Do you trust social media influencers repeating "bigger is better" lines while reviewing and expressing opinions about OM System and Olympus cameras? Why is "sensor size" not a variable in the exposure formula? Why do full-frame advocates make us believe full-frame sensors capture more light? Does the "more light commercial theory" undermine our ability to manage the performance of the sensor? What do image sensors need to capture the picture? How do we manage the sensor's performance? Sensor performance is linked to the exposure formula and the reflected light reaching the sensor. Do we or the size of the sensor determine how much light is reaching and exposing the sensor?
Why did Olympus sell an innovative and promising imaging business?
PS. If you didn't know it's possible to manage your sensor's performance..., ask why?
This is a handheld photo with no focus stacking and an aperture of f6.3...
These images illustrate key benefits of the digital MFT sensor format and the Olympus and OM System digital imaging process. I converted and prepared these images in OM Workspace. Imagine using your camera's TruePic imaging processor to convert and edit your raw files in Workspace.
Which camera and lens did I use?
Consider the most hated MFT lens, receiving constant negative feedback on social media. Why would they hate this lens so much? Start by listing the MFT lenses with the most negative feedback...
I used the 4/3rds aspect ratio for both the landscape and portrait version...
Why do FF advocates promote sensor size, or large sensors "capturing more light," in 2026? One of the reasons marketers created the "bigger is better" theory was the physical size of full-frame DSLRs and lenses. They needed a competitive alternative for the commercial success Olympus enjoyed with the size/weight benefit of MFT cameras and the innovative OM-D E-M5 and E-M1 from 2012/13.
Some of the sales lines were background blur or the shallow depth-of-field (DOF) of full-frame sensors and the promise that full-frame cameras have less noise and more dynamic range. Depth of field is an optical characteristic linked to the size of the sensor, and noise and dynamic range are technical efficiencies linked to the design criteria, manufacture, and materials used in the sensor.
Instead of focusing on accurate information, marketers doubled down on the "bigger is better" theory with questionable marketing techniques like repetition and astroturfing. For example, they pushed portrait photography when they saw the benefits MFT cameras offered in wider DOF applications. The "capture more light" theory was created to explain less noise and more dynamic range.
PS. Study the photons to electrons graph for more on sensor saturation (dynamic range) and SNR (noise).
I used exposure, iEnhanced options, and tonal controls to "develop" these photos...
How do I study marketing trends and the digital imaging process of Olympus and OM System cameras? I have an engineering and marketing background, which helps me to follow marketing trends and keep only those technical points relevant to digital photography. In the past I followed and discussed my thoughts on photography forums. Today I follow technical and marketing trends with AI. Finally, I use basic engineering principles to study and explain digital cameras and the digital imaging process. The key is to present only the information that could benefit digital photographers.
Study this article and this article for more on noise and dynamic range...
PS. I used the OM System OM-5 with the amazing and tiny Olympus M.Zuiko 9-18mm f4-5.6 lens.
My thoughts wandered to the E-3 from Olympus while preparing a reference guide for my Kodak film simulations. Being from South Africa, I have a close connection to typical African colors. For example, I make an effort to visit the places that shaped my color awareness when I am with family and friends in South Africa. My childhood experience with Africa's nature and wildlife reserves, combined with the refined "Kodak" image processing of the E-3, shaped my digital color preferences. Do you experience a similar connection to the colors found in the country or region you call home? For instance, I always associate Switzerland with snow, flowers, happy colors, and deep blue skies. That said, I'm aware that the E-3 has a Live MOS sensor and not the "Kodak" CCD sensor of cameras like the E-500.
The Olympus E-3 with the Zuiko 50-200 mm f/2.8-3.5 lens. I converted the RAW+ file in Workspace.
I recall experiencing exposure problems when I first took the E-3 to South Africa. I couldn't find the reason and filed the incident as unsolved. It felt strange to discover the cause so many years later in Workspace. Olympus introduced the gradation AUTO option with the E-3. It seems like I used the new option without resetting it. Having owned several versions of Photoshop Elements, I couldn't verify my camera settings as we do with the RAW+ format and Workspace. Everything changed when I set the gradation to "normal" 15 years later. See the portrait, wildlife, and Monaco samples below.
Subsequently, I converted more RAW files from other Olympus DSLRs. In most cases, the results were noteworthy after changing settings like picture mode, sharpness, noise filter, color space, and gamma adjustments like curves & gradation. I also discovered several exposure-related mistakes I made in the past. Imagine tweaking and updating your camera settings 15+ years later.
PS. The TruePic processor and image processing became one of Olympus' most critical technologies...
The posted photos are from the Olympus E-3, the 50-200 mm f/2.8-3.5, the 14-54 mm f/2.8-3.5, and the 25 mm f/2.8 lenses. My RAW+ files from 2009/10 were converted and edited in Workspace. My E3 image look and my Kodak guide represent my color preferences. For instance, I adjusted the exposure and tonal values and left the colors as is for the images I posted. I'd like to invite you to practice your color awareness as you do with framing your scenes. Lean on familiar colors as you develop your color preferences. For example, would you add cyan to blue skies, desaturate the greens, or do any specific color changes? I think we will spend more time on color specifics in 2026.
PS. Some of my Monaco photos were taken with the Zuiko 70-300 mm f/4.5-5.6 lens.
E-3 with the Zuiko 50-200 mm f/2.8-3.5 lens. RAW+ converted & edited in Workspace.
Olympus cameras and Workspace never stopped surprising me. I like to keep my photography simple, which is what Olympus did with their cameras and Workspace. It's a process of basic photography and image editing principles, which enable us to have great results with 10MP or 20MP cameras. Imagine the possibilities when we add experience to the mix. What would your advice be if you could highlight one aspect of digital photography? My advice would be to step away from social media influencers and free your digital photography experience from unnecessary advertising and repetition. Imagine having only one camera like the Olympus E-3, E-500, or E-30 with Zuiko lenses and Workspace...
Olympus E-500 with the Zuiko 18-180mm f/3.5-6.3 lens. ISO100, f/6.3, 1/250. RAW+ converted/edited in Workspace.
Folks, consider having cameras like the E-3 or E-500 in 2010 and editing your camera settings in 2026. The strategic future of the Olympus partnership with Kodak and cameras like the OM-3 becomes clear with the tonal and color controls we see from products like the OM-3 and Workspace. The OM-3 is not just another camera; it looks more like the ultimate image plus Kodak color solution.
PS: The images in this article are best viewed on a large PC display such as the iMac 27"
Something special about the colors in these images...
Monaco - here are a few more Olympus E-3 photos
I am more comfortable photographing in the southern parts of Europe.
.jpg)
