EPL-2 and XZ-1

[albertri]

Colour accuracy on the display screen is not really an issue but being viewable under sunlight and low power consumption is vital.

I would slightly disagree with you bro a good color reproduction from cam LCD is needed unless you shooting RAW and could correct the photos during PP, if you shooting jpeg yes could still be corrected but very hard compare to RAW. But that said i still believed OLED is slightly better then LCD

power consumption is indeed lower for OLED, and slightly better viewable under bright sunny day but not much.. the good part with XZ-1 they said could use the Oly EVF nothing beats the bright Singapore sunny day than OVF or EVF :thumbsup:

 

[wonglp]

Cnet Asia seems to have a different specs for the XZ-1. The reviewer says

1) Backside illuminated CMOS sensor instead of CCD

2) 920K OLED instead of 614K


More info here: http://asia.cnet.com/crave/2011/01/06/olympus-announces-new-micro-four-thirds-advanced-compact-and-accessories/


Strange ... :think: Very.. EXTREMELY tempting if the above specs are correct.

I'd rather trust Dpreview.

Yes, Dpreview is trustworthy, & certainly I'd trust olympus too
http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_section/product.asp?product=1530

 

[albertri]

Yes, Dpreview is trustworthy, & certainly I'd trust olympus too
http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_section/product.asp?product=1530

:thumbsup::thumbsup::lovegrin:

 

[spidey89]

I would slightly disagree with you bro a good color reproduction from cam LCD is needed unless you shooting RAW and could correct the photos during PP, if you shooting jpeg yes could still be corrected but very hard compare to RAW. But that said i still believed OLED is slightly better then LCD

power consumption is indeed lower for OLED, and slightly better viewable under bright sunny day but not much.. the good part with XZ-1 they said could use the Oly EVF nothing beats the bright Singapore sunny day than OVF or EVF :thumbsup:

Think about this way, even for people shooting jpg, its no recommended that you view images after shooting, even jpg shooters will put on a PC to view it, afterall, why squint at a tiny 3" screen when you can view on a 30" screen? :bsmilie:

Plus, its quite tedious to view colour on the display and be able to judge, most importantly is learn how the colour is rendered, when shooting, make sure white balance is right, exposure is right, nuff said for jpg (may have more steps, but this is more of general steps)

 

[chua beng]

i think he limited the access to friends only. check the 2nd link i posted, it's about the same photos.

There seems to be a restriction from Olympus about releasing original files from pre-production cameras. This is what he wrote: "However, due to restrictions from Olympus to post original resolution pre-production images online, you will need to have a Flickr Account, ADD me, SEND me a message, and I’ll make sure you can see them. " in here: http://www.davidchuaphotography.com/2011/01/06/olympus-xz-1-review-part-1/

 

[sys12345]

I'm not sure about your work flow but i never calibrate my colour based on the result of the display screen on my camera. I have a calibrated monitor and i tweak my settings based on what i see on my PC screen. In addition, especially when i'm travelling, i dont have the luxury of checking the colour accuracy from my camera display screen each time i snap a shot. Besides, colour tones/settings can always be tweaked during the post processing, RAW or JPEG and in camera settings are very limited.

I would slightly disagree with you bro a good color reproduction from cam LCD is needed unless you shooting RAW and could correct the photos during PP, if you shooting jpeg yes could still be corrected but very hard compare to RAW. But that said i still believed OLED is slightly better then LCD

power consumption is indeed lower for OLED, and slightly better viewable under bright sunny day but not much.. the good part with XZ-1 they said could use the Oly EVF nothing beats the bright Singapore sunny day than OVF or EVF :thumbsup:

 

[albertri]

Think about this way, even for people shooting jpg, its no recommended that you view images after shooting, even jpg shooters will put on a PC to view it, afterall, why squint at a tiny 3" screen when you can view on a 30" screen? :bsmilie:

Plus, its quite tedious to view colour on the display and be able to judge, most importantly is learn how the colour is rendered, when shooting, make sure white balance is right, exposure is right, nuff said for jpg (may have more steps, but this is more of general steps)

I'm not sure about your work flow but i never calibrate my colour based on the result of the display screen on my camera. I have a calibrated monitor and i tweak my settings based on what i see on my PC screen. In addition, especially when i'm travelling, i dont have the luxury of checking the colour accuracy from my camera display screen each time i snap a shot. Besides, colour tones/settings can always be tweaked during the post processing, RAW or JPEG and in camera settings are very limited.

Hi Bros,

What I am saying is actually its nice to have a very good cam LCD w/c could display close to PC monitor... I had this experience once that on my cam LCD the color looks dull then I bump up the contrast, saturation that when I look at the photo using my PC monitor is was over saturated and over contrast... I've learned from that mistake and learn to ignore color, contrast on my cam lcd what i am looking now is the sharpness (by magnifying my photo so I could see if it is clear/sharp)

Im sure OLED display would be rich, bright and would be good for viewing yur photo and when checking for sharpness etc... I am exited by XZ-1 and I thnk I could retire my point and shoot Sony H10 lolz

 

[pchmj]

Too rich and bright not a gd thing. Many camera, especially p&s, makes their screen over saturate and using the screen to judge, pics turn out much better than my pen. Viewing in pc is completely different though. Gd marketing since many try and buy p&s in shops. The one with better screen tend to sell better.

