PDA

View Full Version : practical photography review


Vokesie
5th January 2008, 06:47 PM
in this month PP mag pages 114-117 gives the E-3 a review, I quickly flipped to the Ratings pages where the Reviewer gave the following summery:

Pros: excellent weather sealing that easily keeps out dust and water, vari-angle LCD monitor built in IS and dust cleaning system.

Cons: 20% lower resolution than all the main competition. higher levels of noise on the results than rivals

overal verdict (out of 5)

Handling 5/5
Features 5/5
Ferformance 4/5
Image quality 3/5
Value for Money 4/5

Overal 4/5 "the E-3 is quitesimply the best Olympus D-SLR ever. A reliable camera for extreme situations"

Sounds ok but reading in to these results but there is one thing that they have written that annoys me

Why use 20% in stead of 2MP - cos it sounds more, therefore falsly implying a greater issue than there really is. these magazine really do now how to make something look an issue by playing around with the words

PeterD
5th January 2008, 07:36 PM
in this month PP mag pages 114-117 gives the E-3 a review, I quickly flipped to the Ratings pages where the Reviewer gave the following summery:

Pros: excellent weather sealing that easily keeps out dust and water, vari-angle LCD monitor built in IS and dust cleaning system.

Cons: 20% lower resolution than all the main competition. higher levels of noise on the results than rivals

overal verdict (out of 5)

Handling 5/5
Features 5/5
Ferformance 4/5
Image quality 3/5
Value for Money 4/5

Overal 4/5 "the E-3 is quitesimply the best Olympus D-SLR ever. A reliable camera for extreme situations"

Sounds ok but reading in to these results but there is one thing that they have written that annoys me

Why use 20% in stead of 2MP - cos it sounds more, therefore falsly implying a greater issue than there really is. these magazine really do now how to make something look an issue by playing around with the words

Hi Volksie

I think I would be a bit more worried if image quality 3/5 was due to the reduced resolution. The two do not necessarilly go hand in hand. Ask a E1 user. As for noise, it depends which type they complain of and under what conditions.

The rest of the results look very good to me though.

PeterD

Nick Temple-Fry
5th January 2008, 07:50 PM
[QUOTE=Vokesie;3789
Why use 20% in stead of 2MP - cos it sounds more, therefore falsly implying a greater issue than there really is. these magazine really do now how to make something look an issue by playing around with the words[/QUOTE]

And, if they are into counting pixels, why not say 16.7% lower resolution than...?

The others have 20% higher resolution than the E-3.

Anyway it's not the number of pixels, it's what you do with them that gives satisfaction.

Nick