OM1 Sensor, Everything You Need to Know
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 28 май 2022
- This is far from complete. If it was complete it would be several hours long. But the video is everything you will need to know about the OM1 sensor. Strictly from an astrophotographers viewpoint I might add. Yes the technical jargon will be saturated, but the result are surprising and fun to science.
Наука
Man you are awe-some !! The way you present technical detail and demonstrate, what that means in real life is superb. Thank you for your work.
Fascinating... you say a lot and explain a lot that I have seen nowhere else. Thank you!
I appreciate the technical depth, rigor and presentation of your videos. Specifically the nuances as related to “true” performance. Your astrophotography perspective on performance, especially sensors is unique. Highly illuminating (pun intended).
Love the pun :)
Watching this video again just one year later, I am reminded how your convincing arguments led me to order an OM-1 after so many months of dithering. Best thing I ever did. Keep up the good work!
Good news! Thank you for doing all the research and explaining it to us in understandable fashion.
Dude, this is the best info I have seen on the OM-1! This is incredible! Thank you!
Thanks Dave. Its was a long time in the making.
Thanks so much. I learned more valuable info than all the other reviews put together. The sensor engineering is critical yet it rarely gets addressed in such a lucid manner.👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼👍🏼🙏🏼🖖🏼
Great to hear!
This is brilliant Ben! You are always so detail, and a joy to learn a few technical things.
Thank you Jimmy. Will do a complete review of the camera too once i feel like i really know it.
I've been waiting for your comments on the OM-1. Great job. 👍
Great explanation of the underlying sensor technology - information that is very hard to find for most of us. Really cool nerd stuff, but explained in an interesting and easy to understand way! Makes me a happy Olympus/OM enthousiast.
Another fantastic video. Thank you 👍🏻
Great review and really the only true review of the sensor
Way over my head but fascinating and satisfying to know you found improvements.
Glad to hear it!
Great video and this is the best information about OM-1 sensor capacities. Yes, I do see improvement in noise comparing OM-1 to EM1.3. I am not a professional. My ISO limit with EM1.3 is 6400. With OM-1, it is 12,800 ISO.
An excellent video; clear, concise and informative. Thank you.
Glad it was helpful!
Absolutely outstanding video - thanks for sharing!
Glad you enjoyed it!
Wow, that was very interesting - thanks that you cleard things up about the Sensor!
As someone who works with optoelectronic systems, I found this video very fascinating :)
Glad you enjoyed it!
Wow, what a great video with a wealth of information. Thank you.
Very instructive, as always on this channel 😊
Excellent analysis !, and very well explained. Thanks for sharing.
My pleasure!
Very useful information, Benjamin. I was able to test your conclusions last night here in bortle class 4-5 skies and was very surprised at how well the images turned out at iso1000 with the new 12-40/2.8 wide open in the OM-1. I was very impressed with the camera’s better vignette control and this will be especially useful in making panoramas of the night sky when I usually had to stop down a lens like the 17/1.2 if I intended to stitch portrait oriented frames across the Milky Way.
Thanks. I know I might start shooting a little more wide open myself too except if coma is a problem.
@@TheNarrowbandChannel The 12-40/2.8 mark II looks pretty good all the way to the edges. I haven't had a chance to test the 7-14/2.8 or any primes. Seems it likes to rain all the time these days, especially at night. lol. I've been checking the ISO invariance properties for long exposures. I really like what the sensor is capable of, in my rudimentary testing. I'm sure you will have a much better way of examining such characteristics so I'll defer to your expertise.
Dude. Great channel, amazing level of knowledge!
I appreciate that!
Excellent video! Well explained. Thanks mate.
Impressive review. This is my first year shooting the Lumix G9 for wildlife photography and wish I could find somebody with your technical expertise reviewing that camera. Well done.
Wow! Thank you for your research. One thing I did notice is the stars are small & sharper. I really like the OM-1.
Yes agreed. And even my completely uncalibrated image that i showed had no real appreciable noise except some stuck pixels.
Awesome man! Just got mine and I’m also seeing much more improvement then stated.
