1. Welcome to Mu-43.com—a friendly Micro 4/3 camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

E-M5 Comparison Test Pics (DPReview)

Discussion in 'Olympus Cameras' started by lowincash, Mar 16, 2012.

  1. lowincash

    lowincash Mu-43 Regular

    Mar 6, 2012
    Los Angeles
  2. asaulo1

    asaulo1 Mu-43 Veteran

    Feb 21, 2012
    sure does... even at 1600 iso comparison, it shines against what they have it compared to.....
  3. Muntz

    Muntz Mu-43 Regular

    Apr 23, 2010
    These DPReview tests pics look very promising. Very dark blacks compared to the greys of the current leading CSCs/MILCs.

    I played around with the comparison to compare it to some other cameras. To my eyes the E-M5 is going to give even the D7000 a run for its money.
  4. lattiboy

    lattiboy Mu-43 Regular

    Dec 16, 2009
    Gotta put it to RAW to really see. It is impressive. Looks like it's caught up to the 5N up to 6400. Nice job Oly!
  5. ricksastro

    ricksastro New to Mu-43

    Mar 10, 2011
    Ada, Michigan
    Yup...definitely shows there is no issue with the sharpness when compared against other cameras. In RawTherapee it's as sharp as a tack!

    It's right about what I was thinking from those previous samples...about 2/3 stop better than the GH2 and about 1/3 stop worse than the NEX-5N (if that).

    I wish DPR would keep their lighting constant. The exposures are different between the cameras, but they just said they've put new lights in, and one with a dimmer, so we have no way of comparing that.

    Awesome performance!!
  6. bongestrella

    bongestrella Mu-43 Veteran

    Sep 2, 2011
    Mechanicsburg, PA
    Wow, just wow. I don't know how they did it. At ISO 3200 I can't see any difference compared to my 60d. At ISO 6400, which is the highest I'm willing to go on my Canon, it also fares extremely well.
  7. EthanFrank

    EthanFrank Mu-43 Regular

    Oct 30, 2011
    In RAW it's less than two stops behind the 5D Mark II between ISO 3200 and ISO 12800. Base noise is obviously higher, but I'm impressed...any regrets I had about selling my 5DII are gone.
  8. WT21

    WT21 Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Feb 19, 2010
    Dang! How do I switch my pre-order from Silver to Black. I think I want black instead, but I'll bet the pre-order queue is HUGE now. I don't want to go to the back of the line!
  9. Luke

    Luke Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jul 30, 2010
    Milwaukee, WI
    Totally off-topic:thumbup:, but I'm starting to agree with you. I thought for sure silver was the way to go, but that is one good-looking black camera.
  10. starlabs

    starlabs Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Sep 30, 2010
    Los Angeles
    Man the haters are out in force in dpreview's m43 forum. There might come a time soon when I don't bother reading that forum at all...
  11. Linh

    Linh Mu-43 All-Pro Subscribing Member

    Apr 14, 2009
    Maryland, US
    Looks like it has an edge to the G3 in chroma noise. And just overall pretty good. Though, in some parts it looks a bit smudged as you go higher in the ISO in some spots (the blue watch). Overall... just makes me a bit more excited to get my hands on mine. And hopefully there are no major issues otherwise.

    buy them both? =D
  12. Amin Sabet

    Amin Sabet Administrator

    Apr 10, 2009
    Boston, MA (USA)
    I just looked at those. Wow, just wow.

    Based on the Focus Numerique files, the E-M5 sensor is pretty much the same as the G3/GX1 sensor. Based on the RAW conversions DPReview is showing, it's ahead of the G3 sensor and close to the NEX-5N sensor both at base ISO as well as at high ISO.

