Explaining the OM-1 sensor...

[Siegfried]

Hi guys

I did a new kind of article by adding a video this time. I noticed there are a lot of questions and incorrect info about the new OM-1 sensor. I received great mail feedback on the video. I trust this article will be of value to you.

Best

Siegfried

https://myolympusomd.blogspot.com/

[Rob Trek]

Thanks, Siegfried!

[Lysippus]

Very interesting articles Siegfried, and I appreciate the nuances of the discussion therein. Great job.

Just an aside, and nothing to do with your excellent discussion; wouldn't be great if someone could develop a camera format comparison parametric such as - 'cost per pixel photon collection segregation refinement ratio, (with applied encapsulation volume rectifier goodness factor coefficient') including the quasi CFD analysis of ambient light flow around a FF sensor at -273 Deg C, at ISO 250,000, verses the cost per pixel photon collection segregation refinement ratio, (with applied encapsulation volume rectifier goodness factor coefficient') including the quasi CFD analysis of ambient light flow around a MFT sensor at -273 Deg C, at ISO 250,000', in order to give us a real life indication of the level of benefit in performance of FF over MFT. We would all be a lot wiser and be sure of taking great pictures with the best format.

[Rob Trek]

Let's not get carried away!

[Lysippus]

Rob guilty as charged. The new OM-1 sensor will eating the FF lunch, and FF proponents know it. As many more photographers choose to swap from FF to MFT, the old FF shibboleths will become more unsustainable. Again, great post Siegfried.

[Siegfried]

Wow Lysippus, it will take me a while to decipher your suggestions. But thank you for your feedback. My video is receiving good feedback and it seems to benefit everyone. I was hoping that would happen...

What do you think of the new Cross Quad Pixel AF on the OM-1 BSI sensor and how will it benefit the OM-1 in relation to the much older Dual Pixel AF used with Canon CMOS sensors?

[DeMorcan]

I read an interesting article about why m43 is best for low light photography (compared to full frame). It was very technical but matches my experiences. I live like entertainment at blues bars. I have gone with various people in the camera club and used many cameras. In those lighting conditions dynamic range of the camera does not matter. There are no highlights worry about and few to no blacks. A shutter speed to capture the musicians playing is mostly fixed. The dof to get the whole subject in focus is mostly fixed. The ISO is 2 stops lower with m43. And because the m43 has less dynamic range, it uses more of it giving more contrast than full frame. I think the OM1 & the way it pulls shadows would really enhance this. 2 bands that have a photographer have changed to Om43 after comparing their photos with mine. The only camera I used which outperformed the EM1III was the an X1D (not II). Just waiting until I can borrow an OM1 one night.

[Siegfried]

Good to see your reply, I trust you are doing well Sir? Reading your post why not simply use a Go Pro or your mobile phone? That said, the OM-1 like the XT4 should give better results than the EM1 III... (the key is to get enought light onto the sensor)

Think about it, photographers have two choices, get the bigger one or start learning more about the image sensor...

Reviewing the interest in my articles, we see photographers want to know more about the 2nd option

The question is, how do we correct 10+ years of giving photographers only one option - go bigger?

Best

Siegfried

[DeMorcan]

The Go Pro and phone do not have the image quality or speed to capture a guitar players fingers or drumsticks for still photos. Large apertures do not have dof to capture the drumsticks and the drummers face. M43 is ideal.