PDA

View Full Version : E-420 Liveview in Action



tspore
03-25-2008, 09:21 PM
<p><a href="http://tspore.smugmug.com/gallery/4584183_HjtdZ/1/270306184_b6ngj#270595680_JDfRQ-A-LB" target="_blank"><img name="" src="http://tspore.smugmug.com/photos/270595680_JDfRQ-S.jpg" width="400" height="298" alt=""></a></p>
<p>(Click above to see the short video I made of liveview.) <br />
To see a diagram on how the different focusing modes work, make sure to check out our E-420 <a href="http://fourthirdsphoto.com/preview/e-420_05.php" target="_blank">preview</a>.<br />

I have uploaded a Flash version of the video because some people were having issues with old Quicktime codex or something. So I have added in flash the video within the preview (http://fourthirdsphoto.com/preview/e-420_05.php).

Steve
03-25-2008, 09:49 PM
On the positive side of LV autofocus - the camera just held off so you could get the peak action when the car crashed.

ckrueger
03-26-2008, 01:39 PM
HA! I love the action shot at the end! :D

AF speed in the contrast-detection mode seems to be about the same as your average P&S. Very neat; seems the E-420 will do double duty as the best P&S camera on the market.

tspore
03-26-2008, 03:35 PM
In case you could not see the Quick Time version I added a flash version within the preview of the E-420.
http://fourthirdsphoto.com/preview/e-420_05.php

Cheatwoodj
03-26-2008, 10:51 PM
I can see you doing a training course for the 420 in the future! :evilgrin::wink:
The P&S aspects of it are great if you wish to hand off the camera to someone for a group photo and such. Such a niffy little camera!

I hope we see a review of the "pancake" soon!

tspore
03-26-2008, 11:27 PM
Some thoughts about it are in the other thread around post 30.

Pitata
03-27-2008, 11:44 AM
How is the low light focusing in contrast vs normal?

tspore
03-27-2008, 01:40 PM
No matter what I would say that the Image sensor focusing mode is slower than through the AF sensor, in any light.
However, I would say that at f2.8, 2" exposure ISO 400 (Like a dim room, not pitch black) it still focuses slowly, but it does focus.

finemom
03-27-2008, 11:05 PM
So is live view on the 420 the same as live view A on the 330?

tspore
03-27-2008, 11:26 PM
no, basicaly someone else may explain it better, but Liveview A - Is basically like viewing through the viewfinder with 20% of the light from the viewfinder going to another sensor which displayed on the LCD.
The focusing camera off the main Auto Focus Sensor.
On the E-420 Contrast Detection actually focus' off the imaging sensor like a point and shoot camera.
The fastest focusing camera with Live view is still the E-330. However, the viewfinder on the E-330 was very dark and hard to use. The worst SLR camera of the system.

dmpbyrdwatcher
03-28-2008, 12:47 PM
Hi Tony,

that was interesting video and actually quite helpful for someone who is too bored to read all the posts to figure out what the three versions are.... so thanks for that, it was quick way to learn...

I'm wondering if you see much difference between LCD of E420 compared to LCD of E410? I have my fingers crossed that maybe the 'hypercrystal II' will actually let me use the monitor outdoors?

also, is there any difference between the viewfinders of those two models? diopter adjustments the same?

thanks,

tspore
03-28-2008, 01:46 PM
I am trying to figure out a way to display the differences between the 2 LCD's. Really it is a very nice LCD, very much improved.
I have been using it outdoors, and it works. Let me try to photograph it again. the first time it didn't photograph well at all.
The viewfinder seems to be about the same to me, and every time I grab it I have to get use to it. A bit crammed compared to the E-3.

dmpbyrdwatcher
03-28-2008, 03:09 PM
thanks, Tony...

great to hear the LCd is improved - that was my only real complaint about the E410....

well, the viewfinder too -- but that seems like obvious compromise to keep the size small and camera cheap - and mostly a good compromise for me....

tspore
03-28-2008, 03:29 PM
Well here is as good as I can simulated it with a polarizer.
Basically the E-420 is much easier to capture than the E-410.
http://43photo.smugmug.com/photos/271594095_8Txym-S.jpghttp://43photo.smugmug.com/photos/271594299_KXEUM-S.jpg

http://43photo.smugmug.com/photos/271594382_gHNEB-S.jpghttp://43photo.smugmug.com/photos/271594340_idcWY-S.jpg

In all the photos I am showing the best results I could get. The E-420 gave me a lot more head room to show the content of the LCD than the E-410 did. So it is a highly improved LCD.

dmpbyrdwatcher
03-28-2008, 05:00 PM
it's hard to imagine how the pictures translate into real life, although I do appreciate that you made the effort to show me...

mostly I'm just happy to hear that it is really an improvement....

ckrueger
03-29-2008, 07:45 AM
Looks like the glare coating has been improved nicely!