Thanks. Its hard for me to find a reason to grab any of my old cameras now. Wish there was a program to swap out sensors :) here is to me waiting for an OM1x
Hi there, Jose from Puerto Rico. Amazing man! You make technical terms so easy to understand, and your dedication to your craft is second to none. I ordered today a used OM-1 body with 2 batteries. This camera is so hard to find. The guy supposedly had it for 2 months and is selling it because he switched to Canon. Anyhow, I'm upgrading from a OMD EM1 Mark II, which incidentally I also purchased used, and it is awesome. I'll probably sell it when the newer model gets in my hands. Your video truly has showed me that I won't regret my purchase and thanks again for such a detailed and awesome review.
His loss your gain. And thanks.
That was fantastic. Great information on the sensors that I've never heard about before.
Thanks Chris.
Great review. I never expected that there was such a fundamental change in the sensor, or that there is still more head room for utilising it’s properties. As far as DP review goes, it is easier to explain a larger sensor (26mp in the Panasonic), than fundamental improvements.......and sell it to the masses. I’m not critical of the GH6, as I have had nothing but great experiences with their cameras and lenses, but I think that creating a platform for taking advantage of technological growth should position OM Systems well going forward. Now for some video focus........... Keep up the good work.
You study a lot! That is really a great thing. I think many comparison was drawn against full frame. This system give 2x range with less wight. It is really useful. MFT will be more prone to noise and less dynamic range(generally speaking) but this system is great enabler. Only problem is I still do not have mine, delivery is really slow.
Great info! Thanks for sharing your findings about the sensor.
Thank you Chris.
thanks.. great info
Fascinating. Subscribed.
Thank you.
Nice job!!! I would LOVE for you to analyze the GH6 sensor compared to this OM1. Wow,...what a great shootout video you would here there! The battle of the two newest...but VERY different, MFT sensors.
Love your technical reviews and explanation videos. I happily repeat what I said earlier: you have a gift to explain stuff in a way people enjoy watching and sticking to it. Great seeing you make use of it here on YT.
Now, regarding the sensor of the OM-1: maybe I have misheard that but did you say other companies are sqeezing out 5.7k video from that sensor? How would that be possible pixel-wise if its only 5.1k in width? Maybe I just got those numbers mixed up.
What do you think about the new sensor in the GH6? I would love to listen to your expertise investigation on that one. I have the strange feeling the GH6 is not on your radar ("we AP like chunky pixels"...), but maybe someone is willing to borrow you one.
Thanks again for sharing and will to explain and analyse the technical side of sensors, noise and photography. BTW, I would totally buy into a indepth technical noise related episode: covering all type of noises, how to measure them, how to interpret the measured values, etc. Just in case you're running out of ideas :-)
Thank so much!
Excellent info. Thanks.
Thank you Peter.
This is the sort of information I wish channels like yours would also cover, @Peter Forsgard.
@@ThalanorThornhale thank you for the complement. I do however think Peter has been doing a great job with his fundamentals of photography. All of them have been very inspiration and thought provoking.
This information was excellent ✨✌🏼 thank you very much for this.
Also just want to say that Rob Trek brought me here.
Rob is awesome guy!
I'll be buying the next release
What’s fun if that I am both informed and entertained by your videos! Having moved to the GH6 bodies for most of my studio video work, and my photographer using the s1r and r5 my Olympus bodies have dwindled to an ep3 and em10.3. Using the ep3 I do wish we could see another body around that size Ave build style with some of this new tech… it would be a buy for me for sure!
Eventually we will probably see one of those come out.
Excellent info, thanks. I was using iso 800 for tracked astro images with the E-M1 Mk III, are you saying that the sweet spot for the om-1 is more like iso 1000? Or will I get even more dynamic range at iso 800? Do you have a recommendation for wide angle tracked images?
For single shots you might just go as low as 200 but if you are stacking then you should use the 1000 on the OM1. Hope that helps.
This is my first time viewing one of your videos. It is an excellent presentation of technical information regarding the sensor. I have the OM1, and prior to that had the OMD-E1 Mk II, so I am now looking forward to doing some astrophotography myself. Knowing the additional practical application of the technical information brings me even more hope that I may be able to do a serviceable job at it! Keep up the good work!
Yes give it a try. You will find that it is hard but not impossible. Anyone can do it with todays technology.
