A6000 vs. E-M5 II vs. GX8 Image Quality Comparison (Pixel Peepers Beware!)

[Turbofrog]

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

That's a 100% crop comparison of the E-M5 II, A6000, and GX8 from Imaging Resource at ISO 6400. All have been converted from RAWs in Lightroom with the same default settings (mild chroma noise reduction, zero luminance noise reduction, mild sharpening). From there, they have been downsampled to the same 16MP output size.

You can try and guess which is which, I won't tell you for now. And the reason I won't tell you is obvious - because they're all near enough to identical. "Best in class APS-C," vs. "state of the art M4/3" vs. "same old 16MP M4/3."

Why are we so concerned about sensor performance again? I cannot imagine that anyone's photography relies on the infinitesimal differences displayed here.

I should put in the A7 II just for kicks...

 

[tyrphoto]

I'm going to make an educated guess, from left to right, Sony A6000, Panasonic GX8 and Olympus E-M5 Mk.II.

The image on the left has a completely different color profile with softer cyans, yellows that are lacking any hint of an orange cast and an overall warmer color cast. All signs that it's a Sony camera IMO.

The center and right image are pretty close but I see a bit more of a red push on the center image and that tells me, between the two, the center image fits what I perceive to be the Panasonic. So therefore, the right image is the Olympus.

EDIT: Just to add, to me, I find the right image (which I believe to be the Olympus), has the best detail vs noise ratio.

 

[jyc860923]

if I'm to guess, from left to right GX8 EM5 II A6000
but I agree that the difference is so so little

 

[bye]

From the left; A6000, GX8 and E-M5 Mark II.

 

[shermanshen]

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

That's a 100% crop comparison of the E-M5 II, A6000, and GX8 from Imaging Resource at ISO 6400. All have been converted from RAWs in Lightroom with the same default settings (mild chroma noise reduction, zero luminance noise reduction, mild sharpening). From there, they have been downsampled to the same 16MP output size.

You can try and guess which is which, I won't tell you for now. And the reason I won't tell you is obvious - because they're all near enough to identical. "Best in class APS-C," vs. "state of the art M4/3" vs. "same old 16MP M4/3."

Why are we so concerned about sensor performance again? I cannot imagine that anyone's photography relies on the infinitesimal differences displayed here.

I should put in the A7 II just for kicks...

Point well made. All three pictures look very similar. I personally prefer the one on the right, then the left, and finally the middle. But to the OP's point, it took me a while to make that determination. Ordinary people will not scrutinize pictures do that level.

I think the most important thing in buying cameras these days has got to be feature set and handling. That's why I really don't mind the size of the gx8 (having never seen one in real life). It looks like it'll feel great in hand, and that's all that matters to me.

I'd love for you to throw the a7ii in this mix as well though, as I've often contemplated the move to FF and that is most likely where I would land if I did. Is the ISO performance worth the jump?

 

[MrQ]

My guess: A6000, E-M5, GX8.

The center one is clearly worse than the other two. Could be the lens maybe

 

[Klorenzo]

IQ order: right, left, center
Cameras, from left to right: A6000, E-M5, GX8

It's fun that our guessing are so different

 

[tkbslc]

I made the same comparison when I chose m4/3 over Sony for my transition to MILC this past winter. Image quality is close enough and m4/3 has better/smaller lenses in most categories. It wasn't too hard of a choice and I haven't been even a tiny bit disappointed in my decision.

 

[Robstar1963]

I'd go for A6000, EM5 ii and GX8
Rob

 

[Theo]

I won't guess but I like the image on the right. Would I be tempted to upgrade if the one on the right isn't from the same old 16MP MFT sensor? I don't think so. Like Sherman said, few people with myself included, do not scrutinize images to that level.

 

[drd1135]

I think they're all from his iPhone.

 

[b_rubenstein]

Using the Comparometer, and looking at the Proportional Scale it's easy to see that the GX8 resolves more detail than the E-M5 and is comparable to the A6000.

Seriously, unless one frequently shoots at ISO 6400 what's the point? At that ISO, the S/N is crap and the detail is lost. Yes, very useful looking at pictures where cameras give crap results.

 

[shaolinmonk]

they all suck.. you need a FF sensor if you are a real photographer lol
i think a6000, mk2, gx8

 

[Jonathan F/2]

All look the same to me.

 

[MrQ]

All look the same to me.

They look quite similar but I would't go as far to say they look the same. The center one is visibly worse than the other two.

 

[tkbslc]

They look quite similar but I would't go as far to say they look the same. The center one is visibly worse than the other two.

I think the one on the left looks the worst thanks to the odd blue hue around the bottom of the label and in some of the noise at the top. Colored blotches in noise is the worst, IMO.

 

[stripedrex]

Sharper and better dynamic range but different wb? then the other 2 on the left image so I'm guessing A6000 (I'd be really impressed if it's GX8). Middle's worst so thinking EM5ii (I would be disappointed if you say GX8). Right is GX8. I know I'm a pixel peeper, differences in these images are pretty drastic to me.

 

[VooDoo64]

GX8 / E-M5 mkII / A6000 - for me best IQ is 1.right/ 2.left/ 3.center - the right and left are good and close BUT the one in center is 1 class worse than the others

so when will the results be published ??

 

[Turbofrog]

A6000 on the left, GX8 in the middle, and E-M5 II on the right.

Subjectively, I think the E-M5 looks best overall. GX8 is low contrast. A6000 has an unpleasant colour cast.

I wonder if the Olympus 50mm/f2 Macro these were shot with is showing its age finally? It was, after all, designed for the 5MP E-1.

 

[Turbofrog]

Using the Comparometer, and looking at the Proportional Scale it's easy to see that the GX8 resolves more detail than the E-M5 and is comparable to the A6000.

Seriously, unless one frequently shoots at ISO 6400 what's the point? At that ISO, the S/N is crap and the detail is lost. Yes, very useful looking at pictures where cameras give crap results.

I don't like the Comparometer because it only shows JPEGs OOC rather than converted RAWs with no noise reduction.

And I picked ISO 6400 because at low ISOs it's hard to have any real complaints about M4/3 image quality. Many people see high ISO as the final frontier, and people have been wondering if the GX8 moves that yardstick.

I maybe should do a base ISO conversion so I can see if the 20MP sensor really does make a difference, but this comparison has made it clear to me that there's no sensor-based reason to move from my GX7 to any other camera shy of full frame... And even there, the standard 24MP A7 / II (which is the only versatile and affordable camera in the series) is a disappointingly marginal step up. Just 1-1.5 stops at best at these ISOs.