V
Vivek
Guest
Just random snaps that I normally do.
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!
5
57guy
Guest
I wonder what the UI on the new OMG will be like? If its like most Olympus cameras, I will not want it. I bought a E-P3 and its twice as hard as my Leica X1 to use.
I want something small and simple to replace my 5D Mk II
I want something small and simple to replace my 5D Mk II
Riley
New member
V
Vivek
Guest
At the end of the day, a rumor is only a rumor. Olympus (if they are the source) can always distance themselves from such while hoping that the hype will boost their sales.
ptomsu
Workshop Member
Really wish that Oly made it to a new sensor custom designed for them exclusively!
Albeit - the last few years showed that they only got the mediocre old stuff from Panasonic.
Cannot see how that would have changed - so best to expect is that they got a G3 (or similar) sensor, while Panasonic will move on to the next generations in their models.
16MP would have already been doable in the E5 - and literally if the E5 would have got 16MP I would have stayed with that camera. But it was not meant to be.
Albeit - the last few years showed that they only got the mediocre old stuff from Panasonic.
Cannot see how that would have changed - so best to expect is that they got a G3 (or similar) sensor, while Panasonic will move on to the next generations in their models.
16MP would have already been doable in the E5 - and literally if the E5 would have got 16MP I would have stayed with that camera. But it was not meant to be.
kwalsh
New member
I wouldn't be surprised to see both Olympus and Panasonic using the GX1/G3 sensor jointly for awhile. At the GH1 introduction in one of the interviews with Panasonic they brought up how important using a single sensor across both their and Olympus's product line was to reducing cost because their volumes are small compared to Canikony. The GH series are unusual and more expensive on account of their low production volume sensor (or so Panasonic says).
So - if there is any truth to that - Olympus is almost certainly using the GX1/G3 sensor and we'll see it in both their and Panasonic's cameras for a bit.
But of course, we won't know until the camera is released and tested!
Ken
ggibson
Well-known member
Interesting observation, Ken. From all the rumors, it certainly seemed like the new Olympus camera was going to be using the 16MP G3/GX1 sensor. This is further confirmation in my mind.
On one hand, it's disappointing that Panasonic's new sensor has a pretty minimal low-ISO dynamic range improvement. On the other though, Olympus has managed to extract some pretty impressive high-ISO performance with the last generation 12MP sensor. I'm eager to see how they do with this one.
Jorgen Udvang
Subscriber Member
If Olympus can give the G3 sensor a similar treatment to what they did with the 12MP sensor in the E-5, it's good enough for me 
kwalsh
New member
From the very little information available about the sensors it appears that the original 12MP sensor and the G3/GX1 sensor are using an "analog" sensor (as Panasonic has called them in a few interviews) meaning that the data coming off of the sensor chip itself is analog and is then digitized in a separate chip. Such a design often has higher read noise at lower ISOs (i.e. lower base ISO dynamic range) for a variety of technical reasons.
The GH2 uses a "digital" sensor (again, Panasonic's term) which we interpret as meaning the data is digitized directly on the sensor chip. This typically allows you to keep low ISO read noise to a minimum. This is also the architecture that all the recent Sony sensors with really good base ISO dynamic range are using. These designs are relatively recent as integrating a good pixel design and a good digitizer design into the same semiconductor fabrication process is a bit tricky. But if you can pull it off there is a lot of benefit.
I think most people expect the industry to move towards "digital" sensors exclusively. So perhaps the GH2 sensor or a derivative may become the new "mass produced" sensor for m43 and all the cameras will have improved base ISO DR. Who knows, maybe the OM-D will be using the GH2 sensor? It seems a pricey camera from the rumors so maybe it would work economically to include a pricier sensor?
Well, before I drift off into even more rampant speculation I'll just wait for the announcement
Ken
V
Vivek
Guest
Who bet that?!
V
Vivek
Guest
Finally, it appears that all that marketing B.S. is withering down-
43 Rumors | Blog | (FT5) E-M5 has worlds fastest AF of all interchangeable lens cameras (says Olympus)
GX-1' s sensor with a better processor.
Time to look for the GH-3 announcement!
43 Rumors | Blog | (FT5) E-M5 has worlds fastest AF of all interchangeable lens cameras (says Olympus)
GX-1' s sensor with a better processor.
Time to look for the GH-3 announcement!
photoSmart42
New member
Finally, it appears that all that marketing B.S. is withering down-
43 Rumors | Blog | (FT5) E-M5 has worlds fastest AF of all interchangeable lens cameras (says Olympus)
GX-1' s sensor with a better processor.
