|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
Des Rob. Schroeders Fototechnikseiten |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Olympus E-P1 High-ISO RAW |
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
Olympus E-P1 High-ISO RAW Comparison With The Olympus E-30Test setup:
The E-P1 used was a
presentation model with firmware level 1.0, said to be
pre-production.
Both cameras were shot with
the Olympus Zuiko Digital 50mm 1:2 Macro, hand-held and not avoiding
blur, so sharpness is not something to be judged here. Exposure
values were not completely equal either, so the results have to be
taken with a grain of salt.
The E-P1's RAW file was
patched to identify the camera as the E-30, too, in order to make
the RAW converter accept the file and force it to use the same
profile as for the E-30.
Both RAW files were then
developed with Silkypix Developer Studio 3 using default parameters
except for 'Sharpness' (35/80/90/Pure detail), 'Noise reduction',
which was completely turned off (0/0/0/0/0), and 'Demosaic sharp'
(50). The RAW files were developed to TIFF and crops were taken and
saved as minimally compressed JPEGs.
The complete field of fiew:
The crops:
ISO E-P1 E-30 800 1600 3200 6400 Conclusion: Looks like the E-P1
sensor has perhaps something like 1/2, maybe 2/3 EV stops lower noise
than the E-30 sensor, which is a significant improvement. The images
show that the high ISO improvements which can be seen in the JPEG are
not completely related to the new JPEG engine, but at least partially
go back to an improved sensor.
RS 01-Jul-09
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|