Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] Olympus E-1 Color Magic

Subject: Re: [OM] Olympus E-1 Color Magic
From: Ken Norton <ken@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2020 09:27:18 -0800
Wayne the Enabler wrote:
> Ken, nice again. Looking forward to Kodak CCD images from Alaska.

Thank you. I'm not going to say that they are going to be better, but
they will be different.


> Your email prompted me to see if I had any such images with the E-1.
> I shot with the E-1 in 2004-2005 before I switched to the 5D.
> I recall how much I liked the 5D view finder over to the E-1's
> tunnel vision, but at least it is optical.

In the post-OM era, Olympus REALLY lost its way with viewfinders. The
OM viewfinder is the IMAX theatre of the photography world, and
Olympus threw all that away to embrace ratty 8mm films. The E-1 finder
was somewhere between awful and horrid. But not to leave bad enough
alone, Olympus outdid itself with the porro-finder design of the E-3xx
and then the non-prism versions in the E-4xx, E-5xx, and E-6xx series.
But they did redeem themselves with the incredible E-3/E-5 viewfinder.
The E-1 is small, but it is actually quite usable because the screen
is bright, but still focusable, And the optical viewing distance is
still pretty good. The porro-finder designs are very much tunnel
vision in comparison. (The OMD line is quite good for EVF).

The sad part to all this is how much superior the 5D screen was over
the E-system. And some of you may recall how I felt about Canon
viewfinders back in the film era. Honestly, compared to the OM system,
Canon viewfinders (except for the EOS-1 series) were pretty
gut-wrenching bad. And the 5D had the exact same viewfinder as those
terrible things. The 6D I had was a very good picture-taking machine
(I'll rail against some aspects, but overall, the camera was
excellent), however, the viewfinder was my nemesis. It was nearly
impossible to manually focus in that screen with the wider-angle
lenses.

All that said, as I've been revisiting the E-1 and shooting it a whole
lot lately (the 14-54 is at home on this thing), I'll say that the
viewfinder has actually grown on me a bit. Yes, it's small, but it is
quite comfortable. My eyes gravitate to it rather nicely. As long as I
don't come anywhere near the OM cameras and start crying.


> Here are some photos I never processed from the E-1.
> I used adobe color space in the E-1. Images were processed with ACR
> default or auto. You have a point about minimal need for adjustments.
> Many of the shots were with the 50-200 ZD.

Well, if these are your "outtakes" that you never got around to
processing, I'm curious what your first choices are. Those are very
nice. As to adobe color space, it doesn't matter. sRGB vs. aRGB is an
output thing, not a creation thing. It's just a flag. When you
processed in ACR, it ignores the flag and will output the file in
whatever format you want. Inclusion of this setting in the cameras
really only comes into play with in-camera creation of JPEGs or TIFFs.
Adobe CC pretty much defaults to ProPhoto RGB for file handling. It
truly is amazing how close the default images are. Most cameras
require a lot of bit-bending to get to this starting point and these
files have no bit-bending done yet;


> My color IQ is average, not genius like Ken's, so I can't say how my sonie,
> of today, would compare. For the most part, I prefer the lower level of
> frustration and having more latitude with a camera.

I think you seriously underestimate your color IQ. You're one of the
better photographers I've known. Your macro photography is incredible.
That one picture you took with the 5D and 100 macro is got to be one
of the best I've seen. I've tried to copy it (ahem, be inspired by
it), with no success.


> I'm curious which color space you're using and whether that makes
> a difference with the E-1? Comparing to some 5D shots from that time
> period, I can't say that the E-1 was better than the 5D. I recall if I
> did not nail the E-1 exposure, it could be way off. For me, and most of my
> photography, the 5D was a better camera in use. Although the 50-200
> was a nice lens to work with on the E-1.

For the most part, all of my cameras have been set to sRGB as I shoot
raw. Or if I do shoot in-camera JPEG, it's always with output intent
of sRGB. For a year or so, I was shooting aRGB until I realized it
made no difference.

Nailing exposure is always a little bit of a challenge. The E-1 biases
the exposure down about a stop to protect the highlights. The picture
then needs to be pulled up during conversion and editing. The toe is
long because of the sensor and dithering noise, (Olympus adds
dithering noise to the images - several other brands did too before
the waxed-image look took over) so you can pull up the shadows a ton,
but you can't recover highlights. Ain't nothing there once you clip.
Not at all unlike shooting slide film as far as highlights, but more
like Kodak Portra 160NC when it comes to shadows.


> Are you sure that you like the E-1 so much, simply because it feels
> more like shooting film?

I don't think so. Film is film, and the OM system is the OM system.
But what I do like about the E-1 is the Kodak CCD sensor's unique
ability to see and translate colors. In my non-summer months testing,
the E-300 and E-400 are not the same as the E-1, but are definitely
much different than any other camera. The E-300 appears to have the
same IR characteristics, but not the same UV characteristics. The
E-400 has a different IR filter than the E-1 and E-300. I believe
Olympus changed out the IR filter with the E-500 too. The magenta
blacks is a big problem with the E-1 and E-300. I can't wait to
photograph the Fireweed here in Alaska.

If you are asking whether the E-1 images are more "film-like" than
CMOS images, I would say "kinda-sorta". It really depends on the film
you are referencing. I think the E-1 is more like Provia with Agfa-50
shadows. The blue skies are almost Kodachrome, but the tree bark of
the Upper Peninsula forest is more Ektachrome 64. It's a mixed-bag
that is difficult to decode, but pleasant to work with.

On FB, I've already shared one image, which I'll get around to posting
here later today, that is 100% untouched from that same trip. I think
it really illustrates the color science going on that I've written
2000 words to describe.

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/

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz