Tim Fernando's Blog

  • Home on timfernando.com
  • About
  • Goodbye Canon, I've moved to a little Olympus

    • 7 Sep 2011
    • 5 Responses
    •  views
    • canon changing cameras dslr to milc e-p3 e-p3 ol moving manufacturers olympus olympus e-p3 olympus pen olympus pen e-p3
    • Edit
    • Delete
    • Tags
    • Autopost

    E-p3

    After nearly a decade of using Canon film SLRs, digital SLRs, prosumer compacts and even the odd 'L'uxury lens, I've ditched the lot of it in favour of a new Olympus Micro Four Thirds kit. In the coming weeks I'll be writing about my experiences with the E-P3 hoping to provide a review more focussed on the practicalities of using it rather than the more spec-sheet heavy reviews. 

    Why such a big change? Well for one thing I've been rather frustrated by my EOS 40D for sometime now. The control interface doesn't work with the way I think and it's entirely lacking in serious customisability. Over the years I've grown used to new innovative user interfaces as provided by tablets, phones and new desktop operating systems. And although the new Canons appear to be bringing the odd idea over to its camera line, I don't believe they are really keeping up to provide good value for their price point. The 40D has had three firmware updates, all fixing issues as opposed to providing any new functionality. In a day and age where the software can be updated to provide far more functionality than the hardware was originally designed for, I can't help but feel ripped off. Other annoyances with the 40D include the large but low resolution screen which makes it hard to judge if an image is sharp, the lack of remote flash triggering and so on. There are of course many pluses to the x0D system, excellent build quality, superbly fast focussing, excellent lens choices and pretty good overall image quality.

    10d

    There are various other reasons to switch, not least the cost staying current/upgrading to a decent equivalent (at the moment an EOS 7D), the relative uncertainty of which lenses I'll need to own in the long term due to the three possible sensor sizesand of course the weight. My usual travel kit comprised of the EOS 40D, 17-40mm f/4 L, 85mm f/1.8, 580ex II flashgun, a beanbag and a bunch of spare batteries and chargers. With a bag capable of carrying these safely, this turned out to be about half a carry-on cabin baggage allowance. The weight and size also inevitably meant that I don't carry it in as many situations as ideal. 

    Then there's the National Geographic photographer. Many years ago before the days of mainstream digital, I listened to a lecturer by a National Geographic photographer I don't recall the name of, who carried a Leica M rangefinder and a handful of prime lenses. The images he produced were, as you would expect, utterly stunning. He said the first step to taking beautiful photographs was to make sure you had your camera all the time.

    Canon

    So weight was an issue, but also volume as I wanted to carry it in more situations than I could currently carry my DSLR. In short, this meant moving to a mirrorless interchangable lens camera, also sometimes known as a 'Compact System Camera'. So after deliberation between the various options out there including the Sony E Mount, Samsung NX Mount, Ricoh GXR, Micro Four Thirds, and a fleeting yet longing look at the Leica M series, I settled on Micro Four Thirds. Not least because there were two major manufacturers making good lenses for this mount but also a handful of third party companies such as Voigtlander. It certainly seemed like the system with the greatest long term potential and user base. There are various downsides to the Four Thirds system however, the sensor size is relatively small compared to Sony's NEX but then the camera sizes are smaller too. The system, as with all compact systems is fairly imature and whichever system I were to choose would have some element of risk that one would not have if choosing Canon or Nikon. 

    Voigtlander

    There are currently two manufacturers, Olympus and Panasonic who make cameras for the 1/4th 35mm 'full frame' sensor size Micro Four Thirds format. Both have excellent models, with fast focussing and good user interfaces. A number of things drew me to the Olympus PEN range, including the number of customisable buttons, the excellent solid build quality and of course the style inherited from their 1960s-1970s film counterparts which the E-P3 simply exudes. I have thus far purchased a kit comprising of the E-P3, FL-36R remotely triggerable flashgun, M.Zuiko Digital 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 II, 40-150mm f/4.0-5.6 and the new and beautiful 12mm f/2.0. I also purchased an E-PL1 body for my fiancée and a mount to convert an old Contax fit Carl Zeiss Planar T* 50mm f/1.7 lens to Micro Four Thirds.

