OMD studio photos in DPReview - AWESOME

Discussion in 'Olympus Cameras' started by Armanius, Apr 22, 2012.

  1. Armanius

    Armanius Mu-43 All-Pro

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    Messages:
    1,865
    Location:
    Houston
    Real Name:
    Muttley
    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.
    Advertisement

    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.
     
    • Like Like x 10
  2. napilopez

    napilopez Contributing Editor

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2012
    Messages:
    826
    Location:
    NYC Area
    Real Name:
    Napier Lopez
    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
     
  3. Al.

    Al. Mu-43 Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2010
    Messages:
    372
    Location:
    Hull, East Yorkshire, UK
    Real Name:
    Alan
    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
     
    • Like Like x 4
  4. Blastop

    Blastop Mu-43 Regular

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2011
    Messages:
    92
    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.
     
  5. Luckypenguin

    Luckypenguin .

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2010
    Messages:
    7,231
    Location:
    Brisbane, Australia
    Real Name:
    Nic
    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!
     
    • Like Like x 2
  6. Livnius

    Livnius   Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2011
    Messages:
    2,252
    Location:
    Melbourne. Australia
    Real Name:
    Joe
    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.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  7. Al.

    Al. Mu-43 Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2010
    Messages:
    372
    Location:
    Hull, East Yorkshire, UK
    Real Name:
    Alan
    But surely its flawed test of sensor, raw or otherwise, because they are all shot with different lenses....

    :43: 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
     
  8. dhazeghi

    dhazeghi Mu-43 Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2010
    Messages:
    4,181
    Location:
    San Jose, CA
    Real Name:
    Dara
    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
     
  9. Armanius

    Armanius Mu-43 All-Pro

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    Messages:
    1,865
    Location:
    Houston
    Real Name:
    Muttley
    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!
     
  10. Armanius

    Armanius Mu-43 All-Pro

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    Messages:
    1,865
    Location:
    Houston
    Real Name:
    Muttley
    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!! :)
     
  11. heli-mech

    heli-mech Mu-43 Top Veteran Subscribing Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2012
    Messages:
    582
    Location:
    Vancouver Island, Canada
    Real Name:
    Andrew
    Not sure what you mean by blotchiness? Granted I am only on my notebook right now but looking at any of the color charts it looks to me like the om-d is "smoother" in the colors, especially compared to ep3 but even to the G1X.


     
  12. Amin Sabet

    Amin Sabet   Administrator Subscribing Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2009
    Messages:
    8,585
    Location:
    Boston, MA (USA)
    They kind of do. If they give 25% less light source intensity, then they give accordingly more exposure time to make the exposure the same. Or so they say.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  13. Armanius

    Armanius Mu-43 All-Pro

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    Messages:
    1,865
    Location:
    Houston
    Real Name:
    Muttley
    Why use different light intensities? Perhaps the same light bulb no longer available? I'll shoot those guys a PM and see if they'll respond.
     
  14. Luckypenguin

    Luckypenguin .

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2010
    Messages:
    7,231
    Location:
    Brisbane, Australia
    Real Name:
    Nic
    I don't know how much to read into this since it is possible that the E-M5 images are just slightly underexposed compared to the GX1, but to me it seems the E-M5 shows noticeably less evidence of the characteristic Micro 4/3 low ISO (200-800) grain/noise, and appears to show slightly more detail compared to the GX1. More so than extreme high ISO performance, THIS is what I've been waiting to see improved since my first E-P1 almost two years ago.
     
  15. dhazeghi

    dhazeghi Mu-43 Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2010
    Messages:
    4,181
    Location:
    San Jose, CA
    Real Name:
    Dara
    There was huge thread on it when the samples first came out. Basically, they had to change some things in their studio setup in the past 6 months or so. Since the K-5, D7000 and others were shot before that, they had different lighting.

    DH
     
  16. krugorg

    krugorg Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2011
    Messages:
    2,488
    Location:
    Minnesota USA
    I see an incremental improvement (assume the GH3 is going to push it forward another notch). Yeah m4/3!
     
  17. Amin Sabet

    Amin Sabet   Administrator Subscribing Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2009
    Messages:
    8,585
    Location:
    Boston, MA (USA)
    This wasn't the first time they've varied lighting setups though. Basically, it's more convenient for them not to keep that aspect of their testing constant.

    Here are a couple posts explaining:

    Sorry, Bob, but you've made a critical mistake: Micro Four Thirds Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

    Sigh: Micro Four Thirds Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

    It would be nice if they would properly publish their testing methods.
     
  18. dhazeghi

    dhazeghi Mu-43 Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2010
    Messages:
    4,181
    Location:
    San Jose, CA
    Real Name:
    Dara
    Okay, thanks for the rest of the backstory! 100% agree on them publishing their methodology.

    Still, you've looked at a good many E-M5 samples by now. Where do you think it ends up?

    DH
     

Share This Page