Soon High Res Shooting without tripod

[ptomsu]

Dpreview posted an interview with Setsuya Kataoka from Olympus that high res shooting will be soon possible within 1/60th of a second!

Soon, 40MP without the tripod: A conversation with Setsuya Kataoka from Olympus: Digital Photography Review

Excellent news and shows the innovation potential of that company! Just imagine what that would mean with future higher resolution sensors .....

 

[Knorp]

Mmm, after reading that interview the more reason I see to wait a little ...

:watch:

 

[scott kirkpatrick]

I liked the idea of opening up an SDK for their "Air" do-it-yrself camera kit. If they are worried about defending the low end of the Olympus product line from cell phone apps, getting started on letting lots of users create cool connectivity modes for their better images is an important step. HP tried to sell an "open" camera system a few years back, but backed away from it.

And it sounds as if when they refresh the E-M1 there will be further improvements in IBIS coming. I noticed the remark that they explored 4, 8 and 16 shots. So they reached a clear conclusion that taking four shots as a group was a big win, since it gives really clear color and eliminates Moire aliasing. And then either the accuracy of the chip shifting or the resolution limits of the Pro lens line (or both) set the achievable resolution limit at .7 pixels (the diagonal spacing between the two sets of 4 shots) and not at .5 pixels (what you can do with four sets of 4 shots each). If they can make the whole thing run fast enough for hand-holding, I'd be happy with just four shots.

scott

 

[ptomsu]

And it sounds as if when they refresh the E-M1 there will be further improvements in IBIS coming. I noticed the remark that they explored 4, 8 and 16 shots. So they reached a clear conclusion that taking four shots as a group was a big win, since it gives really clear color and eliminates Moire aliasing. And then either the accuracy of the chip shifting or the resolution limits of the Pro lens line (or both) set the achievable resolution limit at .7 pixels (the diagonal spacing between the two sets of 4 shots) and not at .5 pixels (what you can do with four sets of 4 shots each). If they can make the whole thing run fast enough for hand-holding, I'd be happy with just four shots.

scott

Indeed - I would love to be able to kind of limit my number of shots so I could get to the resolution I really need. I think 4 shots sound like a sweetspot currently for shortening exposure time, while substantially increasing resolution.

Peter

 

[raist3d]

Mmm, after reading that interview the more reason I see to wait a little ...

:watch:

I don't But then it all depends what we are shooting. 1/60 is not fast enough for the majority of photography I do as fast as it is (on the streets)- and I think the high resolution modes are great but I am not sure it really benefits street shooting super much.

Landscapes and product photography is another story.

Finally, the first show of this tech will most likely be an E-M1 MKII, which is a size/form factor I don't like (speaking for myself of course, not saying it's bad by itself), and it will be at least a year from now or two until it trickles to an EM5 MKIII.

- Ricardo

 

[mmbma]

probably via a firmware update... the IBIS is already capable of moving fast enough. So current EMII users would be able to benefit. (what's the point of they can't? it would only make people wait for the next generation）

 

[scott kirkpatrick]

probably via a firmware update... the IBIS is already capable of moving fast enough. So current EMII users would be able to benefit. (what's the point of they can't? it would only make people wait for the next generation）

Well, Olympus probably wants to sell each of us M-1 owners a newer model. But it's not just how fast the IBIS can move the sensor but also how quickly and accurately it can stop it at the new location. I knew the workings once of a big machine that drilled about 5000 holes in a printed circuit board. Ten percent of the time in the drilling process was spent moving the board to the next hole position, 90 percent in stopping it and checking that it was in the right place. Drilling was instantaneous, like taking a picture will be.

scott

 

[raist3d]

Indeed - I would love to be able to kind of limit my number of shots so I could get to the resolution I really need. I think 4 shots sound like a sweetspot currently for shortening exposure time, while substantially increasing resolution.

Peter

Read somewhere that apparently the issue is that 4-shots are covered by a patent (Hasselblad would be my guess).

- Ricardo

 

[ptomsu]

Read somewhere that apparently the issue is that 4-shots are covered by a patent (Hasselblad would be my guess).

- Ricardo

Could be the case!

 

[scott kirkpatrick]

Read somewhere that apparently the issue is that 4-shots are covered by a patent (Hasselblad would be my guess).

- Ricardo

If that were the case (4-shots to un-Bayer), the patent would also cover the 8-shot Olympus version, which takes 4 shots around each of two locations. Hasselblad offers two settings, 4 shots and 6 shots. Six shots sounds like a terrible idea, since it re-introduces Bayer artifacts, which the Olympus example seems to show are a more important source of apparent loss of sharpness than the finite pixel size. Fuji's problems with the expanded "random" Bayer cell in their latest cameras also shows that color acutance is more important than we may have thought.