The viewfinder seems to be about the same to me, and every time I grab it I have to get use to it. A bit crammed compared to the E-3.

A good way I found to compare viewfinders--and you'll have to do this with nobody around lest you be committed--is to mount two equivalent lenses (same aperture and AOV) on each camera, and hold one up to either eye. Aim them so they overlay one corner, and you can see the size and image quality difference very graphically! Some interesting results (to me) were comparing my Four Thirds cameras and my Canon cameras that I could only really say in concrete terms when using this method:

The 5D blew everything away. Much bigger and brighter than the rest, and a nice crisp image. Manual focus is a dream! Only a few of my film SLRs are better.

The E-3 was the next-best. It was big and bright, and the image was very crisp. Adding the Nikon DK-21 the viewfinder was very nearly as large as the 5D, but took on a sickly haze and the eyepoint was poor.

The 40D was next-best. It was a bit smaller than the E-3, and the image wasn't quite as crisp. Brightness was good, however. It took the DK-21 a little better than the E-3, but eyepoint was still low enough to make shooting a pain.

The 350D was poor. Notably smaller and dimmer than the 40D. The image quality was decent, but it's small enough that manual focus is a chore unless you have a very bright or short DOF lens. The eyepoint is low enough that I don't like using the DK-21, especially considering the image quality gets pretty poor with it in use.

The E-410 was a bit worse than the 350D. The different aspect ratio means it's as tall as the 350D, but narrower. It's no brighter, and the image quality is about the same. The eyepoint is the real killer. It's sub-par on its own, and is unusable to me with the DK-21; my eyelid must be on the eyecup to see the entire frame without shading or vignetting. Extremely uncomfortable. The Katz Eye screen I bought barely improves the brightness, but the split-prism screen at least makes manual focus possible in good light.

Whoa, I just realized I went off on a huge digression! Sorry about that! :D

tspore
03-29-2008, 03:59 PM
Great tip, and what you are saying seems to be about what I would say.

tspore
04-03-2008, 11:03 PM
A couple more live view movies - Before they are recorded for real -

Liveview modes - as in display modes on the E-420
http://tspore.smugmug.com/photos/274474214_NfLWt-S.jpg (http://tspore.smugmug.com/gallery/4584183_HjtdZ#274474214_NfLWt-A-LB)


Here is a bit on Shadow Adjustment technology.
http://tspore.smugmug.com/photos/274474490_fZmt5-S.jpg (http://tspore.smugmug.com/gallery/4584183_HjtdZ#274474490_fZmt5-A-LB)

deep
04-04-2008, 12:44 AM
Looks like the glare coating has been improved nicely!



A good way I found to compare viewfinders--and you'll have to do this with nobody around lest you be committed--is to mount two equivalent lenses (same aperture and AOV) on each camera, and hold one up to either eye. Aim them so they overlay one corner, and you can see the size and image quality difference very graphically! Some interesting results (to me) were comparing my Four Thirds cameras and my Canon cameras that I could only really say in concrete terms when using this method: :D

I have done something similar with my Olympus bodies. The E300 viewfinder is clearly bigger and brighter than the E330 - yet many people seem to think the size is the same! The E3 is bigger again, though not as much bigger than the E300 as some may think. Both the E3 and E330 are sharper than the E300. Only the E3 is big/bright and sharp enough to use confidently with my old manual focus 300mm lens.

I am pretty sure the E500 finder is more the size of the E330, i.e. smaller than the E300. What I would like to know is: are the finders on the E410/420/510 series the size of the E330 or E300? Perhaps someone could do this little test and let us know? Thanks in advance,

Don.

tspore
04-04-2008, 03:16 AM
Really the worst viewfinder because its the darkest is the E-330, second the E-410/420, E-5xx, E-300, Next is the E-1, and finally the E-3 (20% larger than the E-1). At least in my opinion. But really it is a bit subjective. test. I need to figure out a way to measure it better. The reason why the E-330 is so bad is because you loose 20% of the light to the live-view A sensor.

So let me see if I can find a good way to photograph it, but that above is my opinion.

highker
04-30-2008, 07:11 PM
Hi all, just registered and just bought an E-420 today. Heads up that Circuit City stores have a sale this week of the E-420 with the 14-42mm, 40-150mm lenses, bag, extra Li-ion battery, and clear filter for $699.97. Decent price and no delayed gratification. Ooh, the battery's charged, off to take some pix.:evilgrin:

tspore
04-30-2008, 08:52 PM
Welcome to the site.

lendur2
05-01-2008, 07:32 AM
Tony, you're doing so much for us. I want you to know that I appreciate it.