Jepp. An addition to the Olympus family of Micro four Thirds cameras. One of the most curious aspects is following: The noise difference between the 4 times smaller M43 sensors and a fullframe sensor, is often considered to be 2 stops**. This holds up well in practice, I have noticed. (albeit Topaz DeNoise AI can pretty easily nullify the difference between the sensors, making it look as if was taken with a full frame camera)...

DPreview's RAW test Studio scene published the other day (8 March 2022) shows that the difference in noise behaviour isn't showing any 2 stops better behaviour ! However, it is cleaner at really higher ISO. At low ISO the new sensor appears to show overall slightly sharper fine details. I guess, the "stop 2 better" is called marketing... (The jury is still out there, though).

Micro Four Third cameras are criminally undervalued. And I can only agree.

The new 20 MP BSI CMOS sensor in the Olympus OM-1, is considered to be 2 stops better**. So, I would say it is going to be very interesting - especially compared to let's say the Canon EOS R6 and it's fullframe 20 MP sensor.

From what I have seen in the RAW files of the Olympus OM-1 is, that the noise behavior is indeed finer, including in the high ISO files. Personally, I used to set the threshold for personal use at ISO 1600 with the Olympus E-M1 Mark II, and the Olympus E-M1X. If I needed "more" ISO, i would instead use longer exposure times. After all, Olympus PRO cameras have such effective stabilization - that it makes more sense to use a longer exposure times keeping the noise down, instead of using higher ISO's.


Noise isn't really an issue

And by the way. One way to get around the relative high noise, was for me to use handheld HIGH-RES mode in low light (Olympus EM1X). This gave me suddenly 3 stops finer noise "by default", when using this technique. And together with Topaz DeNoise AI, a ISO 1600 easily looks like ISO 100-200.

What is there not to love ?

Whether using an earlier Olympus camera like EM1 Mark II or EM1X, or the new OM-1 - with the right technique - you can easily make images look - as if ithey were made with a fullframe sensor camera. The difference however is, that a Micro Four Third system is really a lot much smaller in size - compared to fullframe camera equipment.




I am really lousy...

Because I write geeky fanclub wannabe "reviews"  about cameras and lenses... which are BORING.

I write bubbly, unfocused and in such a way which through my own perspective, is utterly boring. And yet, I also LOVE to write about it. It is almost as if I get excessive energy taking over, spilling over the brim, and i write and write (read: babble). About camera. Wishful thinking. Honeymoon tech dreams. "Oh I can do this and that, like wow".

Up like a cake. Down like a pancake ?

Here is the thing: I write in such a way, that it irks me to read my own text about cameras. It is totally boring. I avoid it like pestilence. Now what does that tell about me ? If I don't read it, why would somebody else do it ?


Impatience - while waiting for "it" ?

I believe that when I write like that, it symbolizes impatience; the typical eagerness that arises from when you ordered (or are about to) order an "awesome" camera or lens - which you think will be "sooo amazing". But it isn't delivered until 1-2 months. That's when the babble-writings about it, soar in my diary. It is mainly just excessive energy, spilling over. (some people even made their passion into a "profession", or let's say wannabe via Youtube, so called "Influencers"). Some are very good at it, and it convinces, does it not ? I would love to look behind the curtains, what really is going on. Or if they start to depend on income... how does it affect their "unbiased judgment" about the products they review ? I am sure that like an alcoholic, they think they are unbiased.

I know very few, who actually do an amazing job into reviewing photographical tools, with human respect and not much bias. Who also tell what they don't like.


I like to scrutinize myself from time to time

with a very blunt, raw and rather cynical mind. In which I take myself not really serious. Because deep down I often know myself. I do understand the multiple strings attached, when i for example buy a camera or a lens. It is not a black or white only thing.

Ultimately, i live this strange, funny, interesting personality called Ralf, in this lifetime - "as it is" - while I am also highly aware about the contradictions and underpinnings bobbing around in the mud, all that that makes Ralf in to Ralf, so to speak. While I live this life, I am also living the "third" observer part; seated back, without bias or judgment, watching in silence what Ralf is doing. We are both the same - but not exactly the same.

Kind a difficult to put in words. The closest thing I can come up with, would be to say that older people, know quite a deal about it. They know themselves a lot better, because they lived a long life - and know their dualities, the theory vs reality. And they often don't take themselves so serious.

Of course, only those who actually dare to look into the darker corners of their personality, understand this. Not everyone does that. I know plenty of people, who don't. Others, have a sort of "silent understanding" they radiate, a part in and about themselves, showing that they are able to "look behind their own persona".

That's what I mean with the presence of a "third observer", an unbiased, silent yet vigilant yet gentle observer over the Ego and the I. It is a part of oneself. But seem to be a higher, wiser and understanding part of oneself.

Boy have I drifted off now...

From Olympus OM-1 camera, into "third observer" from within.


- 38 -