I think that's from back in 2003.This histogram shows an almost perfect distribution of tones covering about a 4 stop dynamic range — from deep shadows on the left to just short of bright highlights on the right.
This fits comfortably within the approximately 5 stop dynamic range capability of most digital imaging chips.
The K5 uses the same sensor as the NEX-5N.jyc860923 said:judged by that GH2 isn't too bad, call me crazy but i actually prefer it to k5
it's just i have to admit the DR of GF3 (quite close to GH2's) is way behind Sony NEX's, and sometimes it's possible to push to the limits.
Wow, thanks, I didn't know that, apparently K5 should be real good.The K5 uses the same sensor as the NEX-5N.
That comes from the K5 has larger sensor thus less DOF, doesn't it? Makes it easier to get layered depth of field.Amin-
Great write up and comparison. Extremely informative and easy for a noob like me to understand.
When I compare photos of the K5 and GH2, I also see a subtle difference that goes beyond the objective qualities of sharpness and dynamic range (if those can be objective). While the GH2's images appear to be sharper for the most part, the GH2 also appears more "clinical" to my eyes. The K5 has more ... depth? More of a 3D? This is probably just a matter of opinion though. Not sure if it's quantifiable.
Of course, if I had to pick between the two, I'd pick the ...
Right. And most of the difference in size is on the long end, which I inevitably crop. I've never loved the 3:2 aspect ratio, and when shooting film loved square formats or 4x5. Of course I shot a lot of 35mm too -- and cropped it. I understand why someone would want to go full frame -- sort of the medium format of digital photography in terms of quality, but the hoopla about the quality difference between APS-C and 4/3 is a tempest in a teapot, informed by pixel peeping and chart gazing more than by practical photographic considerations.I rarely find myself on that edge, so my K5 is probably going to find itself in the classifieds pretty soon.
It will be interesting to see how long it takes Panasonic to catch up to this latest generation of Sony sensor technology. As you are no doubt aware, the difference between APS-C and 4/3 sensor size isn't all that much, and the predicted DR disparity based on sensor size would be less than half a stop.
It depends on the particular sensors involved. It is not necessarily the case that smaller pixels means more noise or other downsides for a given sensor size, but depending on the particular implementation, it may be the case. There is no downside in going from the GF3 sensor to the GH2 or G3 sensor (other than bigger files being more demanding on your computer during postprocessing and cataloging/storage).Wow, thanks, I didn't know that, apparently K5 should be real good.
I own a GF3, knowing GH2/G3 are supposed to have superior sensors with higher resolution, am I right to think that the 16MP sensor may bring more noise or some downsides than the 12MP? However GX1's 16MP ISO-1600 seems quite clean!