Oled may not help in sunlight. Some phones using oled has poor visibility. Battery life does not help much too. IMO, it's more of a gimmick than a useful thing now. A gd ips panel still rules.

 

[diCam]

XZ-1 has AMOLED...

 

[Oly5050]

Colour accuracy on the display screen is not really an issue but being viewable under sunlight and low power consumption is vital.

Doesn't really matter though, the part on true colour, when viewing, its best view in prints or on PC, most important is to get the composition and sharpness there, as well as exposure via the histogram, all others, back to the darkroom

I would not totally discount the utility of the 3 inch LCDs on the newer cameras. If so, all of us can just do with the 1-2 inch LCD screens or even throw it away all together and just shoot ala film. No doubt the histogram is best for exposure verification, the resolution and the colour accuracy of the LCD screen is actually essential for checking focus and for white balance respectively while in the field.

For example, on the E1 LCD, the screen is so small, and the resolution so poor, and the zoom range is limited. For that reason, it is not as easy to check how sharp the image is compared to on the newer cameras. Of course, I usually trust the camera and more than 90% of the time, the images are sharp although there is no way I can be 100% sure based on the LCD screen.

Also, if u shoot RAW, u may think that WB is not an issue and colour accuracy is not so important. BUT, if u want to have your photo come out with accurate colours as is, you may not remember exactly how the colours were supposed to be when you go home and start processing your RAW files. Hence, in situations where u want to have total control of the WB, u need to have an accurate reflection of the colours on your camera LCD....and this can only be done using the camera LCD in the field...unless of course, you can bring out our PC or laptop and shoot tethered. So it is recommended to shoot RAW+JPEG in these situations.

Maybe you guys are not aware, but on the EPL1 and E5, you can calibrate the camera LCD screen by adjusting brightness and temperature. I think this will help to make sure that what u see on your camera LCD will be as close as what u will see on your PC screen (which should be calibrated BTW).

In any case, I usually set my preview to 0 seconds on my cameras. So I once I have dialed in the settings for a given shooting situation, I do not bother to check every image. I have the camera setup in a way where I can trust that once WB etc are set, everything should be OK. There are number of advantages for not routinely showing a preview. This includes faster speed (esp EPL1), saves battery life, and finally, you spend more time shooting than chimping. U chimp too much, u can miss opportunities. After a while, u bond with your camera and the camera is an extension of you, and u have to learn to trust it. U cannot be checking on it all the time.

 

[albertri]

I would not totally discount the utility of the 3 inch LCDs on the newer cameras. If so, all of us can just do with the 1-2 inch LCD screens or even throw it away all together and just shoot ala film. No doubt the histogram is best for exposure verification, the resolution and the colour accuracy of the LCD screen is actually essential for checking focus and for white balance respectively while in the field.

For example, on the E1 LCD, the screen is so small, and the resolution so poor, and the zoom range is limited. For that reason, it is not as easy to check how sharp the image is compared to on the newer cameras. Of course, I usually trust the camera and more than 90% of the time, the images are sharp although there is no way I can be 100% sure based on the LCD screen.

Also, if u shoot RAW, u may think that WB is not an issue and colour accuracy is not so important. BUT, if u want to have your photo come out with accurate colours as is, you may not remember exactly how the colours were supposed to be when you go home and start processing your RAW files. Hence, in situations where u want to have total control of the WB, u need to have an accurate reflection of the colours on your camera LCD....and this can only be done using the camera LCD in the field...unless of course, you can bring out our PC or laptop and shoot tethered. So it is recommended to shoot RAW+JPEG in these situations.

Maybe you guys are not aware, but on the EPL1 and E5, you can calibrate the camera LCD screen by adjusting brightness and temperature. I think this will help to make sure that what u see on your camera LCD will be as close as what u will see on your PC screen (which should be calibrated BTW).

In any case, I usually set my preview to 0 seconds on my cameras. So I once I have dialed in the settings for a given shooting situation, I do not bother to check every image. I have the camera setup in a way where I can trust that once WB etc are set, everything should be OK. There are number of advantages for not routinely showing a preview. This includes faster speed (esp EPL1), saves battery life, and finally, you spend more time shooting than chimping. U chimp too much, u can miss opportunities. After a while, u bond with your camera and the camera is an extension of you, and u have to learn to trust it. U cannot be checking on it all the time.

