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

DxOMark: Panasonic GH4 Has The Best Micro Four Thirds Sensor Yet!

Discussion in 'Panasonic Cameras' started by Wasabi Bob, Apr 14, 2014.

  1. STR

    STR Mu-43 Veteran

    222
    May 16, 2013
    And then you drill into their graphs and realize that you're never, ever going to tell the difference between the GH4 and the EM1/GH3/GX7/GM1/EM5/EM10 unless you're staring at a test diagram. About the only useful bit of info from the DXO test was that the GH3 has legit ISO100, even though it's labelled as ISO125. GH4 labeled its ISO100 properly.

    Another point of contention: why link to that site, which doesn't appear to even link to the source? Is that your site? You should probably add this link: http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Panasonic/Lumix-DMC-GH4

    I'm a bit of an academic. Proper citation, even as it exists on the web, should be observed.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  2. Wasabi Bob

    Wasabi Bob Mu-43 Top Veteran

    No its not my site. Don't shoot me, I'm only the messenger!
    Thought some might enjoy reading it.
     
  3. GFFPhoto

    GFFPhoto Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 24, 2013
  4. jnewell

    jnewell Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 23, 2011
    Boston, MA
    ...by a measurable but immaterial increment? :biggrin:
     
  5. Amin Sabet

    Amin Sabet Administrator

    Apr 10, 2009
    Boston, MA (USA)
    Darn, title got me excited for real progress and it turned out to be just click bait. The least Phoblographer could have done is link to DxOmark :rolleyes:.
     
  6. meyerweb

    meyerweb Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Sep 5, 2011
    I've never put a lot of stock in DXO, especially the summary numbers. The reality is that any sensor differences between those cameras are so small they're be overwhelmed by any and all processing differences: color balance, sharpening, you name it. Unless you routinely shoot at ISO 6400, make 30 x 40 enlargements that you expect to view from 24" or less, or need razor thin DOF, any of today's current m43 cameras will produce stellar results, IF THE PHOTOGRAPHER KNOWS WHAT S/HE IS DOING.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. jnewell

    jnewell Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 23, 2011
    Boston, MA
    I strongly agree on the summary number DXO comes up with. Even the major category numbers are not all that useful. It's a lot more meaningful to look at the results of their individual tests, but in most cases today what you find is that the differences are really minor. Sensors are simply not what distinguishes front-rank cameras today.
     
  8. crhawkeye

    crhawkeye New to Mu-43

    1
    Apr 21, 2014
    Essentially same as the others. Variance will give you small difference like you see.
     
  9. dhazeghi

    dhazeghi Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 6, 2010
    San Jose, CA
    Dara
    Precisely. And when you consider that the GH4 (and for that matter the E-M1) are basically the same as their predecessors, it's actually rather disappointing. More than two years since the E-M5, we still have yet to see a newer sensor offer a significant improvement for images. Video yes, but stills no.
     
  10. dav1dz

    dav1dz Mu-43 Top Veteran

    926
    Nov 6, 2012
    Canada
    Just incremental improvements until E-M5 II, I bet you. It's just how the industry works. Sensor technology are on longer cycles than the annual body refreshes.

    I am interested in how the GH4 auto focus system works in real life. Sounds like a cool implementation. Since it's not a phase detection system there are no missing pixels.

    [video=youtube;HwarLGh75OA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HwarLGh75OA[/video]
     
  11. Wasabi Bob

    Wasabi Bob Mu-43 Top Veteran

    "Same as their predecessors??"

    Perhaps I missed something, but I'd totally disagree. The GH4 has a totally new sensor and its focusing is noticeably faster than GH3. Their DFD technology seems to be working, very well! Walking around dimly lit streets in Japan, it nailed every shot I took. If anything, Panasonic isn't giving enough attention to the GH4's still performance.
     