    I wonder which is true? Unfortunately, DPR has never been good at matching exposures, so I'm not going to get my hopes up too high, but it sure is looking good for the E-M5 in the comparisons they presented!
  13. lowincash

    lowincash Mu-43 Regular

    Mar 6, 2012
    Los Angeles
    No matter what sensor they're using, the performance is pretty damn good :D  From the looks of it, might be slightly better than the NEX-7 too. Now I don't feel too bad getting rid of the 7 for the Oly lol
  14. MajorMagee

    MajorMagee Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 24, 2011
    Dayton, OH
    I can't seem to make their image widget work on my browser. :frown:
  15. pxpaulx

    pxpaulx Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jan 19, 2010
    I'm quite impressed. I still won't be pre-ordering! BUT, I'd been thinking about skipping the camera at least until well into its' lifecycle - those previews are pretty damn close to the K-5, and if DR comes that close I'm completely sold on getting the e-m5 - it is looking better and better, that is for sure.
  16. thearne3

    thearne3 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Jan 28, 2010
    Redding, CT USA
    I can't find where ACR now supports the E-M5. Did DPR get an unreleased beta? What am I missing?

    BTW, I downloaded the DPR 3200 and 6400 RAW files and ran them through Viewer 2 v1.3: VERY NICE! No chroma noise...similar detail to DPR results...
  17. ricksastro

    ricksastro New to Mu-43

    Mar 10, 2011
    Ada, Michigan

    The only reason the E-M5 was the same as the GX1 with the FN files was because you added sharpening only to the EM-5's images due to a lack of sharpness which ended up being caused by being backfocused.

    It's clear from DPRs RAW images that the E-M5 is every bit as sharp as any other camera without added sharpening. Without that sharpening, both sets of images give the same answer...about 2/3 stop better than the GX1 and about 1/3 step below the 5N. Incredibly impressive!

    On DPR's exposures, they indicated in that thread they have changed lights around and added a dimmer on one and they make no attempt to normalize actual light, so the difference in actual exposures doesn't tell you anything about how the camera meters. I really wish they would standardize the lighting and stick with it, although I understand why they do it (to accommodate all the different capabilities of cameras out there).

    FN's images had the same exposures and presumably the same lighting and the differences in noise were consistent when treated the same and normalizing the overall lightness.

  18. dhazeghi

    dhazeghi Mu-43 Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    Aug 6, 2010
    San Jose, CA
    Good point. The E-M5 high ISO shots appear to have had 2/3 EV more exposure than the G3 ones. E.g. 1/1500 f6.3 ISO 6400 v. 1/2500, f6.3 ISO 6400. It's also got 1 EV more than the D7000 (1/1500 f9.0 ISO 6400).

    EDIT: Okay, I see the original thread DPR. Now they're saying that the lighting is different for different samples? Oy vey. So can't conclude anything, but as Andy Westlake says, "These aren't ISO samples." Makes it hard to say anything useful about noise either I guess... :frown:

    You're not missing anything. They've got an unreleased beta. Hopefully that means an actual release (or at least a candidate) is not too far off.

  19. EthanFrank

    EthanFrank Mu-43 Regular

    Oct 30, 2011
    Agreed, this disqualifies it as a scientific test; too many variables. However, it's enough to get me pretty enthused about the E-M5. Even if the results are slightly better than they'll turn out to be in real life, the camera's certainly going to be better in low light than I had dared to hope.
  20. addieleman

    addieleman Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 5, 2010
    The Netherlands
    dpreview Olympus E-M5

    So dpreview offers the E-M5 now in their Studio scene comparison widget which I really like BTW. I was looking at the raw samples and comparing them to the GH2 because that's what I have. I hope DxO will test the E-M5 soon; their overall ratings aren't very telling, but the detailed measurements show a lot about the sensor performance IMHO.

    I must say that I can't really find any differences between the E-M5 and GH2, apart from a somewhat higher contrast of the E-M5. Sure indeed it looks like the E-M5 and GH2 share the same sensor. The Sony NEX-5N looks a little better and the Samsung NX-200 seems to cheat by doing some noise reduction, showing smeared detail at ISO 6400. What do you think?
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.