It would still be nice to see a direct comparison of object A taken with the OM1 vs EM1/X M3/2 and highlight the differences (if any).
That will come in my final review. I am trying to collect a bunch. Spring is finally over here, I usually can only make 1-2 photos each spring here because of the bad weather.
Have a modded D5300 Nikon, but only one lens. When i make the jump to mirrorless, the OM-1 is something I'm pondering for general + occasional astro use.
Would the OM-1 have a notable jump in sensitivity for astro and low light vs the D5300?
I did simple test on my EM-5 Mark III regarding noise on certain ISO levels. I just covered the lens, and took "blank" picture. Then I increased ISO.
Afterwards I checked the images in camera using HI/LOW view. Anything that wasnt completely blue (reporting level 0) was a noise. Afterwards i checked the images in PC, just spilled some color on the canvas and again, anything what wasnt this color was noise.
I found out that on ISO 2000 there is lower noise than on ISO 1600, and I could not exactly figure out why, I just assumed that some sort of analog-digital converter or amplifier switched. Thanks for confirmation. I just have to remember that this is sweetspot for medium-hi ISO.
Agree with everyone - love your videos. I love my EM1.3, but at this point I think I'm ready to spend the money on a dedicated astro camera instead of an OM-1. Not sure why I'd upgrade to OM-1 strictly for astro. Again - I'm speaking strictly from an astro perspective. Not sure I'm sold either on whether I'm ready to upgrade to the OM-1 for non-astro use.
Oh ya go dedicated. Especially mono camera. That is like comparing truck headlights to a candle. Just because of the cooling.
Although I'm not an astrophotographer, I completely agree with you on the MP issue. Give me 16 or even 12 MPs, just make them GOOD as in low noise, high dynamic range.
Yes I too would love to see a 16 or 12mp sensor. Or maybe an option to bin down to a lower MP count.
Great review. I was not aware of this ISO 2000 noise improvement. Can you please advise if OM1 has a rolling 1080p crop in movie mode. So, in other words is it possible to record video with a 1080p sensor crop without any resampling? I know OM1 has digital tele-converter but I think it is not the same as it is some kind of resampled video and not a true 1080p crop from the sensor center. I really need it for my planetary imagining. My E-M5III has it and it works very good in FHD ALL-intra quality for planetary lucky imaging.
Its does let u do a crop into 1080. It is a 1.4x crop. I think it is oversampled too.
@@TheNarrowbandChannel Thank you very much for your reply. So, I think this option is not good for me. My E-M5 III can do 1080p crop without oversampling and it is 2.7x instead of 1.4x. I hope they will add this option in future as every pixel is important in planetary imaging.
Thomas Eisl is suggesting that attaching the HLD-10 and using only the battery in the grip is a way to reduce noise generated by the heat of the battery in the body. Does this make sense you you? I've noticed with my OM-1 that the camera does drain both batteries if used together, even when set to use the grip battery first. It's a smaller drain than on the grip battery, but it does appear to be draining. This would suggest that using only one battery, that being the grip one, is the way to go. Do you think this would make a noticeable improvement in noise?
Yes it does help in astro. Daytime imaging might not be a major difference however with video it would help as that generates a lot of heat.
Love your channel and the info you supply, just a quick question not sensor related, am I the only one out there to experience a fogged EVF on the OM-1? Placed thumb over the rear glass and the fogging went away, came back when shooting again, this was in Australia a week or so ago at the start of our cooler weather. Outside temp only 16-18 C.
Sounds like humidity inside the camera. I would leave it in the sun with the lens off to evaporate it.
I had the back element of my 40-150 Pro fog up yesterday! It was indoors and cool... maybe 18° C. When I put my cheek near the open camera lens mount, I could feel heat coming out of the camera. I was testing C4K video and the 50fps/ 120fps shooting modes, so camera was working a bit. But I have never had this happen before. Maybe the viewfinder fogging is related?
@@bpcs63 I think so but I you contacted Olympus they might be able to give you a better answer. I would think the viewfinder is nitrogen purged? But never seen any documentation on this.
Dude, rewatching after you stated this in my video! Have to bookmark this to remind myself and I'm currently sharing this again on my forums and socials! I have to ask though, I THOUGHT OM/Olympus had a patent on this type of Quad Pixel AF. Does that effect this sensor being bought by anyone else?
