Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Shields
Not sure how accurate that review is. It says
'Another feature previously unavailable on Olympus' first live view DSLR, the E-330, was any form of enhanced framing aid. The E-410 offers several options, including this grid line display.'
I'm fairly sure the E-330 had a grid overlay, though my memory could be slipping.
Also, although it states that the LiveMOS sensor is superior to the Kodak sensor when it comes to noise - again from my own tests I'd say that the E-330 was marginally better than the E-1 in noise reduction.
|
It could be referring to this particular sensor. But personally I did find the e-330 was indeed superior. Keep in mind that the e-330 ISO rating like the Canon, runs higher than the rated number by about 1/3rd of a stop I think it is. ISO 1600 on the e-330 is actually ISO 2000 of the E-1.
Quote:
|
The E-400 is also marginally better. However, the depth of colour and detail on the Kodak CCD's always look better to my eye than the MOS variants.
|
Quite frankly I don't quite understand this. I think both sensors are pretty good. I have done RAW conversions from the e-300 and e-330 and both behave like their rated megapixels- the e-300 from raw in a little dot here or there may have one single pixel of extra data- what I would expect from 7.5 vs 8 megapixels.
I also found the dynamic range of the e-330 superior to the e-300's (though it was a marginal improvement).
Quote:
|
I think the E-410 is a bit of 'two steps forwards, one step back'. Live view is great, but no articulating screen needlessly cripples it. I'm sure the LiveMOS sensor is state of the art for what it is, but it's equivalent to an '8mp CCD' (quote from Olympus website).
|
I have read more than one interpretation on this, so I don't think it directly translates to an equivalent resolution 8 megapixels in interpretation.
Quote:
I suspect the 10mp CCD in the E-400 would out perform the E-410 in certain areas. Would be great if someone could do a real in-depth side by side report of the two. Shame Askey couldn't have done an E-400 report at least. I guess we'll never know (from an authoritative Internet source - where the truth is always out there...) just how good or bad that Kodak sensor really is  .
|
Given the noise I have seen the e-400 do, I wouldn't be surprised if the e-410 behaved better. I really think in the end more than the raw sensor depths and what nots, it's the jpeg algorithms the one that matter most, when looking at these.
The only thing I have truly seen the e-300 Kodak sensor has over my e-330 is that the e-330 can get some banding at high ISO's (not always).
- Raist