It's clear from your response that your don't know how it works either.
It's also clear from your comment on a changed description on "one
particular model" that you mistook my comment about the E3's and E510's
disparity in labeling recording quality levels as "the problem". You
must have stopped reading at that point because the real problem is not
the labeling but the separation of choosing recording quality levels
into two distinct stages... a top level and very limited set of
selections whose actual meaning is determined by a customization menu.
The problem is that the meaning of such quality designations as "SHQ",
"HQ" and "SQ" JPEG levels are not constant even within the same camera.
Rather they are customizable to associate (depending on model) one of 2,
3 or 4 JPEG compression levels and up to 7 image size designations. On
the E1 the combinations were limited to 8 but, on the E300, selecting
one of the 3 JPEG quality levels on the higher level menu actually
translates into 3 of 21 different underlying possibilities. By the time
you get to the E3 the JPEG combinatorial explosion has grown to 7 image
sizes and 4 different compression levels for a total of 28 possibilities
underlying only 3 top level menu selections. This is madness. Who,
pray tell, is going to use an E3 to shoot 640x480 size JPEGs at a 1:12
compression level? The menu system already didn't make sense on the E1
and continuing a similar structure on the later cameras has just gone
off the deep end.
The Canyon 5D offers 3 JPEG image sizes (Large, Medium and Small meaning
full, 1/2 and 1/4 of the maximum pixel count) at 2 compression levels
(fine, normal) for 6 combinations. It also offers raw or raw plus any
of the 6 JPEG levels for a total of 13 selectable options. All 13 are
fully visible on a single screen and directly selectable from the top
level menu by using the jog wheel.
Chuck Norcutt
Ken Norton wrote:
>> Slip away for a couple of days and things get all crazy here. Chuck
>> giving detailed instructions on the correct use of E-thingies?
>>
>
> Well, forgive us, Moose, but we Olyheads don't bother reading, much less
> CARRYING a manual with us because the hideous menu system is adequate and
> the cameras are designed to be used. It just happened that the OP's
> question had to do with something where Olympus went and changed the
> technical description on a feature on one particular model. It isn't a
> problem with the cameras, just the nuts running it.
>
> However, if we Olyheads DID read the manuals, we'd find invaluable
> functionality that we've ignored.
>
> AG
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|