Tank you! 🙂
DP review does allow you to download their raw files. Might be interesting to do this and try to see what they're talking about.
I'm interested to see what the Quad Bayer structure can offer, besides AF performance. There's a rumored OM-5 to be announced in July. It may lack quad pixel AF, but it may have other benefits of a Quad Bayer structure, such as improved low light and dynamic range, or even a high resolution version of the OM-1.
"or even a high resolution version of the OM-1" - only possible if they change the color mask - technically possible, but IMO unlikely. Think of side effects on the whole processing chain. This would be something like a OM1-H then, not a OM5. With the OM1 sensor, all quad-pixels are of the same color.
@@rudigerbien843 yeah unlikely...
Do you use DXO PhotoLab you get two extra stops of low light.
I do not use DXO. Astrophotography is different so stuff like that does not apply.
Does adding megapixels always reduce quantum efficiency?
Also I wonder if part of the reason why dpreviews hasn't put out a video review after their initial impressions of the OM-1, in addition to the firmware update for the EVF, is to really test the camera. Hopeful thinking.
Actually no. There is no real correlation between pixel size and qe.
DPR might do that. I know Chis likes the camera and it is his person choice.
Actually no. There is no real correlation between pixel size and qe.
DPR might do that. I know Chis likes the camera and it is his person choice.
Could you explain why on the older sensor you used iso 400 or iso 2.000? I thought it would be or iso 200 (it's native) or iso 2.000 (where the second iso kicks in).
Good question. I did a full explanation here. ruclips.net/video/0SbhDz_w1h0/видео.html
@@TheNarrowbandChannel Thank you very much!
Wondering how many mm the backspacing or distance to image sensor plane is?
With generic T adapters it is 45mm thus you will need a 10mm spacer.
Is theIMX472 a Quad Bayer filter? I had heard this sensor was from Samsung and part of the OM Systems Samsung alliance.
The Samsung alliance has really not materialized in any way that I know of. Olympus engineers have explicitly said that they used a sony sensor.
I am curious though about the Samsung alliance. Have a reference for more info? Thanks.
@@TheNarrowbandChannel There was a paper filed in Japan that is required by their laws when they go through JIP. It had to be filed because the sensor was not sourced from Japan and they needed approval. It may have been a Sony chip made in a different company. I do not understand their laws. It was filed before the OM Systems name. That was what lead me to think it would not be a Sony chip. Then the contract was canceled with Sony for the Olympus proprietary sensor which had been developed and which I thought was the IMX472 because it came out right after the cancellation. Retired people have too much time and research things like this and read all the patent filings of companies they are interested in. Still waiting for them to use that patent for the f/0.7 autofocus lens. I did not see where the IMX472 was a Quad Bayer (quad pixel with a quad bayer mode as it is more than quad bayer and different micro lenses) when I read the spec sheet a while back. I thought their biggest Quad Bayer was 1"
Are your vignetting test numbers with the lens wide open or stopped down some?
Wide open. F1.2 Vignetting in all lenses disappears for the most part at small apertures.
@@TheNarrowbandChannel That's what I assumed. Are you sure you're looking at uncorrected vignetting? With the 17 PRO wide open you should be getting something like 37% wide open uncorrected. Your 15% number from the E-M1iii is exactly what I would expect from the corrected value.
Thank you for your videos they are great for techies; one thing though, please, can you re-mount your mic since it is picking up your swallowing noise as it is intimately in contact with your skin and the sound is being transmitted straight to it. The audio is otherwise very clear however it is detracting from the audio-track. It is 'noise' over and above the wonderful 'signal' that you give. I think the audio 'compander' ( compression/expander) is exacerbating this as the silence at the time is amplified by the audio gain being automatically increased by the expander. No doubt this is all done in software these days however there is probably some sort of setting like 'auto-gain' on the mic input. Kindest Regards from an audiophile and a camera-phile , D.
Thanks for the feedback. I wish I knew as much as you about audio. That is my weakness I think.
