The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

E-5 better in low light than D7000? Yes, maybe.

Status
Not open for further replies.

jonoslack

Active member
Actually I think all this ISO peeping is same as pixel peeping, who really needs it? look at the M9, its max. sensitivity is ISO2500 and it delivers better results than a Nikon D3S or D3X just because of the lacking AA filter and the reason that if higher ISO levels are not available people start thinking how else they can get great results in available light - also called creativity!
Try telling that to someone who has to shoot a wedding in the failing light and doesn't want to use flash.

Try telling it to any PJ photographer who needs to get the shot in dismal lighting.

I completely agree that it isn't the be-all and end-all, but if you ever need to shoot in poor light.

You could also say that the fact that the E5 is so big is just size peeping (and of course, some people, absolutely reasonably, like it that way). These things don't matter to everyone, but they do matter to some people.
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
Try telling that to someone who has to shoot a wedding in the failing light and doesn't want to use flash.

Try telling it to any PJ photographer who needs to get the shot in dismal lighting.

I completely agree that it isn't the be-all and end-all, but if you ever need to shoot in poor light.

You could also say that the fact that the E5 is so big is just size peeping (and of course, some people, absolutely reasonably, like it that way). These things don't matter to everyone, but they do matter to some people.
How did you shoot weddings, PJ, etc. before sensors with today's sensitivity were available?

How do you shoot your M9 ????? I even succeeded with my old M8 getting excellent results with ISO 1250 and the great M lenses.

Why should that not be possible with the E5 and a 2/14-35 or 2/35-100 ????

I meanwhile think that all this available light / no light stuff today is nothing else than a hype. I know how it feels to shoot a D700 with auto ISO set to 6400 as upper limit and having a 2.8/70-200 VR2 on the camera and shooting it wide open. Great, for sure! But with some creativity and some thinking I could have got all these shots at ceremonies in dark churches also with the E5 and a 2/35-100 at maximum ISO 1600, or even ISO800.

I am not saying that higher good ISO performance does not help. But staying lower is an option, especially when combined with effective IS and high speed glass. But what you get in turn is much better detail. I was surprised when I studied my D700 files at ISO3200 and 6400 and found how much the SW (camera) takes details away. And I am talking only about RAW.

But there is hope that Olympus is relieved from using Panasonic sensors as the contract expires and then they hopefully might get into Sony or Kodak or even Foveon.

Do you not have the desire to see these times come? I do!
 

jonoslack

Active member
HI Peter
How did you shoot weddings, PJ, etc. before sensors with today's sensitivity were available?
LOL - Yes - I also shot weddings with film, but I don't want to go back there again!

still, your points are reasonable
Of course, I do shoot the M9 at weddings - because it has other characteristics which I value, but I don't shoot a wedding with one camera.

You mustn't get me wrong - I think the E5 is splendid, I just wish it was smaller, and that it had a better sensor - really, that's it.


But there is hope that Olympus is relieved from using Panasonic sensors as the contract expires and then they hopefully might get into Sony or Kodak or even Foveon.

Do you not have the desire to see these times come? I do!
Don't really mind if Panasonic makes it, as long as it's good!

all the best
 
But actually I liked the results from the E5 more up till ISO1600, much more natural compared to the very "plastic" look of the D700, already in the range of ISO1600. Of course the E5 is more grainy, but actually I found I prefer the more grainy look compared to the more clinical plastic look of the D700.
that just says you did the wrong raw conversion/postprocessing... unless you are comparing in camera .JPGs where you options are much more limited.
 
Well, let me put it that way - I just don't see it come!
of course that is another story... if you have a big body you might as well live w/ APS-C or FF sensor and no matter how excellent Zuiko 2.0 zooms are they failed to bring the market share to Olympus... somehow even the marketshare of professional photographers for whom the cost of such lenses are just a small expense in the whole picture... even in the times when the technological gap between 43 sensors and APS-C/FF was smaller.... which says that even if you will put a Sony tech in 43 body to reduce the gap to the just a less than a stop based on the sheer size - nobody will come...
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
that just says you did the wrong raw conversion/postprocessing... unless you are comparing in camera .JPGs where you options are much more limited.
LOL - wrong RAW conversion?

I did it with LR3.3 and C1 Pro (I think I know what I am doing) :D and both show similar results, although C1Pro really rocks with the E5 files!

I never ever use camera JPEGs ......

Just try yourself, you will be overwhelmed by the fine details from the E5 - given that you use the right lenses though .....
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
of course that is another story... if you have a big body you might as well live w/ APS-C or FF sensor and no matter how excellent Zuiko 2.0 zooms are they failed to bring the market share to Olympus... somehow even the marketshare of professional photographers for whom the cost of such lenses are just a small expense in the whole picture... even in the times when the technological gap between 43 sensors and APS-C/FF was smaller.... which says that even if you will put a Sony tech in 43 body to reduce the gap to the just a less than a stop based on the sheer size - nobody will come...
You may be right that not many will come.

Anyway once you tried the E5 and did real comparisons it is hard to turn around and just leave it alone ;)
 

douglasf13

New member
Far as I'm concerned, there isn't any "problem" with FourThirds sensors. Even the oldest FourThirds camera, the Olympus E-1, produces stunning photographs. The E-5 does even better.

I know it's not popular to say this around here, but if more folks spent more time making photographs and less time worrying about what equipment they were going to buy, the conversation here would be much more interesting.
I would certainly agree that just about any digital camera is capable of great images. However, this is a tech thread in a gear forum, so I'd say that this is the place to talk about the nuance, no?
 

jonoslack

Active member
I would certainly agree that just about any digital camera is capable of great images. However, this is a tech thread in a gear forum, so I'd say that this is the place to talk about the nuance, no?
I'd have to agree with you there Douglas, and taking photographs as well as joining in with technical discussions is not precluded!
 

douglasf13

New member
Agreed there! I broke my right hand in November, and taking time off from shooting stinks. I wished that all of my lenses weren't manual focus! lol. It did give me a chance to make a lot of prints for friends in my downtime, though. :)
 

raist3d

Well-known member
How did you shoot weddings, PJ, etc. before sensors with today's sensitivity were available?

How do you shoot your M9 ????? I even succeeded with my old M8 getting excellent results with ISO 1250 and the great M lenses.

Why should that not be possible with the E5 and a 2/14-35 or 2/35-100 ????

I meanwhile think that all this available light / no light stuff today is nothing else than a hype.
I think you should speak for yourself and your needs. I have shot for over 2 years steet night life in Hollywood Boulevard with an Olympus e-300/e-330/e-420/E-3 and I can say that having higher doable ISO would have made my life far easier. As for the 2/14-35 an 2/35-100-> the 14-35 has an autofocus issue in low light that it's still happening with the E-5. Basically it locks onto focus then begins a dance of micro steps taking forever to focus.

Now, on the logic of that, you have to consider that then you are making the system big and heavy with those lenses (not to mention very expensive)- and as good as those lenses are (I know they are very good, have seen the output from the 14-35 myself), the system becomes as a whole so expensive that it invites considering other options (E-5 + 14-35 alone is about $3,900 USD).

In the end what new advancements buy more than anything is convenience, and if that convenience comes around with a particular brand and model, I say it's worth considering if you have the option, and if it will make your life easier - even if with the other it is possible, but not very easy.

- Raist
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
I've been away for a few days, so I haven't followed the discussion. I've had the chance to do some testing though, and thought things a bit through. What I end up with is the fact that this is very much based on individual needs. Here's a little story from last Saturday, a day that in many ways was typical for my needs:

Around five in the morning, I started out with a Cambodian friend of mine on his little 100cc motorbike, to travel 40 kilometers on dirt roads in rural Cambodia to reach some ancient temple ruins in the middle of nowhere. At six o clock, we passed a temple that was beautifully decorated due to some ceremony that I've forgotten to ask about. We stopped so that I could take some photos. Since this was before sunrise, there was hardly any light, and the interior of the temple was hardly lit at all.

