Under the sky by Blazouf from blazouf (Astro timelapse with OM-D)
BMPCC C-Mount Test Field of View on Youtube.
GX7 review by Ericcote.net.
GX1 vs. GX7 (and GF1 as well) image quality, mainly high ISO performance (Tysonrobichaudphotography).
Lumix 35-100mm f/2.8 (Bestmirrorlesscameras).
OM to Pentax 645D adpater at DC.watch.
Photo Ninja and Lightroom Integration (OutBackPhoto).
Kornel Lehocz: “I’m the developer of the Scarab Darkroom raw converter, which I think is fairly popular among Olympus users. I’d like to send you news about the availability of Scarab Darkroom 2.0 and 2.0 Lite. (In fact already 2.02 after 2 quick bugfixes.)
I’ve pasted the press release at the end of this message, but you can find the properly formatted press release, and other material at
http://www.scarablabs.com/press
and more information on the product’s page and the About section of the site.
If you have any questions, feel free to contact me!”
—–
Press Text: Scarab Darkroom 2.0 released
Scarab Labs has released the new version of its popular raw conversion software.
Zadar, Croatia, October 7th, 2013: Scarab Labs has released Scarab Darkroom 2.0 – the advanced version of its fast and easy-to-use digital camera raw converter for Windows. Compared to the earlier free versions, it also contains a number of new features like noise filtering, chromatic aberration correction, split toning, Adobe RGB color space support, and more… The software is now available for purchase on the Scarab Labs website for $49. The free variant is still available, and has been renamed to Scarab Darkroom Lite. The program supports most raw-capable cameras from Canon, Nikon, Olympus, Panasonic, Pentax, Samsung, and Sony.
About Scarab Labs:
Scarab Labs was founded in 2008 by ex-game programmer Kornél Lehőcz to follow his passion and create software for the photographic imaging industry. Scarab Labs’s other currently available product is a star filter plug-in for Adobe After Effects and Photoshop. For more information please visit the Scarab Labs website!
—–
47 Responses
This new Panasonic sensor has a more organic feel than the one from Sony, after looking at some pics from different reviews, noise really look more filme like than the ones from the cameras using Sony micro4/3 sensor. I’m really liking the GX7, it doesn’t have the magical 5-axis IBIS from Olympus but if they can manage to make the IBIS work in video mode, that’s it for me. I’d rather have a GX7 with beter video and video options and a normal IBIS than the steadicam-like IBIS but not many options for video.
Olympus said that in the future – whenever “the future” is – they are going to improve the video because they know – and probably knew it for a long time – that consumers want it. But I think that Panasonic will get better at IBIS faster than Olympus will get things right with video. We’ll see.
First and foremost, Olympus cameras are designed what they really are, a still camera. Many photographers are still that, photographers. If they want to make videos, get a true video camera.
Or a Panasonic.
You seem to be quoting the Olympus travelling man Mr Terada. That’s what he said. For the same reason. Or, did you miss it?
since the GH 2/3 are used for serious filmmaking, I consider those “true” videocameras too.
Look, if you just want to take pictures, take pictures, if you don’t want to use video, don’t use it! It’s so simple, why bother if there are people that like to take pictures and make video? Is that making your personal camera worse or something? No? So f*** off!
I don’t get why people think that everybody has to think just like them otherwise they are “wrong”. So narrow minded, so stupid, but this is the Internet, right?
I didn’t know that wishing to Olympus to add more video framerate options was some kind of heresy or something. If Olympus was thinking just like you, why would they go as far as adding IBIS in video via firmware or adding mic imput? And if they did all of that, not adding more framerates is actually the part that is missing.
Everybody knows and no one expects Olympus to become a video camera, the point is that Olympus is missing a great oportunity for something as little as framerate options. If Panasonic catches up in the IBIS department, this oportunity will be gone. And after all the issues and the consequences from the scandal, I think that it wouldn’t hurt to sell a whole lot more cameras, would it?
Wouldn’t selling more cameras help Olympus consolidate even more in the market so they can have a healthy brand so stupid guys like you can keep buying it? So in the end, you are so narrow minded that can’t see beyond your nose.
Do you think that selling those extra camera would help Olympus or would it hurt Olympus? And what about NOT selling those extra cameras because – they think like you and – they decided that adding more framerates was not worth making more money and that people that want those options should buy a video camera? Wow, it makes so much sense, why would they evem care, right?
“I’ll live in my own world because I’m the only one that matters in the whole Universe” said a teenager
If the camera had NO video capability it would cost a LOT less! 🙂
And sell a LOT less.
… and ’cause it is sold less, it will cost MORE 😉
If you want to shoot video you could just buy a video camera…it would do a lot more of what you need it to do…and do it better.
My 2 years old 250 euro compact does a lot more what I want when it comes to video.
That isn’t asking for anything ‘advanced’, its merely asking for the simple basics to be covered, like nearly every other camera on the market does.
You did get my argument to a degree of 0%.
I wasn’t talking about an ideal world, but real world market economy and reciprocal processes in this system concerning price etc.
Sometimes it makes (the R&D of) a product cheaper when it has MORE features, not less (appealing to more customers, publicity/advertising, unrational behaviour of participants of the market (=customers ;)), shared price for marketing/shipping/etc. for a product which would have to be marketet twice if split into two products, one service pipeline, ……..).