@@TheNarrowbandChannel - you are most very welcome and please keep producing these great videos, from David in Scotland :-)
there's a guy from Austria that does a good job explaining dynamic range and the OM-1 is good.
yes I have seen his video twice. Good watch for sure.
ok i did not understand much of what you said. but these is something that rang a bill to me and like to clarify it.
is noise affected by temperature. because i noticed that on those very hot humid days my shots are not clean and birds details are not that sharp even at iso 500 and in early hour light.
while on those colder days or when it is less than 35 c and humidity reasonable the results are much sharper.
Yes noise does come from heat. As a matter of fact thermal noise doubles ever degree above 20c. so at 5c it will have 30x as much thermal noise.
Nice job. You do a great job of translating the Star Trek type terms into English. Maybe I missed it but you mentioned that dynamic range was better. How much would you say?
Basically one full stop better. Just as Olympus said. An image that goes from 8bit to 9 bit will have 1 additional stop of details.
Does this mean that if I need to use iso800 it’s better that I raise it to ISO 1000?
For daytime stuff i usually do not worry about it but you should see no difference in noise between the two.
Great video,
It's a shame Panasonic didn't use this sensor in their GH6.
I know. It would have made a killer GH6 with great AF.
Just wondering since you do astro photography why not use full frame for better high ISO?
Sensor size does not change the amount of light gathered. Its the aperture size in mm that matters. Good question. I get it a lot. Eventually i will have to do a video addressing some of the false things Tony Northrup has said.
@@TheNarrowbandChannel It riles me to see how many times the "bigger sensor = better low light performance" myth gets repeated. It would be nice to see the internet BS refuted, although you'll undoubtedly get a serious trolling.
@@ianparr1533 I will be doing one sometime this year.
Nice guns. I need to hit the gym.
Sounds like some of Foveon's technology.
Then again, a dedicated B&W sensor gets rid of the Bayer sensor array.
Quad-bayer sensors are by definition hard-binned to 1/4 of their sensel count. Pixel is always an interpolation of 4 adjacent sensels combining 3 different colours. You cannot interpolate information from sensels that are of the same colour.
Interesting, Sony say that this is a Quad Bayer sensor. Dpreview says it’s not. They instead say it’s a Quad Pixel AF sensor. Dpreview also say that a 20 Mpixel Quad Bayer sensor can be used as a 80 Mpixel sensor, quite the opposite to what you say. So who are right, Sony, Dpreview or you? Read the Dpreview article and pleas give a comment hear.
@@hemligx-sson8202 I read the article and I disagree. They merely state that it is possible, not explaining mechanism. But you can convince me. Explain to me how can you extract usefull pixel from 4 adjacent sensels having the same colour filter on them like it is on Quad-bayer architechture sensor. What kind of information do you get? By comparing them you will not get neither the info on the color of the pixel nor on luminance as you have filtered light of a wavelength that could happen to carry important information on luminance. So no 4x resolution even for B&W pictures. Also analysing pixels created from 4 sensels of 2 different colours are insufficient. So how on earth you get 4x resolution. You can increase DR maybe if sensels are indepenedtly wired or have different sensitivity. But resolution? I can't see that happening. But maybe I am missing something. Enlight me. 48Mpix QB sensor in smartphone is just marketing trick. Image is upscaled and does not convey 48Mpix load of data. That is why it looks like trash when you zoom digitally until you hit local length of next camera.
With most sensors this is true about how you cannot unbin them. Some though can be. Amd the resolution increase as a result is not 4x but more like 2x. The IMX492 is a good example of a quad bayer sensor that most use as 11.7mp but can be 44mp
@@TheNarrowbandChannel IMX492 is monochrome sensor Sony stating as 47.08 MPix. There is no filtering light there to reconstruct color data. What this has to do with getting 4x resolution from Quad-Bayer architecture?
Thanks a lot, this was much more interesting for a non-astro-photographer (even though I might pick it up in the future, as I moved to a more rural area) than many other reviews. This one aspect of improved sharpness might be a deciding factor when I think about replacing my current Pen F. I was in the "give me more resolution" camp and a bit disappointed when the OM-1 was announced, but this was mostly due to the not-so-great detail rendering of the Pen F's sensor (compared to the Sony A7 I also own). If this detail rendering is improved, I could very well "live" with 20 MP (and not go Panasonic, as I prefer OM cameras).