But even then, using the 7-14mm at f/4 and ISO800 for the exterior shot and ISO1600 inside, I got what I wanted. With the E-5 and Zuiko 11-22mm f/2.8-3.5, I would have gained one stop from the wider aperture and another from the IS. I wouldn't be able to go as wide, but I can live with that. Usually, I don't need more than this. I did do a job some ten days ago with a D700 at ISO 1600 and 3200, but boy, did I have to work to get those colours right. The two photos below are jpegs out of the camera with a slight adjustment of colour balance and brightness for the interior shot.

Here are the shots, both hand held:

GH1 with Pana 7-14 @ 7mm, f/4.0, 1/25s and ISO1600



GH1 with Pana 7-14 @ 9mm, f/4.0, 1/20s and ISO800



As long as I'm not going to print very large, 4/3 and m4/3 does it fine for me. With poster-size enlargements, the Files from recent Nikon cameras, including those from the D7000, are much more robust, and show less noise, even at low ISO. I will probably stay with both camera systems, but I believe I will use the Olympus and Panasonic cameras much more. I'm undecided with regards to the E-5 still, and will spend some more time taking photos. That's what they are for anyway, these cameras :)
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
How did you shoot weddings, PJ, etc. before sensors with today's sensitivity were available?

How do you shoot your M9 ????? I even succeeded with my old M8 getting excellent results with ISO 1250 and the great M lenses.

Why should that not be possible with the E5 and a 2/14-35 or 2/35-100 ????

I meanwhile think that all this available light / no light stuff today is nothing else than a hype.
I think you should speak for yourself and your needs. I have shot for over 2 years steet night life in Hollywood Boulevard with an Olympus e-300/e-330/e-420/E-3 and I can say that having higher doable ISO would have made my life far easier. As for the 2/14-35 an 2/35-100-> the 14-35 has an autofocus issue in low light that it's still happening with the E-5. Basically it locks onto focus then begins a dance of micro steps taking forever to focus.

Now, on the logic of that, you have to consider that then you are making the system big and heavy with those lenses (not to mention very expensive)- and as good as those lenses are (I know they are very good, have seen the output from the 14-35 myself), the system becomes as a whole so expensive that it invites considering other options (E-5 + 14-35 alone is about $3,900 USD).

In the end what new advancements buy more than anything is convenience, and if that convenience comes around with a particular brand and model, I say it's worth considering if you have the option, and if it will make your life easier - even if with the other it is possible, but not very easy.

- Raist
This is exactly what moves trough my head again and again. I know the E5 plus these 2 lenses will be heave, although excellent! I also know I almost never use my D700 - although it is an excellent system - but somehow it does not feel as comfortable to me as a camera could. The E5 does.

I have basically 2 options - in any case sell all Nikon stuff and get:

1) the discussed E5 system with 14-35 and 35-100 and use that also fo indoor available light shooting (extensively, I will need that in some 4 months from now :))

2) abandon any DSLR system and go back to M9 (buy one) and use all my M glass - including the 1.0/Nocti for that available light stuff. And use my GH2 as DSLR replacement. Especially adding the 100-300 for those occasions where I need long tele (I am very happy with the GH2).

Interesting times ahead ;)

Anyway thanks for sharing your opinion about those lenses!
 

kweide

New member
When i shake my old head i can hear it bouncing from on side to the other, from left ear to right ear and it goes:

M9 M9 M9 M9 M9 M9 M9 M9 M9 M9 M9 M9 M9 M9 M9 M9 M9 M9 M9 M9 M9 M9 M9 M9 M9

This is so crazy. I love my E-5 but my perfect companion would be M9, so Peter, if you dont know what to with your M9 i do have some good ideas :)

Klaus
 

jonoslack

Active member
When i shake my old head i can hear it bouncing from on side to the other, from left ear to right ear and it goes:

M9 M9 M9 M9 M9 M9 M9 M9 M9 M9 M9 M9 M9 M9 M9 M9 M9 M9 M9 M9 M9 M9 M9 M9 M9

This is so crazy. I love my E-5 but my perfect companion would be M9, so Peter, if you dont know what to with your M9 i do have some good ideas :)

Klaus
HI Klaus
I fear that Peter only has the lenses to give you, and not the M9 body. I have two bodies, but I'm much too mean to let you have one!

