Digital on Test

[Cybergoldfish 1]

http://www.uschold.com/pdf/Report%20SLR%20...2009.02%20N.pdf

 

23 pages!

 

Enjoy

[markh 0]

Cheers Bob. You've solved my wife's pressie dilemma.

 

I will print it off, bind it & give her this. You're a hero.

 

Mark

 

Seriously, it references the E20 so I will give this a good read.

[james 0]

I got a kick out of reading that report. It's obvious that the E20 is the best! lol...

 

Sorry, but when I see a report that says the E20/cheap oly lens is better than an S2 with the Nikkor 17-35 or a D60 w/ the Canon 16-35 I start to "lose faith" in the quality of the information.

 

Section 4a is very interesting info though. All of the digicams show about an 8.5 stop input dynamic range. Most of us know that the E20's dynamic range is nowhere near that of the other DSLR's.

 

Bob - where did you find this report? It's really interesting! Who paid for this research and who is Anders Uschold?

 

Cheers

James

[Cybergoldfish 1]

Sorry, but when I see a report that says the E20/cheap oly lens is better than an S2 with the Nikkor 17-35 or a D60 w/ the Canon 16-35 I start to "lose faith" in the quality of the information.

 

Please read the information again to see why the lens is more than comparable to the non-digital counterparts - The "Cheap Oly lens" is designed for its sensor, the Nikon & Canon lenses are not (p12).

 

All of the finding in this report are conducted under specific laboratory conditions by industry benchmark scientific personel. Fundamentally these are the guys responsible for the inception of the new lenses not only for the APS chips but a new range for the 35mm chips too.

 

As far as the rest of the report goes I think it explains everything there is to need to know.

[james 0]

Bob,

 

I agree. However, do YOU think that the small E20 sensor has the same dynamic range as the APS sized sensors used in the D100, S2, and D60? Something looks fishy.

 

Cheers

James

[laz217 0]

Bob,

 

I agree.  However, do YOU think that the small E20 sensor has the same dynamic range as the APS sized sensors used in the D100, S2, and D60?  Something looks fishy.

 

Cheers

James

James,

 

What's your reason for thinking the E20 does not have the same dynamic range as the other DSLRs you mentioned?

[davephdv 0]

Wouldn't pretend to understand this analasis. It looks like all the ultra wide (weitwinkel) zooms suffered under this test methodology. It seems that the test is biased in favor of longer focal lengths lenses. This is similar to reviews that compared the CP 5000 at 28 mm equiv. to it's competitors at 35 to 38 mm equiv .As the E 20 dosen't have a very wide lens in 35 mm equiv. it fares fairly well. But you need that WA for UW photography.

 

Would have to agree with comments on the 17-35 lens. This is one of the sharpest lenses I have ever shot for WA. And it was designed to be used with the D1.

 

If I remember the E 20 uses the same sensor as the Sony 707 and the CP 5000. I was using a D100 to shoot surfers the other day in heavy surf. I was amazed how much better it's dynamic range was compared to a G2 or CP 5000 under the same situation. So I would agree with those who say their is no way an E 20 with a similar sensor can cover the same dynamic range as the larger sensor DSLRs.

 

Still you would have to say that it says that the E 20 is a good camera. Like others though I have to wonder about the cost when a DSLR isn't much more and the prices are due to come down a lot.

 

Also, interesting about the comments about digital optimized lenses being better. Makes you wonder how the new DX lens would fare under this testing and how much better the S2 and D100 might score. :ph34r:

[Cybergoldfish 1]

I agree.  However, do YOU think that the small E20 sensor has the same dynamic range as the APS sized sensors used in the D100, S2, and D60?  Something looks fishy.

 

Cheers

James

Obviously it has, and fares better with its digitally optimised lens for the reasons stated in the text about light beams being more linear as they hit the sensor. This is why it was used as a comparison:

 

The author states all of the reasons quite clearly that 35mm lenses deliver light to the sensors in a way that causes a loss of dynamic range noticably across the wider angles and wider aperture ranges.

 

This is easier to understand if you wear glasses: The APS chips appear long sighted.

 

I was interested to note how the sensor on the canon reacts to the given information and compensates for it I am wondering now if the new DX lenses will deliver conflicting information rendering them useless unless the camera is reprogrammed.