Regarding SLVS-EC... I think you are little bit mistaken.
Been reading a lot into Sony documentation for their IMX M43 sensors. IMX472 and IMX272 both use SLVS-EC. Because IMX272 allows up to 60 frames per second I assumed it was used in EM-1 Mark II and later M1 models.
But IMX269 uses LVDS, and its transfer rates are limited to 27.27 fps. When you cut down few pixels from the sides it can be 30 fps. Because M5 Mark III is essentially M1 MkII, just the maximum burst rate is not 60 but 30 RAW photos per seconds, I assumed that it uses practically the same sensor just with slower transport interface.
Therefore E-M1 MkII, E-M1x and E-M1 Mk III should all have lower noise compared to M5 Mk III, unfortunately i cannot comfirm that at the moment.
But also IMX472 has 27db PGA gain, older sensor have 24dB PGA gain. This should mean better A/D signal translation for OM1
SLVS-EC permits you to treat to separate channels at two different speeds. Another words you could have one section of the sensor, say a 120x700px area streaming images at 120fps while another cropped portion can run 480p at a different frame rate say 30fps and a different bit depth.
Olympus does not use the IMX272 in their flagship cameras. They use the IM270 a exclusive sensor made only for them by Sony.
The IM269 is only used in the Pen F to my knowledge. The m5 Mark III uses the IMX270 which is a very different sensor. It's built completely different. The IMX270 being front side illuminated while the 269 is backside illuminated. There circuitry is very very different.
@@TheNarrowbandChannel Thanks. This explains a lot, like Pen F not having hybrid autofocus.
But because its BSI, I am actually curious about its low-light performance.
Also thanks to you I already put into good use of ISO 2000 sweetspot on IMX270/E-M5.Mk3.
I have one question about sensor readout speed - 1/60s on IMX270. Yesterday I was comparing histograms of prime and zoom lenses I own, and from them it seems that 1/60s seems to have best dynamic range in "normal" photography conditions.
With this exposure, histogram was showing light between 10-245 range. At 1/125 it was between 10-210 regardless i increased the light intensity by 1EV.
From this I also assume that 1/30s is two composite readouts and 1/125s just one very shorter one.
dpreview is now more to become an entertainment channel 😁, they can do review on any other stuff.
why dont you like smal pixels, it make good resolution
I did a video about using an Em1x with a huge telescope here that might help you understand. ruclips.net/video/4qs1SH3ZP7k/видео.html
I may be on the otherside of the arguments of mega pixel,.. I wish to have more, only for cropping reason... It would be a plus...if Lumix was able to pull 26 MP on MFT...I don't see why Olympus could not pull it off....
I thought the GH6 was 25mp?
At any rate more MP will come with time. And like i said in the video. Olympus is not tied to this sensor. They could change it with the next model.
@@TheNarrowbandChannel From its specs its state:
Sensor Resolution:
Actual: 26.52 Megapixel
Effective: 25.2 Megapixel (5776x4336)
Yeah, i guess your right, hope its sooner than later tho,…
Oh i feel like you're an electrical engineer. Some of this stuff does make sense to me but I'm more of software engineering. great channel. Im more interested in the OM1 camera now. Are you from the same Desh Industries that makes Savage Axis accessories? cuz i happen to have a savage axis on a boyds stock that may need some upgrading, not immediate but for my first deer hunt this winter.
Yes that is me too. My astro products are the ones I need to develop more. That way I have more diversity in case government goes full blown dictatorship.
@@TheNarrowbandChannel thanks. i'll browse your ebay shop for the savage parts. you also have a good point there. hence why i'm shifting to a more stable hobby wtih the current political climate.
Why do you use a Mac book pro when you are so smart? You should be using a HP mobile work station? Do you use om work space and the noise reduction option? Thank you for this information!!!!
I do use the OM Workspace noise reduction occasionally. Mostly for wildlife stuff. Macs run deep in my blood. They are not as good as they used to be but still better then the garbage Microsoft makes today. Its the lesser of two evils.
