Camera Labs

A very good review from an end user perspective about the E5

http://robinwong.blogspot.com/2010/10/o ... reets.html

there are 7 part of it, imo the most interesting part is part 4 and 6..

_________________
“Photography is about a single point of a moment. It’s like stopping time. As everything gets condensed in that forced instant. But if you keep creating these points, they form a line which reflects your life.” – Nobuyoshi Araki

site: http://www.stellarminor.wordpress.com

To date, I have seen good images up to and some times above 1600 ISO with the E-5. I have seen great images from JPEGS out of the camera at ISO-200.

Consider this, I recently processed a E-510-1600 ISO image taken from a wedding with DXO. Before, there was too much noise in the dark regions of the image in the background. The main subject areas of the image were well exposed and showed no visible noise except in the black jacket of the groom. I then opened the image in PS CS 5 and to my surprise, the noise was not visible. I didn't have to use CS 5's noise removal tool to polish off the noise. I printed this image 8x10 and it would go much larger if desired. No noise was seen. Remember this, there are two types of noise; Fixed and random. Fixed is easy to remove. Random is what causes all or most of the problems. Further, noise that we might see on our monitors just might not print if it is a little amount.

So what does all of this mean? I would have liked to have seen the E-5 ISO range to 12.8k but... with a little DXO and perhaps CS 5, it is looking like when you shoot RAW, that the noise can be handled. Yes, you will lose some detail, but it is normally in areas that you may not really care about, like the walls and things in the background. Don't we buy F2.8 glass just to blur these things out anyway?

For our needs, 4-5,000 ISO with F 2.8 will handle 99.9% of our low light needs. Even 3200 ISO with F 2.8 will be all that we really need.

Take a image with your E-5 and a Canon 5d Mk II or Nikon and challenge people to select which camera took which picture. Go further and select the same color rendition in DXO, say Canon 5D MkII for all images. Years ago, some one took 3 MP images and printed them 30x40 and challenged people go guess if the image was 3 MP or 15 MP. Most people could not get it correct.

The E-5 is looking like it competes very well! It has some great cost savings with telephoto lens because of the the 1.92 magnification factor and the fact that the image stabilization is in the body where it should be. Again, who really needs 25-75 MB files (after DXO) to store on our HD's.

So far the E5 seems to be a good camera, but I still think the price is high. For a little less I can get the Nikon D7000 + 16-85 VR, which would be about the same as my 12-60 + E5. The Nikon does not have a swivel screen and the 16-85 is not splash water sealed, but it has a little higher resolution, a bit better movie mode (maybe) and is lighter.

Not an easy choice

_________________
Olympus E-500, 12-60, 40-150, 70-300

Both cameras take great pictures. The Nikon D7000 looks great.

The E-5 was rated by a German site to be the 3rd best DSLR camera. Behind the Canon 1D Mark iv and the Nikon D3s, both $5000 bodies. They failed to mention the D7000. I don't read German but it is a highly rated Photo site. An American, Ken Rockwell rates this camera as the best Nikon under $7500. How ever check out this http://robertbromfield.com/nikon-d7000- ... pressions/

He believes that there is an image problem or lack of sharpness? He prefers the D700 and others the D300 to the D7000. It does have some strong points though.

You say that the Nikon 7000 has better resolution? Why? What is resolution but the ability to record details like lph or line pairs per mm. If the Nikon still is using the old type AA filter then it intentionally blurs the incoming image. It is NOT the number of MP in the sensor. The more MP, the more noise will be generated. That is why the D3S is 12 MP. However, both cameras will do more than either of us need. I suspect that the Olympus will be well ahead on LPH but will lose the ISO race in levels that most of use never use. Now add fine image pixel by pixel processing and you will get great images with the E-5.

What! I just bought a $2ooo telephoto lens and the digital system processing is messing up my image. Yes until NOW. Not with the E-5 because by removing the part of the AA filter that removes moire and miss color matches. Now with 12 MP Olympus told me that their lens will resolve to 60-70 lp/mm. I believe that is around 2600-3300, the same as my Canon 5 D Mark II. (These numbers need to be verified by proper testing, but as a minimum it should equal the D3S resolution at 12 MP). That is amazing and will totally change the way digital images are processed. You watch Canon and Nikon copy this.