But anyway. I just stated the simple economic fact, that your argument “Cam would be cheaper if it had no video” is simply wrong in this world 😉
For still photography my personal feeling is that the Olympus files, Raw and jpeg, look better than Panasonic files. I guess I just prefer the rendering of that sensor.
It is so wonderful to not care about video!!!! LOL!
no raw from oly seem simple because they had rich process to jpg
look back GX7 vs EM5/EM1
may you prefer and always use olympus ,that i am not pity you,
simple like your fall in oly then others cam it worse than your camera 😉
LOL…YOUR COMMENT IS A JUMBLE OF SENSELESSNESS…GOOD JOB,
any of you uses Scarab raw convertor? Any opinion? Its 50% cheaper than lightroom…so I am gonna try the lite version
I just installed and tried the demo version. It seems to give a crisp conversion. It has a nice colour range for hue, sat and lum but the lables or the slides are muddled between satyration and hue. Not a good start. I also found that I did not know what it was doing as there was no indication, that I could see, of the file being updated or being saved (please point out if you find it). It froze on me twice, but that may have been because I had one of the adjustment windows open (in use?). Also there are undo arrows but no reset for each individual adjustment section nor an overall reset. There is also no turn on or off for the adjustment sections. Sharp yes. usable for me, I think not. I will stay with ACDsee6 as my RAW converter and initial tuneup to TIFF
If any one thinks I have not looked around enough or been unfair please point things out.
Oh! I saw no selective adjustment via brush or mask. But it’s sharp enough.
wow ,.look at this size comparison between Pana 35-100 >< Olympus 40-150 prototype
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=afSjAVM8wBU#t=123
Wow! More than twice as big even without OIS. It had better be superior in image quality.
but its 150 vs 100mm…mhhh
That, or just get the Panasonic 35-100!
Honestly, a lens that size, you’re better off shooting FF DSLR!
Olympus wants to return to 43 and go out of business. What a joke of a M43 lens.. I don’t care how well built it is, how sharp, it’s TOO BIG.
Looks like it’s internally focused. Doesn’t the Panny extend?
And its much smaller. That’s some great tech for a lens so small. And it has OIS.
Just wondering, did you actually play the video and look at the comparison? Because the initial view is of the 12-40 and 40-150, and NOT of the 35-100
He clearly put both side by side… The E-M1 and new lenses show that Olympus wants to return to Four Thirds..
It’s also a joke that it can’t compare to the GH3 in video.
Big, for nothing.
I’d think the answer to your question is already in the post you replied to, but seemingly reading is a bit difficult for you.
Oh, and the only thing here that is ‘big for nothing’ is your mouth.
with these non Oly and Panasonic video cameras coming out with M43 mounts (BM and Bolex) it will be interesting to see if these larger Olympus lenses have less distortion and CA as it won’t be corrected in camera.
It’s becoming even more interesting what to buy for GX7. Pana or Oly lens. Hell, I have no idea. I look forward to see how GX7 works with 40-150 lens, and pricing.
didn’t he made that killer shot with the ZD 300mm few weeks ago? It seems this 40-150 has a constant size,and the lumix not?
Lumix also has internal zooming (constant size).
Hence, about 50% longer and somewhat bigger diameter would have been perfectly fine for the Oly (because it is 150mm vs 100mm at the long end).
However, twice the lenght for the Oly is a disappointment, even if IQ could be a bit better (35-100mm is already good enough).
i didnt know the lumix is constant size..amazing.
But Olympus will have without doubt a good reason for using a double size.
I mean, a 2.8 zoom with a fov similar to a 24×36 80-300mm, how much can you expect
it to be smaller than this?
Holy moley that thing is big! Like, 135 format big!
Doubtless, there’ll be a stampede of buyers… of other lenses.
WTF is Oly thinking? Isn’t it MICRO Four Thirds?
Please compare to high-quality FF 80-300mm f/2.8….then check back with me. 🙂
ummm that time lapse is embarrassing, the noise in the night sky is terrible. Sorry for who ever did it, nice try, but either change your ISO or use some NR.
Its only the tomcat peeing on the lens. Smelly stuff sticks to everything.
Hello. I’m the creator of the timelapse.
You’re right. Too much noise. I have to find a good plugin for noise reduction.
Blazouf, despite that “embarrissing” noise, the time-lapse was an impressive view, content-wise.
Wow I think you’re being a bit harsh calling it embarrassing Ulli
i didn’t, i use the quotes saying i find the word exaggerated.
I don’t do time lapse. But is it possible to set the camera to use the inbuilt noise reduction (the shot with the shutter closed after the exposure) and control the number of shots taken by a uc-1 connected type controller with the required time lapse functions.
Neat Video is your friend, also care to share the technical details of your work?
@ Scarab
No OSX…
FAIL.
hmmm oly hope you improve on the 40-150, else my 50-200 is almost as big…
it seems they use a fixed size barrel, very common in effective sealed zooms. That 50-200 is sealed but has more potential to leak. And if you zoom to 200, its erection will make the 40-150 less impressive. But i understand that for some people mft lenses should stay small.
Nice job on the time lapse, regardless of the noise, there Blazeout.
Oly has lost their way and only the blind can’t see that. I saw it eight or so years ago and moved on, those that remain, are in denial. Look at the size of the 12-40, I think it’s bigger than the 35-100 and it extends. I figured their lenses should be smaller with the old 4/3 and now they are right back at it again big lenses/big cameras and small sensor. Panasonic gets it, Oly is just oblivious.