@@TheNarrowbandChannel the optional programs for windows makes file management and large images editing a breeze - I have no problems - hp and asus make the best laptops for media creators
Wait right there, since when do we want big pixels in astro? The sky looks better in higher resolution. I can see a big difference between my 21Mp Canon and 24Mp sony. With olympus didn't tried yet
The sensor in that Sony is way way better on a huge number of other levels. That is why. Has nothing to do with pixel count. In image stacking we can always just drizzle to get greater numbers of pixels. Currently the most popular OSC camera dedicated for astrophotography is a 11.7mp camera. So we do like larger pixels in this hobby.
I had not even realised that sensor-based vignetting was a thing.
Ever since the E1 it and earlier it has been a problem with wide angle lenses.
I love the OM-1, the camera is so good in every aspect. The only problem is that when I shoot events now with OM-1 and E-M1 II and I hate my older camera :)
I still love my Em1x but always reach for the OM1 now because it is better in every way. I do miss the Em1x ergonomics and buttons.
@@TheNarrowbandChannel I don't have E-M1X, I prefer more compact and light systems, but with that said, the E-M1X is built like a tank and very good for long shooting sessions and longer lenses. OM-1X camera can be a beast if they make one!
So you’re saying that the “12 megapixel” GH5s… they lied to us about the “bigger” pixels? That is actually a case for consumer affairs.
What are you talking about?
@@TheNarrowbandChannel you said that the sensor in the GH5s is a 44 megapixel sensor that is hard locked to line skip down to 12 megapixels didn’t you? Am I wrong? I hope I am wrong.
Edit: you said was hard binned.
@@JeffBourke Yes it is hard binned. So it has larger pixels. Binning combines the data of 2x2 pixels to make them one larger pixel.
@@TheNarrowbandChannel but is combining 4 pixels the same sensitivity as a single pixel (photo site) 4 times the size? Intuition tells me that the performance of the single large pixel would be better.
@@JeffBourke Good question. A lot of it depends on the secretary. In most instances though it is the same performance with CMOS sensors. Now with CCD systems it was better performance. Now though we have CMOS sensors with separate ADCs for a group of pixels allowing for it to reach identical performance though you are locked into that bin level.
Yo!
The proof is in the pudding - I don't see any relevant difference in ISO performance in images compared to the E-M1 III. But this isn't really a surprise - it's the same with the Sony A1 vs a Z7 II or R5. Maybe it makes a difference when doing high ISO stacking and there are certainly advantages for video but for stills ...
That is how it should be measured. I do myself see a large difference. Perhaps you have a bad copy? You should not believe how much variance there can be in image sensors from one production lot to the next.
@@TheNarrowbandChannel so every reputable tester who has actually compared images side by side (which you haven't) and found there's no appreciable difference has a bad copy?
Too bad Olympus (or OMD) cheaped out on ram in this camera.
You are absolutely wrong about megapixel counts and filters. A 20 megapixel sensor has exactly 20mp total photosites which due to the RGBG filter is 5 million R, 10 million G and 5 million B. The sensor is sampled 4 pixels in a box shape, advancing 1 pixels over and then one row down with each output pixel. Thus each color pixel is present in four different output pixels (slightly blurring the edges of lines). Understanding this you understand why 4K oversampled from 8K is sharper, sinne 8K has 4 times the number of pixels as 4K, each output pixel is composed of four unique color pixels instead of shared ones. Monitors, on the other hand, have 3 different color sites for each pixel (in a Bayer filter the eye being most sensitive to green, the green is sampled twice and then added together to give more detail in shadows).
Is this a comment you meant for another video? This is what I said in the video. And in other videos I have said this exact same thing.
People voted for the areas that needed improvement the most, not that they DON'T WANT more megapixels. What a manipulation... . Also it would be nice to see a direct comparison that prove what you said about iso performance.
I will do a direct comparison when I do a final review.
The MP thing is just because DPR said something about it and it gave the Keyboard warriors something to use. Go read any forum thread speculating about the new Old sensor before it was announced. You will see that there was an overwhelming desire to see just ISO improvement and no interest in MP except for those that wanted 8K video.
