On Jan 27, 2007, at 2:38 PM, Digital Image Studio wrote: > On 28/01/07, Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Yes, after reading a few more messages, I realized that this was the >> Olympus SLR. I assume the sensor is similar in size to an APS-C? >> Sounds like a nice piece of equipment. It should be great for wedding >> photographers with that 4/3 format, which converts easily to 8x10 or >> 11 x14. > > Somewhat smaller than the Pentax "APS" sensors in fact, 18x13.5mm vs > 23.5x15.7mm as such they have lower sensitivity and more noise at any > given ISO. It's a beautifully designed camera though, after owning my > E-10 and loving it I was sorely tempted however its low light > performance was just too limiting for me.
Given the different format proportions of the E-1 compared to an *ist D/DS, the relationship is 5Mpixels spread over an 18x13.5 mm sensor vs a 20.9x15.7 mm sensor. In area, that comes to about 35% less light gathering power at the sensor. In practical terms from having spent some time with one, the E-1 performs at ISO 800 about on par with the *ist DS at ISO 1600, at least with the updated firmware (original v1.0 firmware produced much noisier results then it ought to have). At ISO 400 and below, it produces comparable image quality to the *ist DS. For those who use ISO 800-1600 a lot, the Olympus E-1 isn't ideal. For those who use ISO 100-400 most of the time and rarely go to ISO 800 or beyond, it's a fine camera. G -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