As always it many times comes down to what glass do you have already. If you have good Olympus glass then the E-5 is a good choice. If you have no glass then the high cost of Nikon glass might put you in the Olympus area. The cost of Nikon and Canon F2.8 glass is very high and the quality in the past has not been there. It has improved significantly in the past year along with the price going up.

I always ask the question, what do I really need? Map out a dream wish list and compare prices.

So, don't confuse resolution with MP. Even my old E-510 prints great 20x30 in prints. We have sold "2" to our Wedding and portrait customers. That was not the limit of the 510, but the maximum that I have printed.

As I can process with Dxo a noisy 16oo ISO image from my 510, I expect to if needed shoot 6400 ISO. Yes you will lose some detail, but it is normally in the shadows where if you are shooting a F 2.8 lens is going to be blurred anyway.

Yes I want a lower price. I want lots of thing that aren't going to happen. You make an excellent point. Compared to the price point of the Nikon D7000, Olympus should shave off $300 here to say $1200-1400. I bet they will not evaluate the price comparison. But add $200 for in camera IS, add another $200 for remote control of flashes and the price is starting to look not too bad. So, $1500 would compete well. I believe that we pay at least $400 more for IS per lens.

"Pay me now or pay me later rings true here."

This is not a sports camera. It does not shoot 10 images per second only 30 in video mode but compares to the Nikon well (6/5)

Consider with a Canon 5D I have to buy a separate wireless remote control for the flash. It is built in the E-5 along with IS.

Does the Nikon 7000/Canon 5D have built in IS? Noooo. We will pay $1000's because it is not built in. Consider this: A Canon 100-400 f4.5-56 costs $2k. You can get a great 100-400 F2.8 to 3.5 (50-200) lens for about $1k. What really irks me is Canon primes without IS. Not a problem with Olympus. You buy an F 2 100 mm Canon and with no IS you lose 1 to 2 stops for low light. Add IS and you could shoot say 1/40 verse 1/100.

The E-5 and the lenses are water proof. Is the Nikon...noooo but getting better. That CAN be very important if you shoot outdoors and it is raining of someone's wedding day.

I love Nikon. I just can't afford them. The best bang for the buck is Olympus. They just may have been a little late getting this camera to market but it is selling well. If it was out last year, I would have it now and no Canon. As we have lots of outstanding Olympus glass- 12-60, 14-54, 50-200, 8mm, and their great kit lenses. We will be getting one of these puppies for my wife. I wonder how much I will be using it. Put a 50mm F 2 on it and low light will be your friend.

FYI Olympus 12-60 is one of the finest lenses test by what was his name??? Gordon Lang... Check out the review at Camera Labs

So if you want a great camera to shoot out doors then this is it. Don't jump to Nikon unless you have deep pockets. They will get you on their lenses. The new canon 70-200 F2.8 costs here in Canada $3k. That is almost double the cost of the E-5 body. So you can get either the 12-60 or 50-200 for the cost of a Canon 5D body. Grab some of the 510 kit lenses. They have outstanding image quality. One was rated at 4 stars.. outstanding.

Nikon have found the secret to low noise high ISO images. I suspect, that they have low voltage amps on their sensors as the battery consumption is incredibly low. Low noise is a big factor with digital image quality. Thus Nikon will give better ISO response at higher levels. The long term costs of lenses and flashes (Nikon is ahead on flashes also) will be high.

High ISO means poor IQ because DR, color, noise, etc all drop down the curve as we push the limits of the camera. So we fool ourselves or marketing makes us think that this is a good thing. A usable 800-1250 ISO will save flash batteries and helps to keep the IQ higher.

Our portfolio has lots of E-510 images. No one can pick which ones come from the Olympus or the Canon 5D Mark II. All printers print in 8 bits. We use an Epson 4880 so the printer is tops.

You will not go wrong with either camera. The D7000 is much better than the D90 for what I have read and we all seemed to like the D90.

Hi Kaptnk, I know, you're right, the e5 is great and maybe it's worth the money, but for me the price seems just too high. Another thing is the weight. I like the light weight of my E500 and together with my 12-60 it's already heavy enough. For taking photo's the E5 is OK and in my backpack also, but for times when it is hanging around my neck, I don't want anything heavier.
Probably I have to find a solution for that.....

_________________
Olympus E-500, 12-60, 40-150, 70-300

We know all about weight. Try shooting a wedding with a 5D MkII for 12 hours with a 580 ex II on top. Maybe I shoot 700-800+ shots. You run all over the place to get the angle. You will pay for it the next day.

