Any Real World Low ISO Image Quality Differences Between E-M5 & E-M1 ?

Discussion in 'Olympus Cameras' started by M4/3, Oct 4, 2013.

  1. M4/3

    M4/3 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    713
    Sep 24, 2011
    So far I have not seen any threads where someone who owns both cameras has commented in detail on the differences in image quality between the two cameras. Especially at base ISO. Like are the outdoor landscape images of the E-M1 brighter overall and slightly more detailed due to fact that it has a new sensor, can shoot at ISO 100 and doesn't have an AA filter? Are the colors even more accurate and natural looking? Thanks, Paul
     
    • Like Like x 1
  2. b_rubenstein

    b_rubenstein Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 20, 2012
    Melbourne, FL
    You can go here and look at images taken with both cameras, using the same lens under carefully controlled studio lighting to your heart's delight, or your eyes fall out of your head.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. M4/3

    M4/3 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    713
    Sep 24, 2011
    Thanks, but I'm interested in real world outdoor landscape results. Not studio results. And only owners who have used both cameras outdoors at base ISO are going to know if the E-M1 produces noticably brighter, more detailed and accurately colorful landscape images than the E-M5.
     
  4. Lindsay D

    Lindsay D Mu-43 Veteran

    242
    Jan 2, 2013
    West Sussex, England
    Lindsay
    I'm not really seeing a difference in the RAW images between the two cameras however anecdotally I think the colour balance is coming up slightly more red on the EM1. But I will need to look into that further, it isn't a problem though. As for seeing more detailed images, I have to say the EM5 with good glass rendered beautifully detailed images so I am not seeing a big difference there either - however, the EM1 is definitely a little faster and more accurate when it comes to focusing and that is certainly helping to get slightly sharper shots in poor light.

    I am yet to test the JPEG engine but that is slightly different to the EM5 in that my usual settings when applied to the EM1 render a slightly more natural looking JPEG.

    With respect to noise, again I have to test this, but it appears to be about the same on both cameras when shooting RAW but when shooting JPEG there is a clear advantage with the EM1 at ISO levels from 6400 and above. Not that I am in the habit of shooting at such ISO values, but it's there if you need it. In fact the JPEGs are so good that I will probably use them more often than before.

    It's early days and I have loads of testing to do over the next few weeks. But I shot a portrait session with it yesterday and it was a pleasure to use, it's a dream camera in many ways.

    Edit: don't be so quick to dismiss studio comparisons - these are more valuable than trying to create identical conditions outside where there is ever-changing light (even if you don't notice it).
     
  5. rezatravilla

    rezatravilla Mu-43 Top Veteran

    533
    Aug 7, 2013
    Indonesia
    Reza Travilla
    Agreed with Lindsay. As I saw MingThein's blog about EM1 vs EM5 vs Nikon D600 the result between EM1 and EM5 not so different.

    Sent from my C6602 using Mu-43 mobile app