 

I would have liked to have seen the Contax used in this too as this would have given more relevence to the test comparisons regarding film and standard 35mm lenses.

 

 

Food for thought!

[markh 0]

This is indeed an interesting report. I wonder what weight it carries within the photography fraternity? I could see Olympus picking up on this & using it as a very effective marketing tool.

 

OK to the report:

 

Comparing digital vs analogue - In a lighting situation (high ISO for example) digital shows remarkable advantages over film. This is good news for U/W photography which is classed as a 'lighting situation' is it not?

 

Producing high end prints - film still comes out on top - although this is no suprise( at present). It will not be long though before full format catches up to redress this, I believe.

 

Comparing digital vs analogue lenses - Bottom line is tread carefully when mixing 35m lenses with high res digital sensors. Lenses MUST be optimised for the sensor. This is very interesting & good news for E20 owners. Not so good if you have splashed out mega bucks on an SLR outfit (accepting compatablity of your existing 35mm lenses).

 

As an E10 owner, thinking of investing into a housing, c/w a possible E20 upgrade, this report convinces me, at the moment, not to plough mega bucks in to a dedicated SLR system ( like the D100 or Fuji S 2) but to go with the E10/20 setup.

 

However, I am convinced that in 12/24 months time there will be another report on the table dealing with the next generation of SLR's i.e. the full frame setups like the new Kodak 14, with different conclusions!

 

One thing is for sure if had just spent mega bucks on an SLR system, as reported, I would be a bit miffed, to say the least.

 

Many thanks Bob for sharing this report with us. In the short term you have saved me a few bob!!!

 

Mark H

[markh 0]

Just to add further to my previous post. I came across this URL which has some relevance and discusses the new 4/3 concept. Whilst this mentions the planned new OL SLR with interchangeable lenses it confirms the importance of compatability with the sensor.

 

Perhaps I should wait for the new Olympus SLR after all?

 

Oh I am all confused now...... :freak:

 

http://www.a-digital-eye.com/Olympus43Q&A.html

[Cybergoldfish 1]

One thing that this report does -

 

Following the heated debate about Sigma's SD9 marketing stratergy and especially lenses available to would be purchasers.

 

This puts everything into perspective as none of the lenses owned by punters Nikon Canon or otherwise are any advantage at all apart from the fact they use the same mount. They will only produce comparable images to film at medium/long focal lengths - The reason I stated most pro's would only use digital for close-up & macro.

 

All they have to do now is get rid of the dirty blues, burnout, build in lower ISO settings and a working TTL dedication to compete with film in medium field & WA, .

 

I think the manufacturers should be held accountable for duping their customers into buying something that is not really suitable for the lens technology.

 

Those people who have just purchased new lenses specifically for DSLR should maybe return them to the store and await the arrival of the digitally optimised versions due in spring, to get maximum benifit from their investment in digital.

 

Until these arrive and are proven to work properly my recommendation is to wait or buy cameras with built in digitally opimised lenses - The E20 being just one of the best.

[Slippery-when-wet 0]

I was given a copy of this report by the Sigma Representative last week, I am very glad i read it and my interpretation is as above. It seems everyone contemplating DSLR has to start again.

[scottyb 0]

I guess it depends on what you want to get out of that article. When I read it, I see this.

 

P21 5.c

i. Those who waited for digital cameras that can compete with silver halide film based models, can buy now. Regarding resolution, speed, film properties, digital cameras can compete. Under extreme lighting conditions, actual digital photography exceeds analog capabilities.

ii. For those photographers who have spent much money on their existing AF lenses and wish to keep them, or who want to use both analog and digital with the same system, they will find a good solution with the new 6 megapixel generation.

[Cybergoldfish 1]

I totally agree with this...

 

The digital cameras presently available from just 5 mp upwards are on par and can exceed the film systems under artificial and poor lighting... At the other end they are not.

 

My point is these huge investments have been let down by insufficient correct information regarding contemporary 35mm lens technology and digital compatability. The non-linearity promoting poor contrast, lack of sharpness and poor saturation.

 

Past tests in photographic journals are now deemed inconclusive of the DSLR's full potential as a result of this unless all of the test pictures were shot specifically on 85mm's at f8/11.