    • Tweet
  • Apple Digital Camera Raw 3.8 vs Olympus E-P3 JPEG

    • 2 Sep 2011
    • 2 Responses
    •  views
    • aperture apple digital camera raw digital camera raw 3.8 e-p3 olympus olympus e-p3 olympus pen olympus pen e-p3 pen raw vs jpeg
    • Edit
    • Delete
    • Tags
    • Autopost

    With today's release of Apple's Digital Camera RAW 3.8, I have been wondering if it's good enough in terms of colour reproduction and distortion correction to replace using either the Olympus Viewer 2 (very *very* slow) or JPEGs (and thus move to shooting RAW full time). 

    Below are comparisons taken from Aperture showing the differences in rendering between the E-P3's JPEG output and Apple's rendering of its RAWs (the info boxes refer to whichever image is on its side).

    Screen_shot_2011-09-01_at_19
    Lens: Carl Zeiss T* Planar 50mm f/1.7 lens for Contax fit. 
    100% Crop. In the above image it's clear that the RAW on the left preserves a little more detail than the JPEG with the default noise reduction setting. To me the noise in the RAW is very reasonable and the JPEG has too strong a noise filter. 

    Screen_shot_2011-09-01_at_19

    Lens: M. Zuiko Digital ED 12mm f/2
    100% Crop. Here the JPEG on the left seems to have more realistic colour reproduction of the champagne muselet. 

    Screen_shot_2011-09-01_at_19

    Lens: Carl Zeiss T* Planar 50mm f/1.7 lens for Contax fit. 
    25% Crop. Here the right hand JPEG has more accurate colour reproduction (the swan and sign seemed closer to black). 

    Screen_shot_2011-09-01_at_19

    Lens: Carl Zeiss T* Planar 50mm f/1.7 lens for Contax fit. 
    25% Crop. Here the JPEG (left) has a more accurate colour reproduction. 

    Screen_shot_2011-09-01_at_19
    Lens: M. Zuiko Digital ED 12mm f/2100% Crop. Americano Crema. The RAW (left) has closer reproduction of colour to what was in front of me. 

    Screen_shot_2011-09-01_at_19

    Lens: M. Zuiko Digital ED 12mm f/2
    33% Crop. The pinkish bar of soap towards the bottom of the frame here has been turned neon by Apple's RAW interpretation (right). 

    Screen_shot_2011-09-01_at_19

    Lens: M. Zuiko Digital ED 12mm f/2
    To fit. I think the meat on the left has a better colour tone to that of the camera JPEG on the right.

    Screen_shot_2011-09-01_at_19

    Lens: M. Zuiko Digital ED 12mm f/2
    100% Crop. It's evident here that the right hand RAW has maintained more detail in the mushrooms than the JPEG, yes there is more noise but I don't believe it to be all that distracting. 

    Screen_shot_2011-09-01_at_21

    Lens: Voigtlander 25mm f/0.95 Micro Four Thirds
    100% Crop. Although the RAW on the left's colours are more pleasing, the JPEG to the right was closer to life. 

    Screen_shot_2011-09-01_at_22

    Lens: M. Zuiko Digital ED 12mm f/2
    50% Crop. This is quite interesting as the bokeh on the JPEG on the right is smoother thanks to the default noise reduction present. 

     

    Conclusion
    It's a mixed bag. The Aperture RAW renderer certainly doesn't do a bad job and it seems to be pot luck as to whether it's better than the camera's JPEG or vice versa. I'm personally going to continue shooting in RAW+JPEG for the time being but I can certainly see myself dropping the JPEG for Aperture's RAW. Of course Olympus is renowned for its excellent colour reproduction and I'm keen to see a few more shots before ditching their processing entirely. 

     

    • Tweet
  • About


    28876 Views
  • Archive

    • 2011 (15)
      • November (1)
      • October (1)
      • September (9)
      • August (1)
      • May (1)
      • January (2)
    • 2010 (29)
      • December (1)
      • November (3)
      • October (6)
      • September (3)
      • August (5)
      • July (2)
      • June (2)
      • May (4)
      • April (2)
      • February (1)
    • 2009 (23)
      • December (3)
      • November (2)
      • October (5)
      • September (7)
      • August (6)

    Get Updates

    Subscribe via RSS
    TwitterFacebookFlickrFlickrmetaweblog