was set to 100 and shutter speed was set to 1/4s.

The RAW images were then converted to JPEG format using Olympus Master v2.12 with white balance set to 5000K.

Below are the results in 100% crop (please click to enlarge):

Crop 1:

E-3 (Sharpness +0, Contrast +0, Natural Mode):


E-3 (Sharpness +2, Contrast +2, Natural Mode):


E-510 (Shapness +0, Contrast +0, Natural Mode):

[shengliang1981]

Crop 2:

E-3 (Sharpness +0, Contrast +0, Natural Mode):


E-3 (Sharpness +2, Contrast +2, Natural Mode):


E-510 (Shapness +0, Contrast +0, Natural Mode):

[shengliang1981]

Crop 3:

E-3 (Sharpness +0, Contrast +0, Natural Mode):


E-3 (Sharpness +2, Contrast +2, Natural Mode):


E-510 (Shapness +0, Contrast +0, Natural Mode):



Anyone has any explanation as to why the images from E-3 is not as sharp as the one from E-510, even when the sharpness and contrast has been set to +2? To me, it seems like there are some noise reduction being applied in the E-3 although the noise reduction setting was turned off.

Thanks.

[rez610]

I have both the e-520 and the e-3 and i experienced the same thing -- my jpeg in the e-520 has more "punch". But in fairness to the e-3's Raw, i feel that i can draw more from the RAW file to make it punchier in Lightroom =)

[drakon09]

Pro-level cameras do less in-camera sharpening and contrast as compared to consumer level cameras.

The assumption is that the users of a pro-level camera would post processed their images, so images are normally softer and less contrasty out of the camera.

In any case, I find the 5xx/4xx images have too much sharpening applied at their default settings.

[dorts]

If you check out reviews like DPReview or here, you realise that the E-510 applied far too much sharpening, even at -2. I'm not sure about RAW, but it seem to also do some sharpening.

Sharpness can be applied during PP anyway. Unless you do little editing, which turning up the sharpness would be good.

As long as the detail is there, it doesn't really matter does it? You should be happy that your E-3 has better DR than the E-510. I prefer the E-3 colours too, although this is subjective.

[shengliang1981]

I have tried tweaking the sharpness in Lightroom but no way I could obtain the same amount of detail that I got from the E-510. Seems like there are some detail loss in E-3 due to stronger anti-aliasing or noise reduction...

I hope Olympus is able to provide us a firmware update which allow anti-aliasing or noise filter to be fully disabled.

[Hitman]

Originally Posted by shengliang1981 I have tried tweaking the sharpness in Lightroom but no way I could obtain the same amount of detail that I got from the E-510. Seems like there are some detail loss in E-3 due to stronger anti-aliasing or noise reduction... I hope Olympus is able to provide us a firmware update which allow anti-aliasing or noise filter to be fully disabled.

The replies you got from DPreview and from this thread pretty much sums up the reasons.

Anti-aliasing filter is hardware, so unlikely that a firm ware update can change that. Noie filter - maybe...

Most importantly, without pixel peeping, which output (from each of the camera) do you like better? Just enjoy the photography and the process of acquiring the images, pixel peeping is bad

[shengliang1981]

Originally Posted by Hitman The replies you got from DPreview and from this thread pretty much sums up the reasons. Anti-aliasing filter is hardware, so unlikely that a firm ware update can change that. Noie filter - maybe... Most importantly, without pixel peeping, which output (from each of the camera) do you like better? Just enjoy the photography and the process of acquiring the images, pixel peeping is bad

The additional detail in the E-510 is very noticeable even without pixel peeping. I did this test because I noticed that images are quite soft when I started using the E-3 initially. My test confirms my observation.

To be honest, I still prefer the results from the E-510. Maybe I am just too used to the sharp images from E-510 as I have owned it for almost a year as opposed to the E-3. Maybe I need more time to get used to and appreciate the output from the E-3.

[rez610]

Originally Posted by dorts If you check out reviews like DPReview or here, you realise that the E-510 applied far too much sharpening, even at -2. I'm not sure about RAW, but it seem to also do some sharpening. Sharpness can be applied during PP anyway. Unless you do little editing, which turning up the sharpness would be good. As long as the detail is there, it doesn't really matter does it? You should be happy that your E-3 has better DR than the E-510. I prefer the E-3 colours too, although this is subjective.

I'm not sure if this is the case, but i agree that the e-5xx tends to oversharpen. I tend to get halos more when i use the unmask filter in PS when i use the e-5xx rather than the e-3 and i agree that i like the colors of the e-3 more

[diCam]

The raw format of E-3 is designed to give the photographer head room to do post-possessing.

