Tag Archives: micro four thirds

The Olympus PEN E-PL1 vs Nikon D3000 paradox

Posted on by
2

Petavoxel recently bemoaned the fact that the majority of sensors in recent micro four thirds EVIL cameras (or MILCs, if you prefer) perform poorly compared to contemporary APS-C sized sensors in digital SLRs. The only exception was the Panasonic GH1, which put up quite a respectable showing compared to its μ4/3 stablemates.

Yesterday dpreview posted their review of the E-PL1, and they were very happy with its high ISO performance. I quote:

Overall, the E-PL1′s images are the most natural and convincing here – avoiding the D3000′s overly contrasty, noisier images …  Most impressive is the E-PL1′s ability to produce results comparable with the EOS 500D and Pentax K-x, despite its smaller sensor.

But what does DXO Labs have to say? They disagree, showing that the big three leave the E-PL1 gasping for photons with a lowly 487  points in the low-light ISO stakes.

Hence, the paradox.

How do these two $500-ish cameras weigh up against each other?

How can this be? Is either DXO Labs or dpreview writing nonsense? The keen observer will notice that there are two significant differences in the way these two respected websites measure image quality: Continue reading →

Samsung’s advance

Posted on by
4

Samsung has been making cameras for some time now, but (at least I) never really took them seriously. Things might be changing…

Why? Because it looks like they’re doing something similar to Panasonic. But isn’t the obvious deal-breaking difference that Panasonic is Japanese, and Samsung Korean? Please bear with me…
Both Samsung and Panasonic are huge, well-known mega-companies.  Both make lots of different stuff. Panasonic Corporation used to make bicycles, makes every kind of imaginable electronics, and even acts as a mayor sponsor in Formula 1. The Samsung group is even more diverse, making electronics, ships (yes – those big things sailing the world’s oceans) and even being involved in construction as well as soccer and Olympic sponsorship. You could think that this lack of (ahem) “focus” would make them bad at producing cameras, but then you could be wrong.

Why do I put this logo in my "Samsung" article? Read to see why...

Panasonic came to the digital camera party around 2001, which is later than the classical photographic big boys such as Nikon and Canon. Sure, they’re Japanese, and the Japanese have a knack for making good cameras. But they had to be content with a teeny tiny market share compared to the big boys, who were solidly into digital photography by the mid 90′s.

The Lumix FZ3 was the first Panasonic camera to catch my eye. Great lens, and great ergonomics.

Continue reading →

On exchangeable lenses for small cameras

Posted on by
1

A small fast prime goes wonderfully with a micro 4/3 camera. The small Nikon D3000 with its small 35mm f/1.8 looks huge by comparison.

My favourite camera review site, DPReview, just posted a short article on desirable lenses for small (read: Micro 4/3 and Samsung NX) cameras. This nicely complements my recent post on the rise and fall of the digital SLR.

The review can be found here.

As a user of a mid size DSLR I completely agree with the article – when at a social event I’d prefer to swap my Nikon D80 with its 35mm f/1.8 lens for a Panasonic GF1 with 20mm f/1.7.

The rise and fall of the digital SLR

Posted on by
10

During the latter days of film photography, almost every photographer used 35mm film, and almost every serious photographer used a 35mm film SLR. In the early days of digital photography the SLR was almost forgotten, only to make a huge comeback since 2003. There are signs that this is again to change. Why? This blog post will try to sum it up.

SLR is an acronym for “single lens reflex”, and means that the photographer physically looks through the lens by means of a rather complex mirror and prism setup. In the film days this was the only way to accurately show a photographer how his picture was going to look, since his eye was physically seeing the same image that was going to be projected onto the film when the shutter was pressed.

The complex path that light travels in a (digital) SLR camera

Compact “point and shoot” cameras had separate optical viewfinders through which the user framed the picture, but suffered from parallax error (especially when looking at close subjects), and could not properly show focus, depth of field or exposure.

A 35mm point and shoot camera

All of this changed with the advent of digital photography.

Continue reading →