LEICA D VALIO-ELMARIT 14-50mm F2.8-F3.5 ASPH + OLYMPUS E-1

[Bob Ross]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I would like to see a picture (or pictures) of the E-1 with the Leica lens, and a picture of the L1 with the Zuiko lens. (I mean a picture of the cameras, not pictures taken with the cameras).

I think the E-1 would match very well with the big Leica lens.

Ian Butley at dpNow took pictures as you described at PMA and I think they are in the L-1 announcement. He also has a picture of the L-1 with the ZD50/2 in one of the forum threads.

Bob

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[supperman]

I think it's obvious that easy environment is just easy picture, do not use comparison.

The noise of camera is no relationship with RAW developer.

 

Do you know photo diode size of LEICA D-Lux2? It is only 1/25 from E1 and LEICA DMR.

 

The noise of small sensor is just destiny.

Not pixel count.

Most important point is color depth and linearity, and noise.

Small photo diode can't support all of parameters.

 

If you can't understand this real situation, you don’t need DSLR, it is very happy.

 

Currently, I not use LEICA D-Lux2 and Panasonic LX-1. The noise performance is no good than other product.

 

The following is by my LX-1 same as LEICA D-Lux2. This kind of picture is quite easy for small sensor camera, same as your sample.

 

 

You seem to like to take things very personally.

 

The samples of your E1 picture are so small that there's no way I can comment about the noise. I was talking about your D-Lux2 pictures that you developed with 'Rowshooter', especially the ISO 400 image of the guy, which is still horribly noisy even when down sampled. Noise (chroma and luminance) is more obvious in shadows, so it's not surprising that your first photo was very noisy looking. If we were using the same camera, obviously I know that the Dlux2 is very noisy at ISO 400, but what I'm trying to show is that PSE3 is much better at removing chroma noise from RAW photos. I'm going to go on a limb and say that the 2nd photo you posted, that supposedly is similar to mine, is not shot at ISO 400 whereas mine was, or else it was heavily noise reduced, because I didn't get rid of luminance noise in mine and you can see some speckles, whereas yours looked very smooth even in the shadows.

 

But why did I mention megapixels? Of course I know that the DLux2 has a much smaller sensor and so is much noisier than the E-1. But the thing is that noise is also linked with resolution; more noise, less resolution. If you have a higher resolution sensor (more megapixels), you can actually down-sample the image and it would be similar to a cleaner image from a lower resolution sensor. So I was interested to see if an 8MP image down-sampled to 5MP might reduce the noise difference between the sensors. But as I'd said, the D-lux2 only really outputs 6MP at 4:3, so 1MP more resolution is not going to do much.

[Bob Ross]

But why did I mention megapixels? Of course I know that the DLux2 has a much smaller sensor and so is much noisier than the E-1. But the thing is that noise is also linked with resolution; more noise, less resolution. If you have a higher resolution sensor (more megapixels), you can actually down-sample the image and it would be similar to a cleaner image from a lower resolution sensor. So I was interested to see if an 8MP image down-sampled to 5MP might reduce the noise difference between the sensors. But as I'd said, the D-lux2 only really outputs 6MP at 4:3, so 1MP more resolution is not going to do much.

While noise and resolution are only part of an image's qualities, your question about downsizing is a good one. The question is better framed where the photosite size is near equal, since image data collected can have a big impact. You might get reduced noise, but the tonal or color gradients might come apart or become harsher. I have asked a review to look into this with the new crop of 10MP DSLRs where 10MP is kind of an overkill for normal sized prints (up to A4?). The other side of my question was to explore the differences between in-camera to PP downsizing. Some in-camera processing is done on the raw file and might be good as PP. Another factor here is that comparisons should be done at final product level, the print or the screen/projection size. Printing can reduce noise and will level resolution differences.

Bob