It is extremely difficult today to pick a camera. I ignored Olympus for the past few years as the MP race went crazy. You have a 12-60 so you have a great piece of glass. The 50-200 is outstanding for portraits and out door wild life. If I had no glass, then the Nikon D7000 looks very good to start.

The price of the E-5 does appear a bit high. Here in Canada it costs $1920 out the door.

I am still trying to find out the resolution of the E-5. Early reports put it at exactly what the EP-1 is, that is 2300 to 2700 Extn. The same as the D3S, but with no detectable moire. Some put it 15% higher which makes sense with the weaker AA. 15% would be a huge jump as resolution is by a factor of 4. The 21 MP Canon is 2600-3300 extcn. but lacking the in Camera IS and IS in most if not all of the primes.

For both you and I, an upgrade from our E-500/510 is getting due. For us it is a no brainer. Sell our Olympus glass and buy another Canon 5 D Mk II body or get an E-5. Both are good systems. The E-5 costs much less than the price on one Canon F 2.8 70-200

One thing that irks me with the E-510 is that the 12-60 resolution is not fully utilized!

If your 500 is working for you, then what I see from Samsung X3- 46 MP sensor is another game changer or so it looks like. That is a C sized sensor, so if you put it in a 4/3 rds size, with fine detail processing you will get another great IQ. The X3 does not need an AA filter to boot. So maybe it is a good time to wait. I wonder what the DR of the X3 will be. I understand that the ISO range is not very good. Maybe Samsung can sell a 4/3 sensor to Olympus as it appears Panasonic does not want to give the gh1 sensor yet. That may change next year.

A good rule of thumb in this numbers game is: "Is it good enough"!

Time keeps moving on.

Gordon Lang has posted D7000 and Canon 60D photo comparisons. Again, even at the best ISO's, noise is evident in all photos. That is what prompted us to go FF Canon 5D MkII for pure IQ reasons. Shots taken at 5000 ISO with it and DXO processed show little or no noise. (Again you can see Gordon's review). I advise against the 60D as they forgot to put in a micro adjustment for the lens which puts them back 3 years.

The noise is normally generated by too many pixels, too close together. That is why 12 Mp is all we should shoot for until newer technologies eliminate this barrier.

A recent review of the E-5 by one user showed that it surpassed the Nikon D700 up to 1600 ISO in IQ and then the Nikon took over. Again we should always aim for the lowest possible ISO to get the best DR, color and noise reduction possible with our images.

Another online review showed that the E-5 resolution to be the same as the Pen1. I want to see Gordon's test or other on this point. That resolution was about 2300 lph. Other charts that I have seen reached about 2500 lph with extinction of 2700 lph. That would be an amazing increase if it is real. My 5D with twice the pixels is 2600-3300 lph with moire at the end.

If we can get images that rival a Nikon FF D700, then this is an amazing feat by Olympus as that German Mag put it at the number 3 DSLR camera. Beat out by Canon Mk IV and Nikon's D3S.

For those with Oly glass it is worth the buy.

Any news on the prospect of a review Gordon?

There are excellent reports about the high IQ.

There are almost no reports about the resolution in lph which would be of interest.

The amount of noise at 3200 and 6400 iso can be easily removed by CS5 or DXO. Maybe you are waiting for CS5 camera raw support.

camera raw support has already arrived!
http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/ ... ftpID=4923

_________________
Olympus E-500, 12-60, 40-150, 70-300

Yes Hans I too found the CS5 update. DXO tested the sensor against their previous test of the same sensor and found them to be about the same. No surprise here as there are using the same sensor.

How do you test the IQ post sensor, post computer processing? Everything is digital today. Amazing things can be done to improve the IQ as the translation of the German testing lab verified. It is the fine detail processing where DXO testing does not take into account. The German lab did however take this into account. Keeping the ISO low gave outstanding results. You can now take images up to ISO 800 and save your flash batteries. In good light shoot 100-200 ISO always for best IQ period. Gordon L. keeps pointing out that more MP gives noise even at 200 ISO with cropped sensors.

Again, it might have been better if Oly could have used the GH1 sensor. Again it may not matter. We don't have access to this information. Panasonic it appears have moved to IS into the LENS and it is NOT in camera.

We have been taught by Gordon L and others that FF sensors have lower noise and better higher ISO images. They too, suffer IQ decrease with increased ISO. With post processing with CS5, increasing vibrance, color sat, even changing the response curve (in DXO and CS5) can give different results.