Time to look for the GH-3 announcement!
Agreed... GX1 sensor sucks compared to the GH1. Would have been nice to have moved the technology forward as opposed to backward. I'll still wait for samples - the IBIS, form factor, and weather sealing may prompt me to buy one anyway as a G1 replacement.
photoSmart42
New member
Well, OK, but the GH2 sensor isn't as good as the GH1. I don't care much about high ISO or high MPx count, but I do about IQ and DR.
kwalsh
New member
Really? You are the first person I've ever heard claim that. Do you own both cameras? Everyone that I know that has had both says exactly the opposite. I suppose you could have gotten the rare GH1 that didn't suffer from horrible banding and a GH2 that was somehow defective and reach that conclusion - but I haven't seen anyone else come to that...
Ken
V
Vivek
Guest
That is odd indeed.
Good news regarding two possible new lenses from Olympus- a 75/1.8 and 60/2.8 Macro!
It is starting to look like a very strong system.
If only they will bring out some versatile, proper sized flashes..
Good news regarding two possible new lenses from Olympus- a 75/1.8 and 60/2.8 Macro!
It is starting to look like a very strong system.
If only they will bring out some versatile, proper sized flashes..
Riley
New member
ok heres the interview
Panasonic interview: Learning from the fringe, taking small steps - Imaging Resource
and the key part
DP: Obviously, we’ve cast our lot with Micro Four Thirds. We still think you can obtain the same optimum image from a Micro Four Thirds that you will from an APS-C. Why do we say that? Well, in terms of everything above APS-C and full frame; the level of development, the R&D that goes into those sensors has been very limited, whereas in the point and shoot sector, the very tiny sensors, massive amount of R&D has gone into those to improve those because they have low light issues. So now, we as a company are focusing more and more and more on what can we do to Micro Four Thirds to take it to the next generational level. So I think you’ll see from us, in time, a greater emphasis on taking Micro Four Thirds and sort of leap frogging or even going further ahead with the technology. You see this in the difference between the GH2 and the G3, for example, or even the GX1. The GH2 has a full digital Micro Four Thirds 16 megapixel sensor, whereas the GX and the G3 have analog 16 megapixel Micro Four Thirds sensors. The numbers are the same, but the technology is vastly different. Now, what the digital version gets you is far better video--far better, faster readout rates--but it’s a lot more expensive. So between the two cameras you get a better video read on a GH2 than you will with a G3, for example. But at the same time, for still pictures, they’re pretty close because we have been able to take the image processors in the G3 and the GX and take them up a significant level, having learned what we did with the GH2 when we built it. We took them and even created a better image processor, technically, than is in the GH2. Now, we can apply this technology to the GH2 sensor in the future, and you can imagine what we can do. I think we will reach that level very soon.
Panasonic interview: Learning from the fringe, taking small steps - Imaging Resource
and the key part
DP: Obviously, we’ve cast our lot with Micro Four Thirds. We still think you can obtain the same optimum image from a Micro Four Thirds that you will from an APS-C. Why do we say that? Well, in terms of everything above APS-C and full frame; the level of development, the R&D that goes into those sensors has been very limited, whereas in the point and shoot sector, the very tiny sensors, massive amount of R&D has gone into those to improve those because they have low light issues. So now, we as a company are focusing more and more and more on what can we do to Micro Four Thirds to take it to the next generational level. So I think you’ll see from us, in time, a greater emphasis on taking Micro Four Thirds and sort of leap frogging or even going further ahead with the technology. You see this in the difference between the GH2 and the G3, for example, or even the GX1. The GH2 has a full digital Micro Four Thirds 16 megapixel sensor, whereas the GX and the G3 have analog 16 megapixel Micro Four Thirds sensors. The numbers are the same, but the technology is vastly different. Now, what the digital version gets you is far better video--far better, faster readout rates--but it’s a lot more expensive. So between the two cameras you get a better video read on a GH2 than you will with a G3, for example. But at the same time, for still pictures, they’re pretty close because we have been able to take the image processors in the G3 and the GX and take them up a significant level, having learned what we did with the GH2 when we built it. We took them and even created a better image processor, technically, than is in the GH2. Now, we can apply this technology to the GH2 sensor in the future, and you can imagine what we can do. I think we will reach that level very soon.
A
Allan Ostling
Guest
For what it's worth, DxO gives the GH1 a DxOMark of 64. The GH2 has a score of 60. So by this measure the sensor of the GH1 is better than the sensor of the GH2.
I own neither camera, so cannot comment on how this translates to the real world.