Discussion in 'Open Discussion' started by bilzmale, May 5, 2010.
On Steve Huff's site - review by Jonathan Wong.
An interesting read - thanks for posting this.
i also found it interesting - very, and the comparison samples between the nx10 and the e-pl1. i was also interested in his issues with stabilization.
Oh.. yeah he mentioned my problem with 20mm on GF1 at the moment..
Bill, thanks for this link to Steve Huff's - * oops, I should have written Jonathan Wong's -experiences with the E-PL1 and the Samsung NX10. I always enjoy reading a review that leaves me feeling very happy about what I already own.
That's an excellent little review. It confirms my opinion that while Samsung make some interesting and capable stuff, they haven't quite got the experience to hit it exactly on the nail. I can see Samsung becomming a big player in the years to come.
Happy to keep my Olympus E-P1 until Olympus bring out a semi-professional model.
Looks like he's enjoying m4/3rds - hardly a surprise
should say hello here again - as the writer of that review thanks for the feedback everyone, even though i know this forum will be slightly biased lol!
to be 100% honest i was prepared to ditch m43 when i heard about the nx10. when it wasn't performing up to par i went into denial mode and convinced myself that there was a way to make the samsung dance the way i wanted it to; but at the end of the day i had to be realistic and i'd be damned if i was gonna pay for a 3 week holiday in japan and not have a usable camera for it.
so i reviewed all the options (including going back to an SLR) and m43 was the ticket. the iso1600 image quality on the epl1 rivals the iso3200 quality on my nikon d90, so i really cannot complain at all.
the 43rumors.com news article interestingly uses the phrase "That hurts!" to describe my review but that was my aim from the beginning. i personally don't get much out of reviews that end with "which camera is better for you? well it depends. blah blah blah...." so i provided a real conclusion. let's just hope i didn't ruffle any bad feathers!
So, if based on our own experience we agree with you, we're biased?
I've been enjoying the E-P1/2/L1 + 20mm f1.7 combination for months... your review was no surprise.
Excelent review of both cameras.
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? The reason I ask is that at times, with my EP1, I find the colors to be spot on. And at other times, I find them, especially when hiking in the woods with the sun out, too warm. For example, tree trunks should be a dark brown vs what the EP1 shows, more of a lighter warmer brown. I find the EP1 hitting greens dead on, but browns typically aren't dark or blue enough sometimes.
I noticed this, for example, with the pine trees in your picture. The pine needle leaves seem dead on, but the trunks seem to have more of a golden cast where as the NX10 has a darker brown(or cooler tone) to them, which in my experience, is closer to how the trunk of a pine tree normally looks.
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.
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!
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.
That said I also find the E-PL1's default colour a tad warm but only in certain situations like you said
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.
[*] Colour is just one part of a more complex problem in imaging. Just for reference, in a sunlit scene, contrast may easily vary from 30.000 to 1 while normal monitor contrast is 2.000 to 1, and paper contrast a measly 50 to 1 ; so chasing 'true' colour is a doomed endeavour until we can reproduce those other parameters faithfully. See also how we resent differently luminance noise vs chroma noise, and how much better we tolerate reduction of chroma details while any attempt at smoothing luminance blurs the final picture.
No more accurate than Velvia, and plenty of us used to love that!
seems I've generated quite a stir on the dpreview.com forums, mostly centering around my apparent amateur level for depending on auto-iso.
well i guess that's partially correct in my opinion, unlike aperture, shutter speed and exposure bias, ISO sensitivity is not a creative control. for any given aperture or shutter speed, the photographer always wants the lowest ISO possible to achieve the intended exposure. having the propensity to set the ISO manually for each change of conditions does not make someone a pro photographer - it just makes them a slower photographer.
that said it's an open debate which will never be won/decided thanks to the canikon party - but i'll be damned if i'm not going to take advantage of such an awesome feature
I think you did an excellent impression piece, I haven't shot extensively with the NX10 but you've picked up on some key strengths of the Olympus Pen. Those comments so far on dpreview (given it's the Samsung forum) are very tame... I'd be more concerned by the people who seem to be confusing the author of your piece!
I really enjoyed your writing style and the sample images were very illustrative
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.
Sure enough, you don't generally buy a NX-class camera with the aim to wedge the selector to iAuto. That's the limit of your review. But not recognising that a badly implemented auto-iso can make you lose a shot just in case is not a reasonable attitude either.
I found your review balanced, because you made your own preference clear, but you didn't bashed the NX either, pointing out its main achievments.
i've got shaky hands but have been shooting handheld for years because i work with a combination of shutter speed and iso. that has allowed me to get tons of pics i wouldn't have been able to get without adjusting my iso.
on the other hand, that's me - i see no creative virtue in it. i leave that to the traditionalists. my husband is a better and much more experienced photographer than i, and he shoots in program with no stabilization. it probably helps that he's got the steadiest hands in the west - he can hand hold at 1/16 of a second with no blur
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 though
Separate names with a comma.