[ closed ] Olympus Announces its latest Micro4/3 camera and lenses - OM-D

[MichaelLee]

The Zuiko 50-200 weighs 995g. Unless you already have it as part of your existing 4/3 system and are using the m4/3 camera as backup, I don't think it makes much sense to get this monster lens to pair with your small-and-light E-M5.

the fact, there is one. whether it make sense, it is subjective.
for me , it make sense, because it has good optical.

 

[MC42]

Basically, Oly is short-changing you. You get ISO4000 performance because of a reduction in shutter speed, not due to an improvement in technology.

According to DXO, the nikon d700 at ISO6400 is really 4871. The 5Dmk2? It's 3990. The Nex 5N? 4540. Nikon, Canon and Sony short change us all too!

ISO was established for film makers to standardise their emulsions so camera meters will work consistently with all brands of film. It worked very well for that era and the concept of sensitivity as labelled with well known ISO numbers (64, 100, 200, etc) was carried over to digital. But there are pitfalls in doing so.

In the digital era, each manufacturer can and will use different gain settings for their analogue amplifiers, so calling the amplifier gain setting the 'ISO' is wrong. Their concept of ISO is to match the final output from the raw converter (in camera or on the computer) with what would have been achieved had film of the same ISO rating been shot with those exposure settings.

This is all a little confusing because we expect the ISO values to yield the same brightness in RAW. But it isn't since RAW isn't considered by the manufacturer to be the final output. There is a valid reason for this (no, it's not marketing trying to short change us. Not this time anyway!). When they design the analogue amplifier, they know which part of the gain curve is most linear. By limiting the gain to just the portions of the gain curve that are most linear, they reduce amplification noise. They then compensate by increasing or decreasing the digital value from the sensor to the correct brightness for that ISO setting. In fact by doing it this way, enough noise is reduced that increasing the digital number still results in a cleaner image than gaining up the amplifier to keep the digital number unchanged. I think <speculation> their ultimate goal is to have only one gain setting in a very linear amplifier, then match ISOs simply by tweaking the digital number. This would simplify circuit design and keep parts cost down. <\speculation> Sigma tried this, but failed to achieve sufficient S/N ratio for good output at higher ISOs.

At the lower end of the ISO scale, some manufacturers, trying to keep within the linear part of the gain curve, 'understate' the ISO, then digitally reduce the brightness for the final output. This compromises dynamic range, but keeps noise low. That's why for the D700 (and some others as well) the 'base' ISO is not 100, but 200.

Sorry, a bit long winded, but hope this helps...

 

[silencer13]

Super explanation! Thanks for taking the time to write that, I learnt something new and valuable today.

 

[rhema83]

According to DXO, the nikon d700 at ISO6400 is really 4871. The 5Dmk2? It's 3990. The Nex 5N? 4540. Nikon, Canon and Sony short change us all too!

ISO was established for film makers to standardise their emulsions so camera meters will work consistently with all brands of film. It worked very well for that era and the concept of sensitivity as labelled with well known ISO numbers (64, 100, 200, etc) was carried over to digital. But there are pitfalls in doing so.

In the digital era, each manufacturer can and will use different gain settings for their analogue amplifiers, so calling the amplifier gain setting the 'ISO' is wrong. Their concept of ISO is to match the final output from the raw converter (in camera or on the computer) with what would have been achieved had film of the same ISO rating been shot with those exposure settings.

<snipped>

...

A very in-depth write up. Thumbs up for you! Are you an electrical engineer by training? It sounds like you are quite familiar with signal processing.

 

[rhema83]

the fact, there is one. whether it make sense, it is subjective.
for me , it make sense, because it has good optical.

You're right, it is subjective. It might not make sense to a downsize-from-DSLR shooter like myself, but it probably makes a lot of sense to someone who values optical performance above all else. As long as it makes you happy, right?

Come to think about it, it is already 30% lighter than the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L, so Olympus has already taken advantage of the smaller 4/3 format.

 

[MichaelLee]

You're right, it is subjective. It might not make sense to a downsize-from-DSLR shooter like myself, but it probably makes a lot of sense to someone who values optical performance above all else. As long as it makes you happy, right?

