- Messages
- 984
- Name
- John
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Are there any circumstances where an Olympus E3 might out-perform a Nikon D3 in terms of image quality? My first reaction to this idle thought was, No, surely not, but then.......take this scenario:-
Two aspiring wildlife photographers, One the owner of a D3, the other an E3, need the longest reach lens they can get for less than £1000 and both settle on a Sigma Bigma. It has, of course, a maximum focal length of 500mm regardless of which camera it is used on. However, the Nikon is full frame and hence has no crop factor whereas the Olympus has a x2 crop factor that creates an angle of view equivalent to a 1000mm lens on full frame.
Now it just so happens that both photographers have a particular interest in wild birds and need every millimetre of focal length they can muster, ideally at least 1000mm or equivalent. The E3 owner shoots away happily, filling the frame with his subject and producing detailed 10MP images that require no cropping. The D3 owner gets the same images, except that the subject is much smaller in relation to the size of the frame and the crop needed to match the E3 magnification results in 3MP (yes, 3MP) images. Now I've no doubt that they will be very high quality 3MP files, but can they really match the 10MP files from the E3?
Of course, the Nikon owner can always add a x2 converter to match the effective focal length of the Bigma on the E3, but his lens will now have a maximum aperture of around f13. The light levels are quite low and the Olympus owner is shooting 1/250 sec @f6.3, ISO 400. he is comfortable using that comparatively slow shutter speed on such a long lens thanks to in-body IS. The Nikon owner can thankfully crank the ISO right up by virtue of the superb noise control of the D3. Without the benefit of IS, he is wisely shooting 1/1000 sec @f13 with the ISO set at 6400.
Thankfully, the brilliant sensor of the D3 is quite capable of supporting ISO of this magnitude but is this situation getting to the stage where the seemingly inferior E3 has the edge? Don't forget the Bigma is now attached to a x2 converter and even the best of these is bound to degrade IQ slightly, especially when shooting wide open.
The sky darkens and the EV drops another two stops. The Olympus owner wisely won't go slower than 1/125 sec for fear of subject movement, meaning he has to step up to ISO 800 at which the E3 still performs surprisingly well despite the negative press it has received for high ISO performance. Meanwhile, the Nikon owner is forced to make rather more serious compromises. It's not ideal without IS, but he drops his shutter speed to 1/500 sec and cranks up the ISO to 12800. Now it's truly amazing that the D3 can produce an image at all at this sensitivity, but can it really compare to the E3 which is still cruising at ISO 800?
Food for thought?
Two aspiring wildlife photographers, One the owner of a D3, the other an E3, need the longest reach lens they can get for less than £1000 and both settle on a Sigma Bigma. It has, of course, a maximum focal length of 500mm regardless of which camera it is used on. However, the Nikon is full frame and hence has no crop factor whereas the Olympus has a x2 crop factor that creates an angle of view equivalent to a 1000mm lens on full frame.
Now it just so happens that both photographers have a particular interest in wild birds and need every millimetre of focal length they can muster, ideally at least 1000mm or equivalent. The E3 owner shoots away happily, filling the frame with his subject and producing detailed 10MP images that require no cropping. The D3 owner gets the same images, except that the subject is much smaller in relation to the size of the frame and the crop needed to match the E3 magnification results in 3MP (yes, 3MP) images. Now I've no doubt that they will be very high quality 3MP files, but can they really match the 10MP files from the E3?
Of course, the Nikon owner can always add a x2 converter to match the effective focal length of the Bigma on the E3, but his lens will now have a maximum aperture of around f13. The light levels are quite low and the Olympus owner is shooting 1/250 sec @f6.3, ISO 400. he is comfortable using that comparatively slow shutter speed on such a long lens thanks to in-body IS. The Nikon owner can thankfully crank the ISO right up by virtue of the superb noise control of the D3. Without the benefit of IS, he is wisely shooting 1/1000 sec @f13 with the ISO set at 6400.
Thankfully, the brilliant sensor of the D3 is quite capable of supporting ISO of this magnitude but is this situation getting to the stage where the seemingly inferior E3 has the edge? Don't forget the Bigma is now attached to a x2 converter and even the best of these is bound to degrade IQ slightly, especially when shooting wide open.
The sky darkens and the EV drops another two stops. The Olympus owner wisely won't go slower than 1/125 sec for fear of subject movement, meaning he has to step up to ISO 800 at which the E3 still performs surprisingly well despite the negative press it has received for high ISO performance. Meanwhile, the Nikon owner is forced to make rather more serious compromises. It's not ideal without IS, but he drops his shutter speed to 1/500 sec and cranks up the ISO to 12800. Now it's truly amazing that the D3 can produce an image at all at this sensitivity, but can it really compare to the E3 which is still cruising at ISO 800?
Food for thought?