I really want to like the OM1 to the extend I make a purchasing decision to upgrade from my E-M1 III. But the price difference is just too steep. It's ridiculous. By no way is the new sensor and the new processing power worth almost twice the price of the E-M1 III. And I'd have to buy a new battery type, a new grip. The E-M1 III does everything the OM1 does, only slightly slower in terms of processing, and maybe with a stop less of noticeably better image quality. 80% of additional cost for ~20% of real world improvement? Hard to justify. The vignetting improvement?! A click in Lightroom. Fixed. The laws of diminishing returns. I'll wait for the successor to arrive before I pick up the OM1 when it drops significantly in price. I can't justify the OM1.
It’s around the same price as GH6 and what an E-M1 mark II did cost when it was new in 2016. You could buy 3 OM1 and still have around 1000 $ left compared to a Sony A1.
or get canon r7 :)
@@mmd90 Can the R7 shorts 50 fps with AF between every shot? Can the R7 do Pro Capture at 50 fps or 120 fps with focus on only the first? Can the R7 do Live Time and Live Composite? Can the R7 do stacking in camera? Does the R7 have 8 stops of IBIS, in real life, not only on paper? Does the R7 have stacked BSI sensor?
@@mmd90 Haha! Learn from the 7D series - a great camera direly in need of matching lenses. Don't buy into Canon crop bodies unless you're content to shoot consumer zooms forever. Canon won't support their crop sensor R bodies with dedicated pro level lenses because that would eat into their FF sales and reduce their profits. The R7 will be good as a second body for Canon supertelephoto users but anyone else who buys a crop R-series expecting more from the Canon system than consumer lenses or overweight & overpriced FF hand-me-down zooms is going to be disappointed.
@@hemligx-sson8202 Or I could buy the Fujifilm X-H2S which is almost the same price as the OM-1 and arguably a MUCH better camera on paper. Fuji's lens line-up compares well too. Yeah, it's slightly larger and heavier, but not by much. The new Fuji does 40fps at full resolution with AF tracking. That's something to consider for wildlife and sports shooters which might have bought into that perceived OMD niche. And the X-H2S is video focused. There is likely to be a X-H2H with maybe 40MP and a focus on stills photographers.
OM Systems really needs to nail the value proposition with how they're trying to sell their expensive cameras. They want to be the dark horse that is above competition with others (their own marketing presentation!), but that only works if they manage to carve out a niche successfully. I don't see how they'll be able to do that.
Don't get me wrong, I am not unhappy with my Olympus gear. I started with Four Thirds, still have my E-5 and some lenses. I have tons of MFT lenses, several of the smaller Pen bodies, two Pen F bodies (silver, black), the E-M1 (bought new when it came out) and the E-M1 III (bought new when it came out) - I am as committed into this system as anyone can be. But I fail to see how OM Systems is going to stay competitive when considering value for money. Brand loyalty only goes so far.
You mean Sony is selling off technology (IMX472) in the same way they sold off the VHS intellectual property?
Sorta.
This video is a collection of conceptual mistakes that are at times almost laughable.
All feedback is welcomed. Have two or three specific things you could share? Everyone needs to get better.
@@TheNarrowbandChannel one example at 13:59 you are showing an input referred noise chart which is taken from photostophotos a website I collaborate a lot. The reason why you see that step at ISO 1000 is because dual conversion gain is now kicking in at 1000 instead of 2000 as in the other models in the chart. That graph does not have anything to do with dynamic range. If you click on that website on the data series you will see that at ISO 1000 the OM-1 EDR (engineering dynamic range not to be confused with photographic dynamic range) is 11.2 Ev for the OM-1 while on the EM1MKIII is 10.5 Ev so the difference is 0.5 Ev. However when you look at dynamic range on that same website you see that the OM-1 is 7.73 Ev at 1000 and the EM1MKIII is 7.54 Ev so of the 0.5 Ev EDR noise has eaten 0.31 Ev. When you reach ISO 2000 which is when the EM1MKIII gain switches the two cameras are identical. So there is no gain it is just done differently besides Panasonic has dual conversion gain at ISO 1000 since years. Input referred noise graph measure noise in electrons from an extrapolation but dynamic range also needs saturation signal and the new sensor can take less light than the older one and clips sooner. This is just one of the many conceptual errors in this video. If you don't know perhaps ask who made the measurement to validate your conclusions before coming out with this stuff