4:3 versus 3:2

Take a look at this test between the Olympus E-500 and Nikon D50.
Note the resolution difference.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympuse500/page22.asp

"Rich" wrote in message
...
Take a look at this test between the Olympus E-500 and Nikon D50.
Note the resolution difference.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympuse500/page22.as

But this could suggest that the 3:2 is better:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympuse500/page20.asp

Surely the pixel count has something to do with it, as well as the
format -or am I being naive?

John

Rich wrote:
Take a look at this test between the Olympus E-500 and Nikon D50.
Note the resolution difference.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympuse500/page22.asp


yea, this is the difference between 8MP vs. 6MP

l e o wrote:
Rich wrote:

Take a look at this test between the Olympus E-500 and Nikon D50.
Note the resolution difference.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympuse500/page22.asp



yea, this is the difference between 8MP vs. 6MP

You could also say it's the difference in resolving ability of the
lenses too!

--
Douglas...
Specifications are good to read but
When it comes to judging Digital Cameras...
I'm in the "how do the pictures look" category.

The D70 is out of focus! Look at the camera lens crop, why is teh D70
SHARPER there? But it has some softness elsewhere, maybe the DOF? But
the shot was at f/9, so it maybe a focus issue. I had the impression
that my D70 was not ficusing quite right sometimes...The images were
just not sharp all th etime....

JR

On Sun, 23 Oct 2005 14:20:33 +0100, "JohnP" wrote:


"Rich" wrote in message
.. .
Take a look at this test between the Olympus E-500 and Nikon D50.
Note the resolution difference.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympuse500/page22.as

But this could suggest that the 3:2 is better:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympuse500/page20.asp

Surely the pixel count has something to do with it, as well as the
format -or am I being naive?

John


Not that much to do with it. I've seen identical shots taken
by the Canon 350/XT and the Nikon D50 that looked almost identical,
except for the slightly higher resolution of the Canon.
-Rich

On Sun, 23 Oct 2005 19:19:59 -0700, JR wrote:

The D70 is out of focus! Look at the camera lens crop, why is teh D70
SHARPER there? But it has some softness elsewhere, maybe the DOF? But
the shot was at f/9, so it maybe a focus issue. I had the impression
that my D70 was not ficusing quite right sometimes...The images were
just not sharp all th etime....

JR

Supposedly, the D70s has more accurate autofocus.
-Rich

In article ,
Rich wrote:

On Sun, 23 Oct 2005 19:19:59 -0700, JR wrote:

The D70 is out of focus! Look at the camera lens crop, why is teh D70
SHARPER there? But it has some softness elsewhere, maybe the DOF? But
the shot was at f/9, so it maybe a focus issue. I had the impression
that my D70 was not ficusing quite right sometimes...The images were
just not sharp all th etime....

JR

Supposedly, the D70s has more accurate autofocus.
-Rich

I just moved to the D2X and now all shots are sharp.....

JR

Not that much to do with it. I've seen identical shots taken
by the Canon 350/XT and the Nikon D50 that looked almost identical,
except for the slightly higher resolution of the Canon.
-Rich

So why in:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympuse500/page20.asp

does the Canon 350D give crisper images than the Olympus E500?

John

JohnP wrote:
Not that much to do with it. I've seen identical shots taken
by the Canon 350/XT and the Nikon D50 that looked almost identical,
except for the slightly higher resolution of the Canon.
-Rich


So why in:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympuse500/page20.asp

does the Canon 350D give crisper images than the Olympus E500?

John


Although the lenses used are both 50mm (in 35mm speak) the Olympus is
actually a +2 crop factor while the Canon is a +0.6 crop factor.
Although the field of view is the same regardless of the crop factor,
the Olympus had to be further away from the subject to produce the same
image size. This almost certainly affects the depth of field.

If you look at the camera lens, both are sharply focused on the lens
scale in towards the back but the Oly image is soft on the Leica name.
This suggests to me that either the shooter used different aperture on
the two cameras or other optical factors are in play. The Oly seems to
have less DOF in all those shots. Otherwise, it is just as sharp.

http://www.auspics.com/flowers/net_rose this is an OLY E300 sharpened
shot. No different to a lot of 20D shots I've taken. The camera is only
the tool by which you make the picture. Fortunately, Olympus lenses are
pretty decent optics, regardless of their price.

The part I can't understand in these dpreview "reviews" is how little
they regard essential information which would help you understand why
one camera "seems" better or worse than another.

I used to think it was because they got cash from Canon that they made
Canon look better but now I'm starting to think they probably don't
fully understand what they are doing anyway and probably shouldn't be
considered any "set in concrete" source of reference. Just another web
site with a lot of missing information when it suits them.
--
Douglas...
Specifications are good to read but
When it comes to judging Digital Cameras...
I'm in the "how do the pictures look" category.