One Russian reviewer stated that Oly changed the frequency of the noise to a point where it can be bettered handled/removed.

The bottom line appears that the E-5 is a significant improvement and upgrade over the E-3 and other 4/3's. All cameras have their weaknesses and strengths.

Off Topic: Technology keeps changing. Now there is a plugin that we can remove image blur just like CSI. Cost is about $69. The examples are amazing.-InFocus.

Most if not all reviews do not take into account what can be easily done post processing to improve the image. Plus they use the default camera settings. Otherwise, it might be a nightmare to try to compare products.

Hans, they have posted a review of the Nikon D7000 at dpreview.com. Look at the noise levels at all ISO's. Look at the noise in the color channels at 100 ISO.

Too many pixels means too much noise. It does help with the LPH. That is why Oly choose 12 MP max for now. My E-510 gave accurate ISO representation. That means 400 is really 400 and 800 is really 800. Now they all get different numbers. 800 now is like 500. My Canon 5D at 6400 is really 3900, about the same at the E-5 (6400 is really 4000). They tell me that my FF Canon sensor is 4X larger than 4/3. That means that the pixel density of a 12 MP Oly is about the same as a 48 MP FF Canon. So, a 21 MP Canon is half the pixel density of the 12 MP Oly and hence lower noise. Now we have improved on how this noise can be handled. Look at Gordon Lang's noise comparison of the 7D and 5D.

Increased resolution is only important if you are going to use it, like cropping. We over shoot wedding pictures so that we can crop at various sizes. As image quality is the name of the game, the E-5 does perform well. Noise and we refer to SNR, is what we look at. You might have to over expose an image to the right of the histogram to improve the image and bring it back in PS. As long as you do not clip data, you will capture the low light data. Two stops to the right does not hurt but will substantially improve the SNR and you will have lower noise.

We await what DXO noise and image sharping can do with the weakened AA filter. DXO lens support has not arrived. Camera support has not arrived.

Talk on the net says Oly will only produce the E-5, and will continue to do so. Until sensor design technology improves, 4/3's can't handle higher pixel levels. Again, 12 MP, with low noise and sharp image produces 30x40in excellent images. With low light all the key image quality features like dynamic range, color, noise, white balance, all become less.

For me 12 MP is enough, it still leaves some space to crop. I made some print of 30x40 cm made with my current E500 (8MP) and they are just fine.

What's really a pity is that it seems the sensor makers develop a sensor and when that's done, they move on to the next one with higher megapixel counts. They never seem to incorporate all new technology in new sensors with the same megapixel count. For Panasonic it meant that they have 2 12 MP sensors, 1 with and 1 without video capability and thats it. There won't be a new one with better noise results although this would be possible.

In the end Olympus will have to move to higher MP levels if they want or not, because otherwise they will got stuck with the same sensor forever.

_________________
Olympus E-500, 12-60, 40-150, 70-300

Right on Hans. Pushing to more MP on any cropped sensor using the current sensor technology is the wrong way to go. More MP is great as long as the noise is low. Focus on DR, color, WB, and image quality.

The images that I saw were 30 inches by 40 inches.

It is difficult to sell 12 MP in the land of super MP. That is the restriction of the 4/3rd's sensor and the C sensor for that matter. If Dot sensors or other sensor designs work then who knows. All the manufacturers are now in this boat. FF or a different way. Selling a VW design for 20 years is not marketing's idea of creating an interest.

Then along comes 3D.

Thanks to those who posted links to reviews and the YouTube interview about the e5.

I'd just like to say the same as many before me, get the camera you NEED not what people tell you is best. I've changed from a Nikon D80 to a GF-1. I do occasionally miss the speed of the DSLR, but that's made up for by being able to carry my camera around and actually take pictures. However, due to the recession here in England, I am looking at working abroad and the next job will be Africa or Haiti. Once I've started that I'll have free cash and may buy a DSLR to document my travels and if I do, it'll be an E5. The reasons are simply it's hard as nails and as a system, smaller and lighter to carry than cropped or full frame systems.

I'll be keeping my pana too as it's got me back into photography again and is usually in my pocket.

Edit: Also meant to say most of my photos are displayed online but I do print some up to A4. People forget to consider this. if you print A3 maybe full frame or medium format would be better, for mr 4/3 does the job.