:thumbsup: good advice bro and feedback... i also feel the same about camera lcd

 

[faisalee]

not quite sure if it is about the file system... I am using A33 and file format of the SD card I am using is FAT not sure if it is FAT32 though but could record HD until either one comes 1st

1. the sensor overheats lols
2. card space (full)

I did notice those with IBIS or SSS tend to have a shorter HD recording than the IBIS is on the lens not sure if this XZ-1 has IBIS on the sensor like Oly and Sony does. This could be the reason of the the 7min HD recording. Sony A33/A55 with IBIS or SSS on could only take 7-9Mins HD vid then you'll start to see over heating warning message.. while if you turn off the IBIS/SSS it could take roughly 20plus mins of HD vid.

Or it could be buffer issue? (I doubt it i though)

but I could also be wrong with XZ-1 and E-5 HD vid limitation.

Fat32 limit is 4GB file size

 

[Lucian]

Thanks to the many helpful individuals who have replied my query.

What is puzzling me slightly is Oly's decision to give the XZ-1 an arguably better performing screen over the EPL-2. Isn't the EPL-2 supposed to be for the more advanced user / serious photographer? Why compromise on the screen for the EPL-2 when Oly clearly has the capability to provide a screen like the XZ-1's?

Does anyone have any insight into this?

 

[mabmy]

Thanks to the many helpful individuals who have replied my query.

What is puzzling me slightly is Oly's decision to give the XZ-1 an arguably better performing screen over the EPL-2. Isn't the EPL-2 supposed to be for the more advanced user / serious photographer? Why compromise on the screen for the EPL-2 when Oly clearly has the capability to provide a screen like the XZ-1's?

Does anyone have any insight into this?

Maybe... just maybe... this is their marketing strategy. If all the good stuffs are on the EPL-2. Why have XZ-1 then? :bsmilie:

 

[spidey89]

Maybe... just maybe... this is their marketing strategy. If all the good stuffs are on the EPL-2. Why have XZ-1 then? :bsmilie:

I have to agree with your statement, it could be marketing strategy, if I gave all the best features to E-PL2,but the crappiest yesterday technology to the XZ-1, would you buy the PEN or the XZ-1 especially when the price difference ain't that far apart

I'd be shooting myself in the foot if I did so, but of course, there could be other reasons, but my belief is in mabmy's statement

 

[loneWolff]

Thanks to the many helpful individuals who have replied my query.

What is puzzling me slightly is Oly's decision to give the XZ-1 an arguably better performing screen over the EPL-2. Isn't the EPL-2 supposed to be for the more advanced user / serious photographer? Why compromise on the screen for the EPL-2 when Oly clearly has the capability to provide a screen like the XZ-1's?

Does anyone have any insight into this?

The marketing team are just a bunch of sick people who know you will buy either of them or both since each has such wonderful functions.
Yes, we are all kinda of a sucker in heart but we just love being one.

 

[albertri]

Thanks to the many helpful individuals who have replied my query.

What is puzzling me slightly is Oly's decision to give the XZ-1 an arguably better performing screen over the EPL-2. Isn't the EPL-2 supposed to be for the more advanced user / serious photographer? Why compromise on the screen for the EPL-2 when Oly clearly has the capability to provide a screen like the XZ-1's?

Does anyone have any insight into this?

Maybe... just maybe... this is their marketing strategy. If all the good stuffs are on the EPL-2. Why have XZ-1 then? :bsmilie:

I have to agree with your statement, it could be marketing strategy, if I gave all the best features to E-PL2,but the crappiest yesterday technology to the XZ-1, would you buy the PEN or the XZ-1 especially when the price difference ain't that far apart

I'd be shooting myself in the foot if I did so, but of course, there could be other reasons, but my belief is in mabmy's statement

The marketing team are just a bunch of sick people who know you will buy either of them or both since each has such wonderful functions.
Yes, we are all kinda of a sucker in heart but we just love being one.

Yeah true the more of these so called selling points will make XZ-1 more attractive to consumers =) Oly has a steep competition with Panasonic and Canon w/c has a series of good camera in this level.

For EPL2 I think they've upgraded the LCD also :lovegrin: although not AMOLED

 

[albertri]

Fat32 limit is 4GB file size

I think it's not the Memory card file format it's the video file format limitation

Recording(Movie) Recording format AVI Motion JPEG(30fps) Movie Mode HD : 1280(H)x720(V) Aspect 16:9
SD : 640(H)x480(V) Aspect 4:3(VGA)
Compression Ratio : 1/12(HD), 1/8(SD)
File Size Max 2GB(limited by AVI format)
Maximum Recording Time HD: 7min, SD : 14min

 

[loneWolff]

I think it's not the Memory card file format it's the video file format limitation

Recording(Movie) Recording format AVI Motion JPEG(30fps) Movie Mode HD : 1280(H)x720(V) Aspect 16:9
SD : 640(H)x480(V) Aspect 4:3(VGA)
Compression Ratio : 1/12(HD), 1/8(SD)
File Size Max 2GB(limited by AVI format)
Maximum Recording Time HD: 7min, SD : 14min

Agreed :thumbsup:

 

[albertri]

Agreed :thumbsup:

why Oly still using AVI =( its so 1980's lols why not use H.264 MPEG codec much better compression rate smaller file size