View Single Post
  #3  
Old 16th September 2009
Graham_of_Rainham's Avatar
Graham_of_Rainham Graham_of_Rainham is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Rainham
Posts: 8,190
Thanks: 647
Thanked 945 Times in 733 Posts
Likes: 2,298
Liked 1,605 Times in 927 Posts
Re: Where is the improved E-P1 noise performance?

I have expressed my opinion on this "High ISO" noise issue several times and still see the comparisons that many magazines do as being specifically aimed at promoting one brand over another.

Here however the question is one of improvement of a systems performance as the technology has developed, which is a valid and worthwhile question.

However: I would really like to see some reproducible results along side the anecdotal evidence that results from user trials.

All too often we see comparative images that are produced in less than ideal conditions, with variable lighting, offered as examples. What is needed is an industry agreed standard target, used in controlled conditions so that the results are reproducible.

Many of us older folk will remember the AP "Center & Edge tests" featuring the bow of a boat anchored on the Thames. The images were quite variable depending on the weather, but they were used to show a specific feature of lens performance, and had a level of standardisation that we all understood. While I'm not advocating going back to that level of testing, we do need something that is consistently recognisable and can be easily reproduced to provide good quality results.

We all know that the image itself can influence the performance, and that all the various elements of the production process affect the outcome, so unless we have some "standard test" to reduce the variables to a minimum, we really are into a fruit salad, let alone an apples & pears comparison.

__________________
Graham

We often repeat the mistakes we most enjoy...

Last edited by Graham_of_Rainham; 16th September 2009 at 11:38 AM. Reason: speelin
Reply With Quote