Come to think about it, it is already 30% lighter than the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L, so Olympus has already taken advantage of the smaller 4/3 format.

u right. neither canon/sony/nikon/pentax any brand has lens that give effective range 100-400mm f2.8-3.5 + SWD. So the lens itself is already downsize. Paired with OMD it is further downsize yet it still has 5axis IS. that;s why I think it makes sense and fit the bill.

 

[NazgulKing]

According to DXO, the nikon d700 at ISO6400 is really 4871. The 5Dmk2? It's 3990. The Nex 5N? 4540. Nikon, Canon and Sony short change us all too!

ISO was established for film makers to standardise their emulsions so camera meters will work consistently with all brands of film. It worked very well for that era and the concept of sensitivity as labelled with well known ISO numbers (64, 100, 200, etc) was carried over to digital. But there are pitfalls in doing so.

In the digital era, each manufacturer can and will use different gain settings for their analogue amplifiers, so calling the amplifier gain setting the 'ISO' is wrong. Their concept of ISO is to match the final output from the raw converter (in camera or on the computer) with what would have been achieved had film of the same ISO rating been shot with those exposure settings.

This is all a little confusing because we expect the ISO values to yield the same brightness in RAW. But it isn't since RAW isn't considered by the manufacturer to be the final output. There is a valid reason for this (no, it's not marketing trying to short change us. Not this time anyway!). When they design the analogue amplifier, they know which part of the gain curve is most linear. By limiting the gain to just the portions of the gain curve that are most linear, they reduce amplification noise. They then compensate by increasing or decreasing the digital value from the sensor to the correct brightness for that ISO setting. In fact by doing it this way, enough noise is reduced that increasing the digital number still results in a cleaner image than gaining up the amplifier to keep the digital number unchanged. I think <speculation> their ultimate goal is to have only one gain setting in a very linear amplifier, then match ISOs simply by tweaking the digital number. This would simplify circuit design and keep parts cost down. <\speculation> Sigma tried this, but failed to achieve sufficient S/N ratio for good output at higher ISOs.

At the lower end of the ISO scale, some manufacturers, trying to keep within the linear part of the gain curve, 'understate' the ISO, then digitally reduce the brightness for the final output. This compromises dynamic range, but keeps noise low. That's why for the D700 (and some others as well) the 'base' ISO is not 100, but 200.

Sorry, a bit long winded, but hope this helps...

Given the drop in DR in the high gain, they might to some extent resort to calibration to try to compensate, be it in signal processing or whatever. Of course, noise and DR are two different things in terms of Op Amps but yeah.

 

[rhema83]

Ya looking forward too, also doubt will be cheap, the current X lenses are already priced higher than kit lenses albeit more features. Though optically it might not seem to be as good as the Olympus high grade lenses 14-54/12-60. As long as the 12-35 & 35-100 can have as good performance as Oly equivalent and priced lower than the Oly 12-35/35-100 F2 which are SHG, there should still be a market, for the enthusiast.

Panasonic claimed to design these X lenses with serious enthusiasts in mind. Seeing their relatively large sizes, weather sealing and how they are to match the upcoming top-shelf GH3, I think they won't be shabby. They are Panasonic's flagships after all, so I am expecting to see optical and build quality on par with equivalent Canon L or Nikkor gold-ring lenses. If the two Leica-branded primes and the Lumix G 7-14mm f/4 are any indication, Panasonic should have no problem getting it right.

The wait continues. But it's fun to have something to look forward to, isn't it?

Edit: With the introduction of the "high grade" E-M5, perhaps Olympus will also start producing HG lenses for its micro-4/3 system?

 

[As7eroidS]

wasted no built-in GPS...

 

[Oly5050]

According to DXO, the nikon d700 at ISO6400 is really 4871. The 5Dmk2? It's 3990. The Nex 5N? 4540. Nikon, Canon and Sony short change us all too!

ISO was established for film makers to standardise their emulsions so camera meters will work consistently with all brands of film. It worked very well for that era and the concept of sensitivity as labelled with well known ISO numbers (64, 100, 200, etc) was carried over to digital. But there are pitfalls in doing so.

