It would not be unreasonable to expect that the regulars in a micro-four-thirds forum are biased towards micro-four-thirds The reality of course is that most of us have tried multiple camera standards and we've settled on m43 because we choose to!So, if based on our own experience we agree with you, we're biased?
The E-PL1's JPG output of the Golden Pavilion was much closer to real life. When we were looking at it from the angle taken in the photo, it was sunset and the reflections from the castle were so bright you actually couldn't stare at it for too long! It glowed gold and gave the whole area that sort of atmosphere.I am curious about the two exposures of the "Golden Pavilion", which camera, jpeg wise, creates a picture closest to how you saw the Pavilion?
True colours are overrated (if there's anything like 'true' colour reproduction, to begin with, which is dubious[*]). Olympus reproduce the colours we keep in our memories. That's why we like them. They're more faithful than reality itself.I don't think I would describe the Olympus colour signature as 'accurate' - that isn't the appeal, it's richer than reality in many cases.
More likely, I think nobody is inclined to readily admit that he bought an expensive and flawed camera. This, and what's someone showstopper is someone else mere annoyance.
That's pretty impressive I tried just then at 1/15 holding the camera with one hand, arm outstretched in front of me - I only got 2 out of 10 shots sharp. Different story if I can use both hands and/or brace against my body / something solid thoughhe's got the steadiest hands in the west - he can hand hold at 1/16 of a second with no blur