 

Using the new lens technology will now allow digital to compete successfully in photocomps as the majority of adjustments will not now be necessary.

 

Lookout for the new range of Sigma lenses - I am told there is an 8mm on the cards.

 

 

 

 

"If I remember the E 20 uses the same sensor as the Sony 707 and the CP 5000. I was using a D100 to shoot surfers the other day in heavy surf. I was amazed how much better it's dynamic range was compared to a G2 or CP 5000 under the same situation. So I would agree with those who say their is no way an E 20 with a similar sensor can cover the same dynamic range as the larger sensor DSLRs".

 

The Sensor in the E20 is the same size as a DSLR and why it was used to compare against.

 

"Still you would have to say that it says that the E 20 is a good camera. Like others though I have to wonder about the cost when a DSLR isn't much more and the prices are due to come down a lot".

 

The E20 in UK is £400 cheaper ($600) than the cheapest DSLR (D100) - comes with a zoom lens built in, and extra-wide adapters are available.

The only thing that horrifies me about this camera is the outrageous cost of the housings... but then again, aren't they all?

 

It should also be noted that the E20 is prefered widely used by professional surface photographers.

 

A drop in price will be seen across the board not just DSLR's - Some of which will be held high, until replacements are released. The resale value on current stocks after this price drop will be very low too.

[yahsemtough 0]

I have to agree with you Mark. I went with the cp5000 for now and am waiting out the industry a bit.

 

One thing that makes this a little easier for me is I do not have a bunch of lenses sitting on a shelf. If I did, my decision may have been different, thus going to a DSLR.

[davephdv 0]

The sensor of a Oly E-20 is NOT the same as that on a DSLR. Do a side by side comparisson at DP Reviews of an N-20 and a Sony 707. They have the same 5 megapixel 2/3" interlaced CCD. This is a CCD significantly smaller than those on the D60 and D100. What this means is that the individual pixels are smaller. This translates to more noise and less dynamic range.

 

What I get from these reports is that the E 20 is a fine camera with a digitally optimized lens. But I assure you that you put a digitally opitimized lens on the D 60 or 100 and it will do much better due to the larger sensor.

 

I have reps from drug companies and medical instrument companies come to my office all the time. They all have throughly well conducted scientific studies that prove that their drug or medical device is the best ever made. Most of them aren't. You have to see who funded the study to determine where the bias is. Reading the above links you can see this was funded by Olympus. I'm sure that narrowly taken the test is accurate. I can tell you from long experience don't throw away common sense to take it as the unvarnished truth. I can assure you that every hospital has machines full of 50,000 to 100,000$ machines of limited or no value purchased due to one or more scientific studies that were then used by their reps. in an orchastrated campagin to get you to buy them.

 

I'm not in any way trying to criticise the E-20, which is by all accounts a fine camera. But if you think that with a smaller sensor with smaller pixels it is capable of the same quality as a DLSR you are mistaken. With it's ability to change lens the DSLR is much more flexible. With the future DX lenses by Nikon and probably it's competitors you will see the advantage of a digitally designated lens of the E 20 go away. You have to figure the cost of these lenses into how much you will want to spend. Which one you want to buy an expensive housing for is based on a lot of factors. For some the E-20 may be the best choice. I have a CP 5000 in an Ikelite housing. I love it for it's wide angle and macro capacities. Like the Nikonos system it is so versitatile that I plan of keeping it if I upgrade to a DSLR housing

 

Yes I know the E 20 is a DSLR. I'm comparing it to DSLR with interchangeable lenses and larger sensors:ph34r:

 

Try this link for sensor sizes: http://www.dpreview.com/temp/sensorsize/

 

The D100 has a senor of 23.7x15.6, or roughly the size of the 4/3 sensor listed in the table. Much larger than that of an E 20. Individual pixels on the D100 are 7.8 microns size vs around 5 microns for an E 20.

[james 0]

Thanks for posting some facts David. I've been trying to stay out of this one because I have already been labeled an "olympus basher" on the other board. Now that others understand the facts of the matter - I don't have to stick my nose out anymore.

 

Herb stated in anoter thread that the larger sensors on the DSLR's have 2 stops more of dynamic range than the E20.

 

Cheers

James