Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 18
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    1,852
    Real Name
    Muttley


    Default OMD studio photos in DPReview - AWESOME


    I've got one word to describe the OMD samples --- WOW!!!

    The OMD JPG and RAW studio samples are now up in the DPReview's database.

    I've been looking at the RAW samples at ISO6400, comparing the OMD to the GX1, GH2, NEX-5n, Pentax K-5 and Nikon D7000. The last three cameras are presumably some of the better APS-C cameras, using the same 16mp Sony sensor. Can't compare with the XPro1 yet, because it's not in DPReview's database.

    To my eyes, the OMD's RAW files, yes RAW files, are better than the GX1, GH2 and NEX-5n. The NEX-5n might be a tad better on the red channel. The OMD is very close to the D7000, and only slightly behind the K-5 (which applies noise reduction to the RAW files).

    Use the following link to the comparometer in the GX1's review, and use the pull down menu to choose Olympus OMD EM5. If you weren't impressed with what we've been seeing before, I think you will be impressed now!!

    Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX1 Review: Digital Photography Review

    I think m4/3 may have caught up with APS-C now. Whereas the GH2, G3, GX1 are arguably one stop behind in terms of noise control at high ISO, the OMD's sensor seems to be on par now.
    Last edited by Armanius; April 22nd, 2012 at 12:23 AM.
    OMD EM5, EM1
    12/2 14/2.5 20/1.7 25/1.4 75/1.8 14-150 45-150
    My FlickR!


  2. The following 5 members thank Armanius for this post:



  3. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    NYC Area
    Posts
    815
    Real Name
    Napier Lopez


    Default

    The studio samples have been there for a while, but I agree. People seemed so shocked at reports that the OM-D was matching or beating the NEX-7 for noise performance which i didn't understand because the photosites should be of similar size in those two; the nex-5n is the low light king, not the 7. In fact, since people keep on complainging about the om-d under exposing, I compared the E-M5 at iso 1600 with the NEX-7 at iso 800, and found their performance very very similar


  4. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Hull, East Yorkshire, UK
    Posts
    334
    Real Name
    Alan


    Default


    Isn't it odd when dpreview does a good review of the Em-5, everyone raves and nods in approval, but when finds a fault, its the work of the devil
    GX1, EM-5, p14-45 , p14, , p20, oly 45, oly 60, p45-200,
    fuji X100

    http://500px.com/houghton1

  5. The following 2 members thank Al. for this post:



  6. #4


    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Al.
    Isn't it odd when dpreview does a good review of the Em-5, everyone raves and nods in approval, but when finds a fault, its the work of the devil
    I don't think anybody is talking about a review. Anyway, whatever you think of DPReview's conclusions, they do a reasonable job with their lab samples, and it allows one a bit of pixel-peeping fun, should they desire it.


  7. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    6,949
    Real Name
    Nic


    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blastop View Post
    they do a reasonable job with their lab samples,
    Usually they do, but I'm still not entirely sure how they managed to produce such a poor (unsharp) set of studio samples for the Canon G1X.

    Anyhow, E-M5...looking good!
    Nic
    E-M5, GH1
    Flickr Photostream
    >> Insert quote here <<

  8. The following member thanks Luckypenguin for this post:



  9. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Melbourne. Australia
    Posts
    2,156
    Real Name
    Joe


    Default


    To my eye the EM5 is showing much more blotchy colors than the GX1 ...especially in the reds and is doing so at all ISOs, although most prominent in the reds, this EM5 blotchiness is everywhere (Interestingly, although the ep3 is showing the same blotchiness....it is showing less of it than the em5 !!!)


    People on various forums have been saying that the EM5 is outperforming the GX1 by a full stop, and this and that ?????

    ...maybe in la-la land !


    No doubt a great camera.....a significant improvement for Oly owners in terms of noise, high iso, detail etc , for Pany owners at best (esp GH2, G3 ,GX1)....it would be only an incremental step. IMO.
    Last edited by Livnius; April 22nd, 2012 at 07:19 AM.
    Joe


    ...my stuff is on
    flickr

  10. The following member thanks Livnius for this post:



  11. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Hull, East Yorkshire, UK
    Posts
    334
    Real Name
    Alan


    Default

    But surely its flawed test of sensor, raw or otherwise, because they are all shot with different lenses....

    can do comparason test because they have same lens mounting, and therefore can use same lens, but cannot compare Nex, CanonG1x, due to lens compatability
    GX1, EM-5, p14-45 , p14, , p20, oly 45, oly 60, p45-200,
    fuji X100

    http://500px.com/houghton1


  12. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Davis, CA
    Posts
    4,094
    Real Name
    Dara


    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Armanius View Post
    I've got one word to describe the OMD samples --- WOW!!!

    The OMD JPG and RAW studio samples are now up in the DPReview's database.

    I've been looking at the RAW samples at ISO6400, comparing the OMD to the GX1, GH2, NEX-5n, Pentax K-5 and Nikon D7000. The last three cameras are presumably some of the better APS-C cameras, using the same 16mp Sony sensor. Can't compare with the XPro1 yet, because it's not in DPReview's database.

    To my eyes, the OMD's RAW files, yes RAW files, are better than the GX1, GH2 and NEX-5n. The NEX-5n might be a tad better on the red channel. The OMD is very close to the D7000, and only slightly behind the K-5 (which applies noise reduction to the RAW files).
    The problem here is that the lighting was not kept constant across different cameras. As many cameras perform worse under lower lighting (even with longer exposure), it's not clear to what degree the improvements are due to the studio lighting vs. the improved sensor.

    In all likelihood it's mostly the sensor, but I'd certainly prefer a more thorough test.

    DH


  13. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    1,852
    Real Name
    Muttley


    Default

    Lighting isn't constant? I thought they kept it the same. Bummer if it's not.

    As for lenses, it should be the same for the OMD, GX1 and all m4/3 cameras -- the Zuiko Oly 50mm F2. But when it comes to other cameras, there isn't much that can be done. DPR, as far as I know, tries to keep everything as constant as possible. So at least they use a 50 prime whenever they can.

    As for the G1X samples, that was odd!
    Last edited by Armanius; April 22nd, 2012 at 08:37 AM.
    OMD EM5, EM1
    12/2 14/2.5 20/1.7 25/1.4 75/1.8 14-150 45-150
    My FlickR!



  14. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    1,852
    Real Name
    Muttley


    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Al. View Post
    Isn't it odd when dpreview does a good review of the Em-5, everyone raves and nods in approval, but when finds a fault, its the work of the devil
    Not really. For one thing, DPR hasn't come out with a review of the OMD yet. Plus, DPR is only the work of the devil, if whoever is reading the review acts as if their livelihood depended on what DPR says. And hopefully none of us will ever depend on DPR for that. Heaven forbid!! :)
    OMD EM5, EM1
    12/2 14/2.5 20/1.7 25/1.4 75/1.8 14-150 45-150
    My FlickR!




Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Links on this page may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

Latest Discussions

Inspired Eye

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v4.3.0