In the digital era, each manufacturer can and will use different gain settings for their analogue amplifiers, so calling the amplifier gain setting the 'ISO' is wrong. Their concept of ISO is to match the final output from the raw converter (in camera or on the computer) with what would have been achieved had film of the same ISO rating been shot with those exposure settings.

This is all a little confusing because we expect the ISO values to yield the same brightness in RAW. But it isn't since RAW isn't considered by the manufacturer to be the final output. There is a valid reason for this (no, it's not marketing trying to short change us. Not this time anyway!). When they design the analogue amplifier, they know which part of the gain curve is most linear. By limiting the gain to just the portions of the gain curve that are most linear, they reduce amplification noise. They then compensate by increasing or decreasing the digital value from the sensor to the correct brightness for that ISO setting. In fact by doing it this way, enough noise is reduced that increasing the digital number still results in a cleaner image than gaining up the amplifier to keep the digital number unchanged. I think <speculation> their ultimate goal is to have only one gain setting in a very linear amplifier, then match ISOs simply by tweaking the digital number. This would simplify circuit design and keep parts cost down. <\speculation> Sigma tried this, but failed to achieve sufficient S/N ratio for good output at higher ISOs.

At the lower end of the ISO scale, some manufacturers, trying to keep within the linear part of the gain curve, 'understate' the ISO, then digitally reduce the brightness for the final output. This compromises dynamic range, but keeps noise low. That's why for the D700 (and some others as well) the 'base' ISO is not 100, but 200.

Sorry, a bit long winded, but hope this helps...

Superb!!!! Your expertise really shines through here.

 

[theITguy]

The 150/2.0 and 300/2.8 equivalent of the lens in mFT will come earliest in 2013. That is when they further improve on the 3D AF tracking for the E-M6, which will be release in 2014 spring.

 

[theITguy]

Not sure if this was posted....

Îáçîð è òåñò Olympus OM-D E-M5 – ïåðâûå âïå÷àòëåíèÿ î áåççåðêàëüíîì öèôðîâîì ôîòîàïïàðàòå, òåõíè÷åñêèå õàðàêòåðèñòèêè, ôóíêöèè, îòçûâû è âïå÷àòëåíèÿ, òåñòîâûå ñíèìêè

 

[Evilmerlin]

Olympus has international warranty right? I missed the pre-order promos and am considering getting it from Malaysia or the US instead.

 

[MichaelLee]

Olympus has international warranty right?

confirmed !

 

[Evilmerlin]

confirmed !

Great! Thanks!

 

[jamestan75]

just curious, any links to see the dates of first shipment by country? wondering which country will get first.

 

[Evilmerlin]

According to BHphoto, their expected ship date is 16th april.

 

[silencer13]

According to BHphoto, their expected ship date is 16th april.

Actually BHphoto should be getting it earlier than that. It's just that they're closed for the Jewish Passover from 5 to 13 April, and they don't do online sales on the weekends (14 - 15 April), hence their 16 April date.
Originally they had the date at 10 April, and I suspect that's when they'll get theirs.

Of course, I'm just keeping my fingers crossed and hoping, cause I need mine before 13 April.

 

[MC42]

Given the drop in DR in the high gain, they might to some extent resort to calibration to try to compensate, be it in signal processing or whatever. Of course, noise and DR are two different things in terms of Op Amps but yeah.

That's another reason to avoid simply doubling the gain at high ISO. As long as you feed your A/D converter a signal greater than its inherent noise floor, any further analogue gain merely runs the risk of blowing out the highlights and compromising DR at high ISO. This is what happened to early Oly products. Their ISO ratings were 'honest'. Each ISO increment resulted in an actual doubling of analogue gain. And you know the result... their early products gained a reputation for low DR and high ISO.

 

[Evilmerlin]

Actually BHphoto should be getting it earlier than that. It's just that they're closed for the Jewish Passover from 5 to 13 April, and they don't do online sales on the weekends (14 - 15 April), hence their 16 April date.
Originally they had the date at 10 April, and I suspect that's when they'll get theirs.

Of course, I'm just keeping my fingers crossed and hoping, cause I need mine before 13 April.

You ordered from BHPhoto? I just need mine before the end of May. Then I don't have to bring my E-30 with me (though I will miss my 12-60...).