Oly Printing

[Mr. Pickles]

This is just something I thought of after seeing one of TomH1000 (I think that is his name) prints in Landscapes. I am sure it has been discussed here and everywhere, usually in the negative, but that isn't my meaning.

Given that the 4/3 sensor is small, and that the pixel count is higher on the new models (vs the E-1), do you find the "quality" of a big print is less? I mean, a lot of people state the more pixels on a fixed size prosumer sensor, the more noise or CA you get because of the tigher packed photosites. Is that your experience with the 4/3 one too?

In actuality, do you print these images big or really big? maybe that is more for like PaulS who has the Canon 5D too. Do you think the Oly images can not be printed as big for fear of a bit less detail or quality?

[Paul Shields]

The 5mp E-1 prints fine on A4, but there is a noticable difference between this and the 13mp 5D. However, I've got some fantastic prints from the E-1 and it's really not an issue unless you really scrutinise the print. I found that A4s from the 7.5mp E-330 were pretty much identical to those from the E-1.

[tomh1000]

Originally Posted by Mr. Pickles

This is just something I thought of after seeing one of TomH1000 (I think that is his name) prints in Landscapes. I am sure it has been discussed here and everywhere, usually in the negative, but that isn't my meaning.

Given that the 4/3 sensor is small, and that the pixel count is higher on the new models (vs the E-1), do you find the "quality" of a big print is less? I mean, a lot of people state the more pixels on a fixed size prosumer sensor, the more noise or CA you get because of the tigher packed photosites. Is that your experience with the 4/3 one too?

In actuality, do you print these images big or really big? maybe that is more for like PaulS who has the Canon 5D too. Do you think the Oly images can not be printed as big for fear of a bit less detail or quality?

I have seen billboards printed with 3mp cameras. It is all a matter of perspective. If you look at any print with an eyeloop then of course you will find faults in any print. That being said, I print as large as 13x19 prints and have heard of others printing much larger. As far as noise goes, a well exposed image with the E-1 there is little noise and even less in after printing. I think the future of small sensors looks very good. I don't buy the fact that bigger means less noise. I think the next few years the smaller sensors will have as little noise as the larger ones, as far as the eye can see anyway. After all, isn't that what it's all about? What looks good to the eye, not some electronic device doing the measurement for you.

[Mr. Pickles]

I know, and lots of us on here know, that we can't look at them with an loupe and all that. I was just wondering if the 4/3 crowd would be really satisfied with their large prints, given that people like Canon seem to think that 10mp, on a bit larger sensor than the 4/3 one, is the new "norm".

I did take a Sigma SD9 or SD10 full size image (Foveon sensor - 3.3mp or 10mp, depending on your techie knowledge), and had my brother print it 13x19 ish (I forget the exact size), and it looked pretty good. I was impressed way back then.

I think the 6-8mp range is about all 80% of the people need. Only ones that need more are the ones printing huge, maybe for ads and the like, and those that can't "crop" with their camera and have to with the crop tool. So I really don't get the 13mp 5D size, and wondering how the Olys really fared, print-wise.

[Paul Shields]

OK, I did a *very* quick and dirty test. Cameras were the E-1 + 50mm f/2 macro lens, and the 5D + 100mm f/2.8 macro lens. In theory the Oly 50mm is equivalent to the Canon in size of image based on sensor size. The shots were converted in Silkypix using default RAW settings, and then converted in Photoshop, no adjustment on the original image apart from unsharp mask of 300% at 0.3 for the Canon and 250% at 0.3 for the Oly (my default sharpening). Normally I would do a lot more adjustments to levels and contrast so don't judge the image quality on these shots - I'm just trying to show the differences in detail.

I won't tell you which is which, but it should be quite clear (oh, and apologies for the subject matter - he's a wizened old owl when it comes to dad taking yet more shots ).

image 1


crop 1


image 2


crop 2



The difference in detail is quite significant I think, and I've found this is consistent with all shots I've taken with the two systems (the lighting wasn't very good on these, which has meant less detail than I would normally expect). When printing however (at least up to A4), a lot of this detail is less obvious from normal viewing distances - which I guess is answering Mr. P's initial question.

The other thing that I've found consistent is the quite radical differences in colour, particularly in skin tones. It's obviously a personal preference, and it can all be altered in post, but I do prefer the warmth from the Oly in this area (though I often tone it down just a touch).


btw - the settings for these were:

Canon: 1/60sec @ f/3.5 ISO 200
Oly: 1/160sec @ f/3.2 ISO 200