[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] E-410/420 vs. E-500

Subject: Re: [OM] E-410/420 vs. E-500
From: Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2017 23:48:04 -0700
On 4/28/2017 4:04 PM, Chris Trask wrote:
      Mmmm...  With the uncompressed TIFF I get one byte per colour per pixel, 
about a 24M file size.

I have no idea if this is true. TIFF can be either 8 or 16 bit. If the E-500 
outputs an 8 bit TIFF, that math would work.

Now I get ALL of the available dynamic range and colours without any compromise.

That is untrue. The sensor is 12 bit. One byte is only 8 bits, so an 8 bit TIFF has to take the 4096 levels of brightness captured by the sensor and cut it by four, to 256 levels. How much of that is clipping and how much compression, I don't know. I do know that is a significant compromise compared to Raw output.

Going out on a limb here, based on ancient recollection. I thought Oly Raw compression was lossless, i.e., un-compressing it exactly recreates the original.

  I cannot comprehend why they didn't retain this feature in later models.

Because only you and a handful of other people wanted it.


What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/

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