Moose,
My E-1 loves violets. I have posted this link previously. It shows a mix
of conventional wild violets, along with the grey ones that, where we grew
up in Mississippi, were called Confederate Violets.
http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/OldNick/Violets.jpg.html
Jim Nichols
Tullahoma, TN USA
----- Original Message -----
From: "Moose" <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx>
To: "Olympus Camera Discussion" <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, April 09, 2010 11:00 PM
Subject: Re: [OM] Talking about violet
> On 4/6/2010 2:47 AM, C.H.Ling wrote:
>> After seeing the discussion about violet reproduction, I was a bit worry
>> if the later Olympus camera will have problem to see it. Here are some
>> shots taken for the same type of flower at different date but under
>> similar
>> daylight (overcast) condition:
>>
>> E-1 http://www.accura.com.hk/temp/P3180419.jpg
>>
>> E-PL1 http://www.accura.com.hk/temp/P4060397.jpg
>>
>> 5D II http://www.accura.com.hk/temp/IMG_1700.JPG
>>
>> 40D http://www.accura.com.hk/temp/IMG_0806.JPG
>>
>> All converted from RAW with daylight balance, what do you think?
>>
>
> The difference in background, particularly brightness, makes visual
> comparison pretty impossible for me. To get a semi objective measure of
> difference, I selected the violet portion of the primary flower in all
> four, expressly leaving out the very different, pinkish petal in the 40D
> shot.
>
> I then averaged the selected area. Here are the color values:
>
> Channel E-1 E-LP1 5DII 40D
> --------------------------------------
> Red 113 126 129 112
> Green 32 42 29 37
> Blue 146 150 144 142
>
> Assuming the E-1 is most accurate, per AG:
>
> Difference
> Red 13 16 -1
> Green 10 -3 5
> Blue 4 -2 -4
> Total 27 11 0
>
> Absolute Difference
> Red 13 16 1
> Green 10 3 5
> Blue 4 2 4
> Total 27 21 10
>
> The 40D is the clear winner in "E-1 emulation", with very small
> individual deviations and an average deviation of zero. You are right to
> be concerned about the E-LP1, as it's the farthest off.
>
> Certainly nothing absolute in all this. You don't say what RAW
> converter(s) were used. In the case of ACR, the default conversion
> depends on some values drawn from test shots of targets, so RAW
> conversion probably says more about ACR than the camera itself, at least
> at this level of subtlety.
>
> It might be interesting to compare JPEGs and/or RAW conversions using
> Oly software for their camera and Canon's DPP for theirs. or did you do
> that?
>
> A. Violet Moose
> [Just one letter away from trouble.]
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|
