Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] Olympus Camedia 2500 Results

Subject: [OM] Olympus Camedia 2500 Results
From: Phillip Franklin <pfranklin@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 1999 13:25:56 -0800
Scott & others interested,

I think you missed my point (which it seems I may be at fault here). 
The Camedia 2500 is an excellent consumer digital camera, maybe the best
in it's price range.  Overall this camera does a great job.  However it
just does not compare to a high quality 35mm camera and low-end film
scanner system for getting the best results. I guess my point is that if
you already own a reasonable quality 35mm system and you are getting
into the digital medium; then your next most practical purchase should
be an inexpensive desktop film scanner.  

I'm sure it won't take ten years(as you suggest) for the digital camera
systems to catch up to the quality of a 35mm film camera.  It just has
not done so yet. This new offering from Olympus is a good yardstick of
where the consumer industry is moving. Certainly there are some
situations where this Camedia 2500 makes more sense then pulling out the
35mm film camera just as there are situations where using a 35mm makes
more sense than using a medium format or large format film camera.  Just
because a 35mm film camera can't match the output quality of a medium or
large format system does not mean that we should have abandoned the use
of 35mm film systems.  However, there is no doubt in my mind that the
digital revolution's first major victim will eventually be a big part of
35mm film camera industry.  One of the main reasons 35mm camera systems
will survive in this digital world for at least the next few years, is
because of the abundance of high quality inexpensive 35mm film scanners
and the reasonable costs of using and processing negative films.
Obviously I'm speaking in terms of the digital world.  

Scott... In response to your comments about Photoshop's Autolevel
command, I agree with you that Autolevels is not the way one should fine
tune color adjustment but let me quote Adobe here: "The Auto feature
gives good results when an image with an average distribution of pixel
values needs a simple contrast adjustment. However, adjusting the Levels
or Curves controls manually is more precise".  Basically what I think
should be noted here ties in exactly about my comments on scanning vs.
digital cameras.  These scanners and digital cameras should do one thing
well. They should give a good clean working image with an overall color
adjustment for the intended use.  Regardless of using 35mm film or a
digital camera one SHOULD NOT have to go into Photoshop and spend
anytime dicking around with color adjustment.  The digital capture
device should and must be able to do that.  When I get my images
professionally scanned (usually by the printer who will be responsible
for the overall quality of the job) I don't touch the color in
Photoshop. Their scanner better be properly calibrated for the intended
output use. That's why I think it is so appropriate to use the tools as
they were intended.  Let the tools do their job. Don't expect anything
more or less from their design.  My goal is to produce professional
quality images with the least amount of effort.  That is one of the
advantages of using digital tools. As photographers our tool boxes will
have to expand to accommodate all of the changes the industry demands.
And it seems the changes are coming much faster than most of the
industry predicted.  I would not be suprised to see a $1500 digital
camera system outperfom the typical 35mm/desktop scanner system in the
next 3 or 4 years.

Phillip Franklin

< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz