> Well used? I read a shutter count of 1,877! Did I get it the secret menus
> wrong?
I haven't done the code yet, but I suspect that it was either the
power-cycle count or maybe it got reset through a repair. Either way,
I suspect that it acquired Platinum status as a frequent flyer. The
price was right, so I'm pretty enthralled. In fact, I've got some
plans for it that would otherwise be considered rather risky. So stay
tuned for pictures that only an E-1 would be suitable for.
> I'm with you, Chris. I acquired the three Kodak CCD sensor bodies,
> specifically to see the magic colors. I shot parallel
> photos with all three and an E-M5 II, tripod mounted, same lens at same
> settings. Yes, they rendered subtle lilac
> colored flowers slightly differently. Yes, there was a little bit of
> difference in red ones. But nothing that seemed
> magic, or even particularly superior, to me.
With the exception of pre-D700 Nikons, I have found that most cameras
and sensors tend to match pretty well with "standardized" scenes. They
all have the Fujichrome Astia look to the images. In post, you can
usually crank them to mimic Fujichrome Provia images, but generally
speaking they all are competent pretending to see the world like
Fujichrome Astia. In the digital editing world, it is actually very
beneficial to have your base image to be as Astia-like as possible for
maximum flexibility.
Where we run into problems is when we get outside of the normal
standardized scene which the standardized sensor excels at. Honestly,
we're hard-pressed to see any difference between an iPhone image and a
Sony A7R III image under these conditions. But start to change the
source lighting away from daylight balance, move away from base ISO,
add subject matter which is outside or near the edge of the visible
spectrum (near IR, UV) and all bets are off. The E-1 is unique in it's
ability to see outside the visible spectrum and also remaps the UV
content into what is visible. The side-effect of this is maroon blacks
with the extended near-IR sensitivity.
The E-800 has a similar mapping of out-of-spectrum light, but
Kodak/Olympus had altered the green channel a little bit and adjusted
for it with gain bias. They also partially corrected the misalignment
of channels at the saturation point. The E-1 is a camera you DO NOT
overexpose. The E-300 is a little more tolerant. My initial testing
leads me to believe the E-400 looks to be more like the E-1 in this
regard. The E-3, with the Panasonic sensor is hopeless with no
latitude adjustment.
ALL sensors can be made to match each other with the standardized
scenes by tweeking the gain structure during the read process. But if
the color filters in front of the sensels see differently (Canon's are
lightly tinted to make them more light sensitive and the colors are
derived through mix-minus), there is only so much you can do with the
image as the color rendering is either there or it isn't. This,
however, is completely subject, lighting, and exposure sensitive.
AK Schnozz
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|