DSLR lenses

MarkH wrote:

I am a little confused at this post though, I thought you were talking
about how good your 5050 was and how it suited your needs better than a
D-SLR. But now you are talking about replacing it with a noisier camera
that does not have a f1.8 lens. I used my own camera as an example in my
post (10D) and you are arguing that your postings only applied to the
300D or D70, but the 300D has the same sensor as my 10D and close to the
same noise levels - what applies to the 10D also applies to the 300D.

What makes you think that the 8080 is more noisy than the 5050 ? Pixel
size is the same for both cameras (around 3 micrometer) and Olympus
incorporated advanced noise reduction processes into the 8080.

According to the dpreview data noise levels for the 300D at ISO 400 are
more or less the same as for the 8080 at ISO 100 (around 2 for the
standard deviation). The D70 is a bit more and starts only at ISO 200,
but I would still prefer it over the 300D.
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Olympus_405080/
Olympus 5050 resource - http://www.molon.de/5050.html
Olympus 5060 resource - http://www.molon.de/5060.html
Olympus 8080 resource - http://www.molon.de/8080.html

In message ,
Alfred Molon wrote:

According to the dpreview data noise levels for the 300D at ISO 400 are
more or less the same as for the 8080 at ISO 100 (around 2 for the
standard deviation).

That may reflect noise-reduction in the camera, which also reduces
detail.

Someone posted an example of how noise-free their P&S was the other day,
and the image looked like it was simply stripped of all high-res detail,
and I could clearly see soft blotches of color cast all over the image.


--


John P Sheehy

Alfred Molon wrote in
:

MarkH wrote:

I am a little confused at this post though, I thought you were talking
about how good your 5050 was and how it suited your needs better than
a D-SLR. But now you are talking about replacing it with a noisier
camera that does not have a f1.8 lens. I used my own camera as an
example in my post (10D) and you are arguing that your postings only
applied to the 300D or D70, but the 300D has the same sensor as my 10D
and close to the same noise levels - what applies to the 10D also
applies to the 300D.

What makes you think that the 8080 is more noisy than the 5050 ? Pixel
size is the same for both cameras (around 3 micrometer) and Olympus
incorporated advanced noise reduction processes into the 8080.

Actually I may have been incorrect here, I didn’t check the relative pixel
pitch and may have made a wrong assumption. The other points I make I
still stand behind.

However if you combine the f2.4 max aperture with a larger sensor then you
will get a shallower DoF with the 8080 then your 5050, so you don’t get
quite the same performance in hand held low light.

According to the dpreview data noise levels for the 300D at ISO 400
are more or less the same as for the 8080 at ISO 100 (around 2 for the
standard deviation). The D70 is a bit more and starts only at ISO 200,
but I would still prefer it over the 300D.

And the 10D noise is slightly less than the 300D, still around 2. The
important fact is the 300D is slightly less noisy at ISO 400 then the best
that the 5050 or the 8080 are capable of. The 300D still has 2 more ISO
settings below that that give an even cleaner image. This is due to the
greater light collecting ability of the larger sensor, this is a distinct
advantage in many situations. In my opinion the 300D is a better camera
(as long as we ignore price, weight and size).

I also can’t see how the 28-140mm zoom equivalent on the 8080 could come
close to what you can do on a D-SLR with current glass available to cover
19-1920mm zoom equivalent without using teleconverters.

As long as fans of the 8080 are happy to claim that they find the results
good enough for their purposes I am happy. When they start trying to tell
the world that the camera they like is better than more expensive D-SLRs
then I am happy to insert my opinion.


--
Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
See my pics at http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~markh/
"There are 10 types of people, those that
understand binary and those that don't"

Alfred Molon wrote in
:

MarkH wrote:

I am a little confused at this post though, I thought you were talking
about how good your 5050 was and how it suited your needs better than
a D-SLR. But now you are talking about replacing it with a noisier
camera that does not have a f1.8 lens. I used my own camera as an
example in my post (10D) and you are arguing that your postings only
applied to the 300D or D70, but the 300D has the same sensor as my 10D
and close to the same noise levels - what applies to the 10D also
applies to the 300D.

What makes you think that the 8080 is more noisy than the 5050 ? Pixel
size is the same for both cameras (around 3 micrometer) and Olympus
incorporated advanced noise reduction processes into the 8080.

Actually I may have been incorrect here, I didn’t check the relative pixel
pitch and may have made a wrong assumption. The other points I make I
still stand behind.

However if you combine the f2.4 max aperture with a larger sensor then you
will get a shallower DoF with the 8080 then your 5050, so you don’t get
quite the same performance in hand held low light.

According to the dpreview data noise levels for the 300D at ISO 400
are more or less the same as for the 8080 at ISO 100 (around 2 for the
standard deviation). The D70 is a bit more and starts only at ISO 200,
but I would still prefer it over the 300D.

And the 10D noise is slightly less than the 300D, still around 2. The
important fact is the 300D is slightly less noisy at ISO 400 then the best
that the 5050 or the 8080 are capable of. The 300D still has 2 more ISO
settings below that that give an even cleaner image. This is due to the
greater light collecting ability of the larger sensor, this is a distinct
advantage in many situations. In my opinion the 300D is a better camera
(as long as we ignore price, weight and size).

I also can’t see how the 28-140mm zoom equivalent on the 8080 could come
close to what you can do on a D-SLR with current glass available to cover
19-1920mm zoom equivalent without using teleconverters.

As long as fans of the 8080 are happy to claim that they find the results
good enough for their purposes I am happy. When they start trying to tell
the world that the camera they like is better than more expensive D-SLRs
then I am happy to insert my opinion.


--
Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
See my pics at http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~markh/
"There are 10 types of people, those that
understand binary and those that don't"

MarkH wrote:

However if you combine the f2.4 max aperture with a larger sensor then you
will get a shallower DoF with the 8080 then your 5050, so you don’t get
quite the same performance in hand held low light.

Well, no. The 8080 starts at F2.4 and has a crop factor of 4, i.e. you
get at F2.4 the same DOF as a 35mm camera at F9.6. The 5050 has a crop
factor of 5 and gives you at F1.8 the same DOF of a 35mm camera at F9.

But it's true that the 5050 performs better in low light than the 8080,
mainly because of the larger aperture.
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Olympus_405080/
Olympus 5050 resource - http://www.molon.de/5050.html
Olympus 5060 resource - http://www.molon.de/5060.html
Olympus 8080 resource - http://www.molon.de/8080.html

wrote:
According to the dpreview data noise levels for the 300D at ISO 400 are
more or less the same as for the 8080 at ISO 100 (around 2 for the
standard deviation).

That may reflect noise-reduction in the camera, which also reduces
detail.

I suspect that the Canon 300D applies a lot of advanced noise reduction
too. I heard somebody complain about softness in 300D images the other
day.
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Olympus_405080/
Olympus 5050 resource - http://www.molon.de/5050.html
Olympus 5060 resource - http://www.molon.de/5060.html
Olympus 8080 resource - http://www.molon.de/8080.html

wrote:
According to the dpreview data noise levels for the 300D at ISO 400 are
more or less the same as for the 8080 at ISO 100 (around 2 for the
standard deviation).

That may reflect noise-reduction in the camera, which also reduces
detail.

I suspect that the Canon 300D applies a lot of advanced noise reduction
too. I heard somebody complain about softness in 300D images the other
day.
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Olympus_405080/
Olympus 5050 resource - http://www.molon.de/5050.html
Olympus 5060 resource - http://www.molon.de/5060.html
Olympus 8080 resource - http://www.molon.de/8080.html