Olympus E300 write speed test results

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Sat, 23 Apr 2005 21:47:15 +0200, Alfred Molon <alfredREMOVE_molon@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>http://myolympus.org/E300/writetime/
>
>This camera tops out at over 9 MB/s, meaning that it is the camera
>with the highest write speeds currently on the market. No other camera
>comes even close, not even the fastest DLSRs. Note: this write speed is
>only possible the fastest memory cards currently on the market.
>
>Thanks to all those who performed the test and contributed the results.

So we are happy about the E300. Well I am not. For a test I took some pictures
of the school across the road. It is laid out with 100 meters of lawn in front.
Due to vandals we now have a wire fence around the school.

I was not happy about the test picture I took as I expected the fence to look
good and well focussed.

The E300 was set up on a sturdy manfrotto tripod and I used the 2 second delay
to trigger the exposure. When I saw how bad the pictures were, I took handheld
pictures with the Canon S1 and the Olympus 2100UZ and all 3 pictures went
through a similar crop in Photoshop.

I have placed the pictures on http://members.ii.net/~borge/compare. The names do
indicate the camera the pictures come from. Lens used on the E300 was the 14-45
and all pictures were set up to give the same coverage before cropping.

I have checked the noise reduction and everything else I could think about but
it seems that the E300 is not even as good as the 2100UZ.

The camera will eventually go back to the manufacturers as I expected quite a
lot more for my money.

Sorry about the quality of the website. For people interested, you click the
picture to display and right click to save as......
Pictures have been restricted to a max of 70Kb as that is sufficient to display
lens quality. The Oly E300 obviously being the larger picture.

B.Pedersen Latitude -31,48.21 Longitude115,47.40 Time=GMT+8.00
If you are curious look here http://www.mapquest.com/maps/latlong.adp

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

nesredep egrob wrote:
> On Sat, 23 Apr 2005 21:47:15 +0200, Alfred Molon <alfredREMOVE_molon@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>>http://myolympus.org/E300/writetime/
>>
>>This camera tops out at over 9 MB/s, meaning that it is the camera
>>with the highest write speeds currently on the market. No other camera
>>comes even close, not even the fastest DLSRs. Note: this write speed is
>>only possible the fastest memory cards currently on the market.
>>
>>Thanks to all those who performed the test and contributed the results.
>
>
> So we are happy about the E300. Well I am not. For a test I took some pictures
> of the school across the road. It is laid out with 100 meters of lawn in front.
> Due to vandals we now have a wire fence around the school.
>
> I was not happy about the test picture I took as I expected the fence to look
> good and well focussed.
>
> The E300 was set up on a sturdy manfrotto tripod and I used the 2 second delay
> to trigger the exposure. When I saw how bad the pictures were, I took handheld
> pictures with the Canon S1 and the Olympus 2100UZ and all 3 pictures went
> through a similar crop in Photoshop.
>
> I have placed the pictures on http://members.ii.net/~borge/compare. The names do
> indicate the camera the pictures come from. Lens used on the E300 was the 14-45
> and all pictures were set up to give the same coverage before cropping.
>
> I have checked the noise reduction and everything else I could think about but
> it seems that the E300 is not even as good as the 2100UZ.
>
> The camera will eventually go back to the manufacturers as I expected quite a
> lot more for my money.
>
> Sorry about the quality of the website. For people interested, you click the
> picture to display and right click to save as......
> Pictures have been restricted to a max of 70Kb as that is sufficient to display
> lens quality. The Oly E300 obviously being the larger picture.
>
> B.Pedersen Latitude -31,48.21 Longitude115,47.40 Time=GMT+8.00
> If you are curious look here http://www.mapquest.com/maps/latlong.adp
>

Looks to me like the E300 picture is just not focused properly.
There wasn't much in the center of the picture to focus on.
Everything was dark and had no contrast.
Try repeating the test using a well lighted subject with a lot of
contrast and detail.
I suspect your E300 will shine.
Bob Williams

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

nesredep egrob <Long. -31,48.21 Lat. 115,47.40> wrote:


>
> I fitted the 40-140 lens and took the same picture at the 40 setting. Not
> only do I see the fence post extremely sharp but in fact I see the fine
> fire between the posts. That was just done as a quickie, hand held with
> the same picture. That lens is marvellous and well beyond anything the
> 14-45 can do.

So it's not the camera but the lens.. Someone else posted they got a dud
14-45 so just return it for a replacement. I put the 14-45 on the shelf
after seeing what the 11-22 does! :-)


--

Stacey

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <aKJae.10460$u5.2433@newsfe2-gui.ntli.net>, Leonard says...

> It's a pity the Oly's RAW files are so large that this speed
> advantage doesn't translate into faster per-image speeds.

That's a holy mistery...

Even Dave Coffin who wrote the dcraw RAW converter acknowledges that the
E300 has only 12 bit/pixel.

12 bit/pixel x 8.3 MP = 11.9 MB and the E300 RAWs are 13.5MB. The files
are 1.6 MB larger than they should be. Even if we add a thumbnail, there
are still 1.58 MB which are unaccounted for.

Why on earth would Olympus inflate the size of their RAW files ? To make
the camera less competitive ?
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus 4040, 5050, 5060, 7070, 8080, E300 forum at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
Olympus E300 resource - http://myolympus.org/E300/