Ken, you are really bad, if our Disneyland had not changed the lighting
setup I have to buy another E-thing now and throw away the 5D II. The two
shots were made at different date, both straightly output from RAW:
E-520 ISO 800, no NR.
http://www.accura.com.hk/temp/PC190478_M2.jpg
5D II ISO 2000, develop +0.67 stop (ISO3200 equ), no NR.
http://www.accura.com.hk/temp/IMG_6716.JPG
C.H.Ling
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ken Norton"
>>
>
> The E-1's biggest issue is chroma noise. The luma noise is actually quite
> pleasant, the but the chroma noise reminds me of elcheepo ISO 400 print
> film
> processed in an uncalibrated minilab. Fortunately, chroma noise is easily
> whacked and when doing so it does not do ANY softening.
>
> I suppose that I'm not too worried about the E-1 at ISO 800. I've
> developed
> a few tricks of the trade when shooting it there and have shot it very
> extensively indoors for both recreational shooting and professional
> shooting.
>
> It isn't stupid-clean like the Nikon D3, but unlike most digital cameras
> it
> doesn't lose tonal separation at higher ISOs. The noise floor increases,
> but
> the assignment of tones to the proper zones is maintained. The common
> fault
> with digital cameras at higher ISOs is that to counter the raising noise
> floor, the camera reduces the effective dynamic range of the picture to
> keep
> the noise below the threshold. The problem with this is that the remaining
> dynamic range is squeezed into a reduced scale. It passes DPReview's tests
> with flying colors (or non-colors in this case), but then the grousing is
> that the high ISO images are "flat".
>
> No free lunches either way.
>
> AG
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|