  12. dhazeghi

    dhazeghi Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 6, 2010
    San Jose, CA
    Dara
    Okay, maybe I should have said 'a significant improvement for still image quality'. AF performance is really orthogonal - poor sensors can have good AF (think E-P3) and good ones poor AF (Fuji's X-Pro 1 comes to mind). But none of these newer sensors lets me get the same quality shot I can take with the E-M5 at ISO 1600 at ISO 3200, or anything like that. That's an example of what I'd consider real progress.
     
  13. Wasabi Bob

    Wasabi Bob Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Increamental is the new norm.

    You know, when a PC ran at 10 mhz, upgrading to a 20 mhz CPU was a huge improvement. As the operating speeds increased, each upgrade became more incremental. Today, speed is not the issue it used to be. For what ever value it may have, the incremental improvement GH4 offers did inch out over Oly, at both DxO and Imagining Resource's evaluations. I've compared the GH4, side by side to the current Oly's. The GH4's focusing speed is noticeably faster, even in low light. As each new camera is released the improvements aren't going to be what you might consider "significant".

    Another recent endorsement GH4 received was at this years NAB where it received a "Best of Show" award. A consumer camera at at Broadcast event - now that's pretty impressive. I saw the photos where Panasonic had their "varicam", a $60K camera. At times the crowds were deeper for GH4 than for the Varicam! What ever side of the fence you are on, this is a very exciting time for Micro Four-Third cameras!
     
  14. jnewell

    jnewell Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 23, 2011
    Boston, MA
    Dhazeghi was speaking of image quality, and the differences that DXO reports between the GH4 and EM-1 are probably within the realm of pure sample variation (0.2 bits color depth, 0.1 EV dynamic range, 791 vs. 757 ISO). Even greater difference simply do not show up in practical photography, even if printed at large scale - there are too many real world variables that consume the theoretical advantage. The camera wars, in the short term, are not going to be won on sensor performance and image quality.

    Faster focusing speed, better C-AF performance, better UI - these are the things that are going to allow camera makers to differentiate their product, at least until there is some significant improvement in sensor technology.
     
    • Like Like x 5
  15. meyerweb

    meyerweb Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Sep 5, 2011
    Ditto here!
    That's good to hear. Have to shot moving subjects enough to get a feel for it's performance with C-AF nailing subjects moving towards or away from the camera?
     
  16. STR

    STR Mu-43 Veteran

    222
    May 16, 2013
    Speed is still very important to computing, if not all users. However, what you're trying to get at is called the Law of Diminishing Marginal Returns, where improvements are cheap and significant early on. As time goes on, improvements get slower or more expensive (or both). Finally there comes a point where the marginal return is so low, it just makes more sense to plow your resources into a something entirely new.

    It's called a law because it applies to R&D, resource extraction (Peak Oil Hypothesis is just a narrow (and slightly misapplied) LoDMR), the size of organizations, and project planning/management. Even agriculture. I mean, picking the low-hanging fruit is easy and bountiful. The last apple at the top of the tree? Not so much.

    Camera sensors are already pretty darn efficient. It's unlikely we'll be able to squeeze any more than a couple of more stops out of them without changing them dramatically.
     
  17. mjgraaf

    mjgraaf Mu-43 Regular

    53
    Feb 9, 2014
    Netherlands
    Menno
    Ah, the end of science? Speak to you in 10 yrs :-D

    Sent from my C6503 using Tapatalk
     
  18. RRRoger

    RRRoger Mu-43 Regular

    57
    Apr 28, 2014
    Monterey Bay
    I want to know how DXO figures the camera ISO scores?
    They seem to be wrong to me.

    GH4 lower than GH3?
    D4s only slightly higher than D4?
    D5300 only slightly higher than D5200 and D7100 when the usable ISO is twice as high?
    When I am able to take so much better Pictures and Video in poor light at higher ISO, how can they rate them this way?
     
  19. mjgraaf

    mjgraaf Mu-43 Regular

    53
    Feb 9, 2014
    Netherlands
    Menno
    Which is exactly why you should be carefull with DxO. They do very precise measurements, trust these. But the measurements are based on preconditions of what to measure and these do not nessecarily have to relevant for your shooting style...

    Sent from my C6503 using Tapatalk