Maybe you should learn more about post-possessing?

Also, have you tried shooting JPEG (L-SF, L-F) with E-3? All I can say is that I'm impressed.

[diCam]

Originally Posted by shengliang1981 The additional detail in the E-510 is very noticeable even without pixel peeping. I did this test because I noticed that images are quite soft when I started using the E-3 initially. My test confirms my observation. To be honest, I still prefer the results from the E-510. Maybe I am just too used to the sharp images from E-510 as I have owned it for almost a year as opposed to the E-3. Maybe I need more time to get used to and appreciate the output from the E-3.

I've used every E-System camera, albeit some models briefly. I certainly like the way E-3 render it's images, RAW or JPEG alike.

For some subjects, sharp image doesn't look natural.

Time to brush up your understanding on photography/digital photography?

By the way, I'm still learning...

[olymac]

Originally Posted by shengliang1981 As the E-3 price has went down quite a bit, I finally decided to get my E-3 the last the 2 days and managed to do some comparison with my E-510 today. I was very disappointed when I find out that my new E-3 produces much softer images than my one year old E-510. All the test images were shot in RAW format, on tripod with 2 seconds timer, and with noise filter turned off. The lens that was used is the ZD 12-60mm @ 60mm and F5.6. ISO was set to 100 and shutter speed was set to 1/4s. The RAW images were then converted to JPEG format using Olympus Master v2.12 with white balance set to 5000K. .....

I have been more than impressed by the output of the E510. And I continue to be impressed by my E520. Give these bodies decent glass, take some nice pics and be awed

All within limitations, the most telling being NOT to expect too much at ISO 800 and above

Now the E3 ..... well .... it is a great body ...... but again .... it is a great body. Those who use it then to tweak their pics, esp in RAW. Give the output from the E5XX the same care and you might conceivably achieve similar results. The E3 owners also tend to have better glass .... use these glass on the E5XX bodies and again you might see better results

I have to say that I don't see that big a difference in the jpg output from the E3 versus the E5XX.

Am waiting to see how the E30's DR measure up .... and ISO 800 performance .....

[olymac]

Originally Posted by shengliang1981 As the E-3 price has went down quite a bit, I finally decided to get my E-3 the last the 2 days and managed to do some comparison with my E-510 today. I was very disappointed when I find out that my new E-3 produces much softer images than my one year old E-510. ...... E-3 (Sharpness +0, Contrast +0, Natural Mode): .... E-3 (Sharpness +2, Contrast +2, Natural Mode): .... E-510 (Shapness +0, Contrast +0, Natural Mode): .... E-3 (Sharpness +0, Contrast +0, Natural Mode): .... E-3 (Sharpness +2, Contrast +2, Natural Mode): .... E-510 (Shapness +0, Contrast +0, Natural Mode): ...

Originally Posted by shengliang1981 Crop 3: E-3 (Sharpness +0, Contrast +0, Natural Mode): .... E-3 (Sharpness +2, Contrast +2, Natural Mode): .... E-510 (Shapness +0, Contrast +0, Natural Mode): ...

BTW great pics ... from both cameras ....

And great comparison; thanks for the effort !

[viewwing]

might be me... but i thought the colours produced by the E3 was alot more pleasant to look at. makes me want to get my hands on a E3 more now... sigh... poison!!!

[tomcat]

Originally Posted by shengliang1981 As the E-3 price has went down quite a bit, I finally decided to get my E-3 the last the 2 days and managed to do some comparison with my E-510 today. I was very disappointed when I find out that my new E-3 produces much softer images than my one year old E-510. All the test images were shot in RAW format, on tripod with 2 seconds timer, and with noise filter turned off. The lens that was used is the ZD 12-60mm @ 60mm and F5.6. ISO was set to 100 and shutter speed was set to 1/4s. The RAW images were then converted to JPEG format using Olympus Master v2.12 with white balance set to 5000K.

Such indoor controlled lighting tests can be very deceiving. Unless you plan to use these cameras only for such studio shots, you should also test out both cameras in real life outdoor conditions as well before writing off the E3.

