June 30th, 2012, 08:12 PM
|
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ned
My point is, the E-M5 shoots RAW as well and benefits from RAW just the same as the 60D. Bringing up the difference between RAW and JPG is pointless, as it applies the same to both cameras. If the 60D is better in RAW under your personal processing prowess, then so is the E-M5. If we compare JPG to JPG, then the handicap is the SAME on both sides. Unless you think the E-M5's S.O.O.C. JPG processing engine is so great that it surpasses any manual RAW processing... but I doubt that's where you're going with this, is it? So unless you think that Olympus has now made JPG more powerful than RAW, then there should be no issue with posting a like-to-like comparison. The fact that (both) cameras were shot in JPG for the test isn't a valid reason to discount the results.
|
I get your point really. And I will agree with you..only if you put "in theory" in there. The em-5 uses a newer processor and a newer jpeg processing engine. It is also well documented that Olympus uses a more aggressive sharpening and noise reduction on their jpegs. Canon on the other hand, and the 60d in particular, uses at least, a two year old jpeg algorithm. And no matter what you say, it doesn't explain why I'm getting similar results with my em-5 and 60d in raw. Maybe it's the subjects that I shoot, the way I shoot, and the way I process my files. But based on my experience, in actual use, image quality should be the last of the OP's worries when comparing the em-5 and 60d. Differences in ergonomics, focusing, and lens availability is what she should focus on.
*And just to add, the 60d actually has better jpegs than the 7d. Exact same sensor, different processing engine, exactly the same files in raw.
__________________
Current Gear: EM-5 | E-PM1 | 14-150mm | 20mm f1.7 | Rokinon 7.5mm f3.5 | Fujian 35mm f1.7
For Sale: 14-42mm R, $90 gifted/shipped
Last edited by bongestrella; June 30th, 2012 at 08:34 PM.
|
1Thanks
