1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

DPR has posted RAW E-P3 comparison chart

Discussion in 'Olympus Cameras' started by thearne3, Jul 19, 2011.

  1. thearne3

    thearne3 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    807
    Jan 28, 2010
    Redding, CT USA
    No big surprises...

    Olympus PEN E-P3 Preview: 12. Comparedto...(Raw): Digital Photography Review


    Be careful, the E-P3 can be set on iso12800 (not that I intend to use it in practice), but the G3 and x100 (examples that I wanted to compare) do not go that high.

    No real change vs Epl2. Quite comparable to the G3. I am thinking the key reason to upgrade from my E-P2 is overall speed of operation (focussing, shorter blackout, better VF-2), rather than real change in sensor (using RAW). These are benefiting the Epl3 as well....am I patient enough to wait?
     
    • Like Like x 2
  2. jlabate

    jlabate Mu-43 Regular

    132
    Nov 22, 2010
    I'm a little disappointed with the E-P3 sensor. It seems to essentially be the same one as the E-P1 which is how old now? The E-P3's improvements in speed are nice but for me is not as important as improved image quality. Give me both and I'd be delighted and buying one.
     
  3. WT21

    WT21 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Feb 19, 2010
    Boston
    Th dpr tool doesn't have RAW for ep1, so I'm note sure how you could compare them.
     
  4. Hikari

    Hikari Mu-43 All-Pro

    Nov 26, 2010
    Yes, it does. But only at 100ISO.
     
  5. thearne3

    thearne3 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    807
    Jan 28, 2010
    Redding, CT USA
    That's why I used the E-Pl2 for comparison. Agree, would love to have seen a better sensor. Realistically, I've been happy with the files created by the E-P2 (and E-P1 before it), so speed is a big part of my overall enjoyment and tendency to take the cam with me where-ever I go.
     
  6. Hikari

    Hikari Mu-43 All-Pro

    Nov 26, 2010
    If you check the drop-down menu, both the E-P1 and E-P2 are there for comparison.
     
  7. thearne3

    thearne3 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    807
    Jan 28, 2010
    Redding, CT USA
    True, but for some reason only ISO 100 is available when you choose these bodies...:rolleyes:
     
  8. starlabs

    starlabs Mu-43 Top Veteran

    856
    Sep 30, 2010
    Los Angeles
    Pixel peeping time!

    Comparing the E-P3 raw vs my E-PL1 vs the Panny G3:

    At 800, 1600 and 3200 ISO pretty much a wash between the E-P3 and E-PL1, although I see some slight less noise in the E-P3 in some areas of the picture.

    The G3 definitely has less noise at 1600 ISO and 3200.

    Oh well. In the grand scheme of things, a faster AF is more important than better high ISO. Doesn't matter how great your 3200 ISO is if your picture comes out blurry or you didn't get it at all due to crappy AF! :tongue:

    I would love to be a fly on the wall at Olympus' high level meetings. I wonder what their situation is with regards to sensor development and availability...
     
  9. elandel

    elandel Mu-43 All-Pro

    Apr 16, 2010
    Milan, Italy
    Agree with you. Faster field operation is importantand sensor why not?

    Oly is really disappointing me. If I need a second :43: body I'll buy an E-pl1.
     
  10. RT_Panther

    RT_Panther Mu-43 Legend

    May 4, 2011
    Texas
    I'm an E-PL2 owner and I concur with you here...

    I'd say it's the same "tweaked" E-PL2 one....(Olympus advertises the E-PL2 as having a "tweaked" sensor..)
     
  11. Pelao

    Pelao Mu-43 Top Veteran

    959
    Feb 3, 2010
    Ontario, Canada
    The E-P2 produced very nice RAW files (at least to my eye). I sold it because I did not like the controls compared to my GF1.

    It did feel slower overall in action than the GF1, but it never stopped me getting a shot I wanted.

    If the E-P3 retains or improves on the E-P2 files, and speeds up operation, then it will be a fine camera for those who prefer it's style and way of working. The price seems a bit steep...

    I much prefer Panasonic controls, and want a built-in EVF so if I was buying today the G3 would be my choice. from what I have seen it's RAW files are better at low and high ISO, though for my shooting I doubt if I would notice much improvement when printed.

    I was always very happy with the GF1 focus speed, and when I used the G3 I noticed it is very much faster, even with the kit.

    Good times for M4/3 people.
     
  12. ckrueger

    ckrueger Mu-43 Veteran

    304
    Jul 16, 2011
    I think the RAW samples look pretty good. I compared to other M43 bodies and my two DSLR bodies, the 5D2 and 7D. The EP3 looks at least as good as the other M43 bodies, and doesn't give up much to the 7D until ISO 1600. I don't think that's a bad thing, to be honest.

    Everybody wants M43 to improve in noise performance, but look at the competition. Canon and Sony sensors haven't improved much since the original 5D. The D3 is pretty much like the 5D and its noise wasn't so much better as it had heavier in-camera noise reduction and higher settable ISO. The 7D is clearly worse for noise than its predecessors. The NEX cameras haven't really broken any new ground. Panasonic has improved a bit, but it's mostly up to noise reduction.

    I think we're just going to have to wait for the next technological breakthrough for noise to improve much. Remember back-side illumination? Gap-less photosites? All that was prior to M43. These are the most dense sensors on the market (barring P&S and cell phones). To even get close to an established player like Canon or Sony–and to do so with a smaller sensor–is quite an accomplishment.
     
  13. drd1135

    drd1135 Zen Snapshooter

    Mar 17, 2011
    Southwest Virginia
    Steve
    I can't believe that Oly doesn't know the fight they're in for market share. I'm sure they would use a better sensor if they had access to one. OTOH, I'm not all that excited about more MP, just more sensitivity. Does anyone know the MP number for the diffraction limit for the mu43 format?