I don't understand all the worry. I don't know how to evaluate dynamic
range between the two but the A65 has produced a clearly superior image
with respect to resolved detail. To prove it I chose to concentrate on
the chimney cap and its mesh screen. In the A200 image the mesh screen
doesn't seem to exist at any magnification. In the A65 image the mesh
screen stands out sharply. I wondered if this was just a 24MP sensor vs
an 8MP sensor so I reduced the height of the A65 image from 4000 pixels
to 2454 pixels to match the size of the A200 image. The mesh screen was
still sharply visible and even at 65% vs 100% (1:1 pixel view). Since
it was still visible at 65% I was emboldened to reduce the image height
to 1920 pixels which is the image size for the 5MP A1. Even reduced to
5MP the A65 image still shows the mesh screen clearly visible at 100%.
You can't see it clearly resolved at 65% but you still know that it's
there. The A200 at 8MP shows nothing but a blur.
Of course, this may be due to the lenses involved or the apertures used.
You didn't give any tech data for the images so I don't know what
apertures were used. The A200 has a tiny sensor. Shooting it at f/8 or
possibly even f/5.6 will cause diffraction to reduce image detail to
about 4MP vs. the 8MP capability of the sensor. Whether it's lens
quality, aperture & diffraction or something else I don't know. What I
do know is that the A65 image blows the A200 out of the water. I don't
know how you could have ever thought the A200 was superior.
Get a good night's sleep and then a cup of coffee and have another look.
Chuck Norcutt
On 6/15/2014 9:23 PM, Willie Wonka via olympus wrote:
I felt the buyers remorse when the A65 showed up, because I really
wanted to have the EM10. I still have it, but it is buried somewhere
deep so it does not bother me anymore.
Here are the details, even the ones you never cared about:
I bought it from “Beach Camera” tad later I received a message that
there was a problem with my order. Nothing serious, the bank was
being careful, which I appreciate and wanted to alert me about having
an account charge. But then the funny thing happened: A second camera
arrived at my door a day after the first one was delivered.
Right before I got the bank to authorize the purchase, I was caught
by my significant other looking at the EM10 once again, but was told
that “I had done my research already, liked what I choose, especially
the price and there isn’t a reason to ride this emotional train once
again”.
The camera is huge by my standards. Although the plastics used are
really nice, you wouldn’t like it. Actually, the impression would
have been completely different if the flash shoe was metal one. I
thought this was a senseless way to cut cost along with the other one
that caused me a great irritation: The remote control had to be
purchased separately, really...it just costs $20.
It is very pretty in a Canon EOS from the mid-nineties way. I have
small hands and at that time they were extremely tired, because of
the number of pull ups I did in the gym that week, but despite having
trouble holding heavier items, I felt really comfortable handling
it.
I tested the camera side by side with the A200 and it looked like
A200’s picture quality was better. But found out later that I was
looking at a wrong file, it was really late. You can imagine what I
felt, as I was having doubts in a first place. That’s when I wanted
to put it to test, along with the M5 that my friend has (and justify
the EM 10 purchase). I never found out what I was looking at and why
I got the impression that its picture quality was worse than that of
the A200, so no tests were performed, but if anyone cares, I can do
that.
Back to the camera: besides excellent ergonomics, the thing that I
least cared about, but know that you were itching to ask me-how does
the electronic viewfinder perform…You would be very, surprised. You
wouldn’t know that it is not optical. Actually, I lied-there is some
grainess that appears in dark scenes that require exposure of 1/8
seconds or slower and that’s when you start to notice that it is an
electronic viewfinder. I am not sure if there is a difference between
the jpeg’s and the RAW files the camera produces. I will experiment
with that later, after work slows down. I have put up two pictures on
zone10 one made with the A200 and another with the A65. The A200 is a
RAW converted to tiff I believe and the A65 is the jpeg straight from
the camera also converted to tiff just to be fair. I have a RAW to
tiff that wanted to post, but the Schnozz stubbornly refused to give
me an upload permission...:), because the file was huge.
I would like to get the opinion of the pixel peepers amongst you on
the picture quality of the camera (s). I picked this scene, so I
could also get an idea of what the dynamic range and evaluate the
metering performance.
Best
Boris
The link to the files:
http://zone-10.com/tope2/main.php?g2_itemId=12748
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|