My friend I fear you are doomed . . . that sort of reaction can only spell disaster. Don't sell your E5 though - it would make a very nice companion to the M9 for those Zoom moments. I don't hanker after those f2 Zuikos, but I still miss my lovely 12-60.

all the best
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
Klaus,

Jono is right, I currently do not have a M9 - I sold my M8 some 18 months ago and then could not get a M9, as it was sold out and then .. well you know how things happen. Anyway currently I do not have one but am considering, as I wrote in my previous post.

Might also give me some time to wait and see what Oly is really doing with their 43 system and maybe jump in later :cool:

PS: Jono, if you have 2 M9's you could sell one to me :confused:;)
 

jonoslack

Active member
Klaus,

Jono is right, I currently do not have a M9 - I sold my M8 some 18 months ago and then could not get a M9, as it was sold out and then .. well you know how things happen. Anyway currently I do not have one but am considering, as I wrote in my previous post.

Might also give me some time to wait and see what Oly is really doing with their 43 system and maybe jump in later :cool:

PS: Jono, if you have 2 M9's you could sell one to me :confused:;)
Hi Peter
I certainly could . . . . I fear my black one has a nasty ding on one side, and I love it too much to part with it. You could make me an outrageously high offer for the grey one!

I like to have two - one with a 28 or 35, the other with a 50 or 75 (or even a 90).

I'm astonished you've stayed aways so long if you have the glass.

all the best
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
Hi Peter
I certainly could . . . . I fear my black one has a nasty ding on one side, and I love it too much to part with it. You could make me an outrageously high offer for the grey one!

I like to have two - one with a 28 or 35, the other with a 50 or 75 (or even a 90).

I'm astonished you've stayed aways so long if you have the glass.

all the best
I will most certainly get one. As I said I have the need for a typical available light camera and I think - after trying all the other stuff, which partially is great - a Leica M9 with some of my high speed lenses (1.4/35ASPH, 1.4/50ASPH, 1.0/Nocti, 1.4/75 and 2/70 and 2/90/APO) will do me the best job.

And it will give me time to see what Olympus will do with 43. I really love the E5 but I am not convinced on what they are doing in the future for that system. And investing in the 2.0 zooms is a lot of money, so I do not want to wake up and see this is going nowhere ;)

With Leica I am meanwhile sure that the M9 matured and will not be replaced before Photokina 2012, so somehow a safe investment. And I have the real need for it now. This was also the reason I did not buy one, as I was doing lot of landscape work with my H3D39 and this is a totally different and very exciting area. But for now (the next 2 years) I will not do much landscape work, although I will keep my H3D39, I love this camera.

Thanks

Peter
 

nugat

New member
I haven't looked in here since November when I wrote about my new E5 and compared it to D700. Since then many happy pics with the Oly and almost none with the Nikon. I added xz1 since for ultimate portability situations. This and E5 cover all my needs. I understand needs vary, but why agonize over picture comparisons taken in ****ty no light? This is not photography (drawing with light), used to be called surveillance. Not my line of work anyway.
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
Ok, I know I am totally crazy, but today I did it!

Returned my D700 and lenses and will get my E5 with 14-35 and 35-100 in about 2 weeks.

All my test, research and RAW processing proved that the E5 in combination with high grade Olympus lenses is by far outperforming even FF cameras like the D700, even in combination with the best Nikon zooms from 14 to 200.

At least up to ISO 1600, which looks more than ok to me in combination with high speed lenses!

Hope it would have arrived already :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top