So I'm hoping for a four-shot version in which the image stabilization still is operating (4 shots from a slowly moving frame frame of reference which the IBIS cancels out) for my OM-D E-M1 Vii. Where do I put my order in?

scott

 

[raist3d]

If that were the case (4-shots to un-Bayer), the patent would also cover the 8-shot Olympus version, which takes 4 shots around each of two locations.

No, not necessarily. Olympus is doing a couple of things weird as someone who used the RAWdigger found- the 2nd set of 4 shots have an RGB range "capped" - it's not the full range. Why? Don't know. It may very well be that doing their 8 shots improves the image quality over the 4 shot solution, though we were wondering 4-shots for 16 MP only.

Hasselblad offers two settings, 4 shots and 6 shots. Six shots sounds like a terrible idea, since it re-introduces Bayer artifacts, which the Olympus example seems to show are a more important source of apparent loss of sharpness than the finite pixel size.

That depends on how Hasselblad handles the 6 shots- if for example, they picked only luminance from green photo sites from the extra two. Not saying they are doing this, just pointing out it's not necessarily the case.

Fuji's problems with the expanded "random" Bayer cell in their latest cameras also shows that color acutance is more important than we may have thought.

I disagree with Fuji's problems - I think the best raw converters show a lot of detail in the conversions. It depends on some subjects and Fuji benefits from extra green/luminance/detail photo sites. The raw converters that convert it well, the images look pretty darn good. In B&W even more so.

So I'm hoping for a four-shot version in which the image stabilization still is operating (4 shots from a slowly moving frame frame of reference which the IBIS cancels out) for my OM-D E-M1 Vii. Where do I put my order in?

scott

Looks again there is a patent on that. But we'll see. Keep in mind Olympus was talking 10-shot for the 1/60 version, not 4 shots. So it's more about them moving the sensor faster with more accuracy and faster processing of the incoming data than doing less shots.

- Ricardo

 

[Ulfric Douglas]

It seems a logical step to improve the 8-frame 40megapixel merge into a merge with image alignment within the camera. (1/60th or 2 seconds : irrelevant)
Doesn't take too much processing and should be a doddle to actually achieve, minus the fudge with moving objects but you can't have everything.

 

[Godfrey]

Mmm, after reading that interview the more reason I see to wait a little ...

Yes indeed. I'm glad I'm outfitted with good mFT lenses. A new body a year or two down the line is a relatively small expense compared to buying a new lens system, and even the current E-M1/E-PL7 perform very well. They'll suffice for some time to come.

G

 

[ptomsu]

Same thoughts from my side

After reading through all the info about high res implementation I meanwhile an sure to wait for at least 1 new incarnation - say EM1 Mark2 or even longer.

For me a slight increase in base resolution (maybe 20MP) while slightly improving DR from todays 16MP m43 sensors would be something much more important than any high res implementation anyway.

Peter

 

[Knorp]

So do we agree: the silent shutter is its main attraction ?

 

[Godfrey]

So do we agree: the silent shutter is its main attraction ?

LOL! I'm not sure about that. I depend on hearing the shutter click to know that I've made the exposure. I find it quite disconcerting when I press the button on my Leica X and cannot hear the shutter click ... I've turned on the shutter simulation sound so that I know when I've made the exposure. ;-)

Obviously, for eliminating vibration, the silent, all electronic shutter operation is a great thing...!

G

 

[scott kirkpatrick]

....

Looks again there is a patent on that. But we'll see. Keep in mind Olympus was talking 10-shot for the 1/60 version, not 4 shots. So it's more about them moving the sensor faster with more accuracy and faster processing of the incoming data than doing less shots.

- Ricardo

You must be quoting information from another source than the interview in DPReview. Where can I read about possible patents and 10-shot schemes?

scott

 

[Knorp]

LOL! I'm not sure about that. I depend on hearing the shutter click to know that I've made the exposure. I find it quite disconcerting when I press the button on my Leica X and cannot hear the shutter click ... I've turned on the shutter simulation sound so that I know when I've made the exposure. ;-)

Obviously, for eliminating vibration, the silent, all electronic shutter operation is a great thing...!

G

LOL - indeed, a silent shutter is just as annoying as a noisy shutter !

 

[jonoslack]

So do we agree: the silent shutter is its main attraction ?

Yes - but not because it's silent (nice though that sometimes is) - but for the shutter speed, and the opportunity to shoot fast lenses wide open in good light (without needing an ND filter).

Still not enough for me to jump this time though.

 

[Knorp]

Yes - but not because it's silent (nice though that sometimes is) - but for the shutter speed, and the opportunity to shoot fast lenses wide open in good light (without needing an ND filter).

Still not enough for me to jump this time though.

Mmm, well perhaps - but one stop won't save you from grabbing for your ND filter on a bright day, me thinks.
Last Sunday even the Z40-150 at f/2.8 and 1/8000 dropped the ISO value as low as 100.
But fair enough - let's rephrase my statement: the attraction is for its silent and fast shutter ...

Kind regards.