Thread: Has m43 finally lived up to the promise?

Originally Posted by krugorg

Interesting article.

Oh, and vanilla bean is the best kind of ice cream.

We can agree that the article was an interesting read. But while I appreciate the subtleties of a good vanilla bean ice cream, mint chocolate chip is the KING!

Originally Posted by Luke

We can agree that the article was an interesting read. But while I appreciate the subtleties of a good vanilla bean ice cream, mint chocolate chip is the KING!

When you're undeniably right, you're undeniably right! And you, sir, are, how-do-we-say?.....undeniably RIGHT!

Well, there goes the Rashomon Effect theory!

Two respondents here and my wife that like the same, and clearly inferior, ice cream flavor!

Kyle, to question one's spouse in regards to having good taste, first consider who she's spending the rest of her life with. My guess is you will soon be enjoying mint chocolate chip with a smile on your face.

The modern 6.8um family of Truesense CCD's list the key specs as:

Saturation Signal 60 K e-
Charge to Voltage Conversion 24 μV/e-
Quantum Efficiency (RGB) 37%, 43%, 36% (This is with the IR absorbing glass)
Read Noise (f=24 MHz) 16 e-

More real data sheets are here:

Full Frame CCD

Comparing with M9 with the M8, those numbers look believable. CCD's do not apply signal processing on the chip as CMOS detectors do. On the M8 and M9- noise reduction is done on the computer. Lightroom 3.x and later do a great job with noise reduction on the M9 and M8.

Looking at the numbers on the dx info site- I am guessing they are comparing RAW output from cameras. In this case, CMOS based cameras have already performed signal processing on the chip and the CCD based M8 and M9 have not. Otherwise, the QE numbers for the M9 should be closer to 90%, or the 60% numbers are for cameras without a color filter and without an IR filter.

Now this is a serious -and compact- monochrome CCD camera.

http://www.optcorp.com/product.aspx?pid=1116-17423

Uses C-Mount and Nikon mount lenses.

Originally Posted by Luke

Kyle, to question one's spouse in regards to having good taste, first consider who she's spending the rest of her life with. My guess is you will soon be enjoying mint chocolate chip with a smile on your face.

Originally Posted by Luke

We can agree that the article was an interesting read. But while I appreciate the subtleties of a good vanilla bean ice cream, mint chocolate chip is the KING!

Actually, there's vanilla ice cream, and then there is white lingerie and thigh high white leather boots vanilla ice cream. My kind of vanilla.

I can only imagine what YOUR mint chocolate chip is all about

I picked up the Olympus 45/1.8 the other day. Price isn't too bad at $330(out of Korea). It's an ugly little thing, but the glass sure isn't. Well, it's not ugly on it's own, but it sure does look naff when mounted on a black E-M5 or a GH1! Thankfully a hood toughens up it's looks a bit. I compare this and my PL 25/1.4 to the EF 50/1.4 USM and Sigma 30/1.4 HSM I had on my (APS-C) Canons and for a similar combined price I feel that I have come out well in front. Neither of those two lenses were anywhere near being sharp until stopped down, and the Sigma was never sharp around the edges.

Originally Posted by Luckypenguin

I picked up the Olympus 45/1.8 the other day. Price isn't too bad at $330(out of Korea). It's an ugly little thing, but the glass sure isn't. Well, it's not ugly on it's own, but it sure does look naff when mounted on a black E-M5 or a GH1! Thankfully a hood toughens up it's looks a bit. I compare this and my PL 25/1.4 to the EF 50/1.4 USM and Sigma 30/1.4 HSM I had on my (APS-C) Canons and for a similar combined price I feel that I have come out well in front. Neither of those two lenses were anywhere near being sharp until stopped down, and the Sigma was never sharp around the edges.

It isn't much to look at, huh? The little cosmetic ring is annoying also... seems to pop off pretty easily. Cracks me up still that Olympus doesn't include a hood or pouch, especially since they are made in China (mostly). Then you look at the image output and could care less!

I have started using the lens more on the E-M5, for non-portrait stuff, though, and I am finding that it tends to miss focus a decent amount. These are shots where there is a lot of contrast in the background, where it is reasonable to think that there any CDAF system could have an issue, but I am not seeing similar misses with the 12/2, 20/1.7 or 25/1.4.