Of all the 4/3s cameras I had used, the E510 was the most disappointing to me under outdoor conditions. The DR of the E510 is just terrible and will blow highlights most of the time.. especially bad for shots with overcast skies. I used it on one trip and never wanted to use it again for outdoor shoots. Despite all its special features, it performed far worse than my less-endowed Panasonic L1 using the same lenses. It is also overly sharp by default and the sharpening must be toned down completely even in RAW (as it would make use of the camera's settings during conversion). The images from the E510 also cannot stand much sharpening or USM during post-processing. The images from the E510 when it first released had a terrible magenta cast problem in that the blown highlights would have a magenta cast instead of white. This was subsequently rectified via firmware and Studio/Master software updates but the correction was actually done be turning the magneta cast white only... not really solving the DR problem.

The images from the E3 on the other hand has much better DR... the best amongst all the E-series DSLRs with NMOS sensors. Although the images are not visually sharp, they could stand a lot more post-processing without showing all kinds of jpeg artifacts. What's more, the E3 performs very well both indoors and outdoors and also performs much better than the E510 at high ISOs.

My 2 cents on this issue

[nightpiper]

OT a bit.

Wud it help if the E510 or 520 is set with a -1EV? How does the shadows look with this compensation?

As to sharpening, i think if the pic is already this sharp in the E5xx series, why the need to further sharpen it? Come to think of it, that wud also save 1 step during pp wudn't it?

IMO good or bad is what one makes of their equip. So if i own a E5xx, i'll probably do what's needed for the workaround.

Ur thots anyone?

[mactigasuku]

Originally Posted by shengliang1981 .... Anyone has any explanation as to why the images from E-3 is not as sharp as the one from E-510, even when the sharpness and contrast has been set to +2? To me, it seems like there are some noise reduction being applied in the E-3 although the noise reduction setting was turned off. Thanks.

Not sure about the sharpness bit but the pics from the E3 seem to have a better Dynamic Range ....

[Oly5050]

Originally Posted by shengliang1981 As the E-3 price has went down quite a bit, I finally decided to get my E-3 the last the 2 days and managed to do some comparison with my E-510 today. I was very disappointed when I find out that my new E-3 produces much softer images than my one year old E-510. All the test images were shot in RAW format, on tripod with 2 seconds timer, and with noise filter turned off. The lens that was used is the ZD 12-60mm @ 60mm and F5.6. ISO was set to 100 and shutter speed was set to 1/4s. The RAW images were then converted to JPEG format using Olympus Master v2.12 with white balance set to 5000K. Below are the results in 100% crop (please click to enlarge): Crop 1: E-3 (Sharpness +0, Contrast +0, Natural Mode): E-3 (Sharpness +2, Contrast +2, Natural Mode): E-510 (Shapness +0, Contrast +0, Natural Mode):

Nice work. Nice photos. I think all the images are sharp, but I can see why u say the E5XX is sharper. Look at the stitching on the green ball on the right. U can see the definition in the E5XX image. I dunno but my comments are :

1. Is ur IS switched on or off in both cameras. Since u have a slow shutter speed and on a tripod, I would recommend that in this kind of clinical testing, u should switch off the IS.

2. The other thing that comes to mind is did u have anti-shock on or off? Basically anti-shock flips the mirror up 1 sec before the shutter is opened. This reduces any kind of shake that may occur when u press the shutter. I recommend that in your tests, u should have them both on. Not sure if E5XX has that option. It may be due to the mirror slap that cause the slight loss of sharpness in the E3 photos. Maybe there is more inertia in the E3 mirror compared to the E5XX mirror?? I dun know, just making guesses.

[shengliang1981]

Originally Posted by Oly5050 Nice work. Nice photos. I think all the images are sharp, but I can see why u say the E5XX is sharper. Look at the stitching on the green ball on the right. U can see the definition in the E5XX image. I dunno but my comments are : 1. Is ur IS switched on or off in both cameras. Since u have a slow shutter speed and on a tripod, I would recommend that in this kind of clinical testing, u should switch off the IS. 2. The other thing that comes to mind is did u have anti-shock on or off? Basically anti-shock flips the mirror up 1 sec before the shutter is opened. This reduces any kind of shake that may occur when u press the shutter. I recommend that in your tests, u should have them both on. Not sure if E5XX has that option. It may be due to the mirror slap that cause the slight loss of sharpness in the E3 photos. Maybe there is more inertia in the E3 mirror compared to the E5XX mirror?? I dun know, just making guesses.

Thanks for your feedback. Here are my answers to your queries:

1. Yes, I have turned off the IS on both cameras.

2. Good point there, but I forgot to turn off anti-shock on both cameras. I will remember to do this next time. Can't do anymore further comparison now as I have just sent in my E-510 to replace the rubber grip.