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

E-M5 MkII Noise

Discussion in 'This or That? (MFT only)' started by Lurch, Mar 24, 2015.

  1. Lurch

    Lurch Hi, I'm a gear addict

    118
    Apr 21, 2014
    Canberra, Australia
    Jason
    Evening all,

    Firstly, my sincerest apologies if this has been asked previously, however I couldnt find what I was after.

    I'm really, REALLY tempted to pull the trigger on a MkII.
    I love my MkI, but the whole raft of new/improved features on the MkII make it so, so tempting. Wifi, Faster shutter, focus peaking, the list goes on.
    However my only real annoyance of the Mk1 is its high(ish)-ISO noise performance. I find ISO 800 pretty much the top of the range for usability. Even at 1250 I'm having to apply significant noise reduction in PP, which naturally reduces detail.

    So my question is; is there noticeable improvement in high-ISO noise performance in the MkII, over the MkI?
    If someone feels the urge to post up comparative RAW files, I would certainly appreciate it.

    Cheers,
    Lurch
     
  2. serafko

    serafko New to Mu-43

    4
    Dec 1, 2014
    Emil

    You can download raw files from http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympus-om-d-e-m5-ii/8 in various ISO settings.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  3. Lurch

    Lurch Hi, I'm a gear addict

    118
    Apr 21, 2014
    Canberra, Australia
    Jason
    Thanks mate - much appreciated.
    Pulling both into Lighroom (well, after some playing with exiftool to get the MkII file imported) there seems to be bugger-all in it.
     
  4. gryphon1911

    gryphon1911 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 13, 2014
    Central Ohio, USA
    Andrew
    You might gain one additional stop of hi ISO performance, but that would most likely be pushing it.
     
  5. drd1135

    drd1135 Zen Snapshooter

    Mar 17, 2011
    Southwest Virginia
    Steve
    It's the same sensor so I seriously doubt the RAW noise at high iso is much different form the Mk I.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  6. gryphon1911

    gryphon1911 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 13, 2014
    Central Ohio, USA
    Andrew
    The potential for the JPG engine and processing algorithm to have improved is there, so I give them the benefit of the doubt.
     
  7. drd1135

    drd1135 Zen Snapshooter

    Mar 17, 2011
    Southwest Virginia
    Steve
    That would certainly be nice. I've never been particularly bothered by PEN/OMD noise, but I've never used a high end APS-C or FF body.
     
  8. pdk42

    pdk42 One of the "Eh?" team

    Jan 11, 2013
    Leamington Spa, UK
    JPEGs might be a tad better, but the raw performance will be identical.
     
  9. MadMarco

    MadMarco Mu-43 Veteran

    298
    Oct 30, 2014
    Guildford, England
    If you find that ISO800 is the highest usable setting it sounds like you might be better served with a good full frame. I find the ISO performance of the E-M10 to be superior to my old Canon 700D APS-C (certainly not the best example of APS-C for sure).

    Personally I find the results at ISO3200 are very acceptable once it's gone through DxO or Lightroom with a light touch to the NR.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  10. 50orsohours

    50orsohours Mu-43 All-Pro

    Oct 13, 2013
    Portland Oregon
    You may also want to try Olympus viewer to get the best out of Oly files.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  11. Lurch

    Lurch Hi, I'm a gear addict

    118
    Apr 21, 2014
    Canberra, Australia
    Jason
    I've had both a D800 and a Pentax K5. Both known (especially the Pentax) as awesome noise performers.
    Please don't get me wrong, it's not a show stopped and I'm happy to keep using a touch of Topaz deNoise where I need it.
     
  12. Lurch

    Lurch Hi, I'm a gear addict

    118
    Apr 21, 2014
    Canberra, Australia
    Jason
    May do, but I do really like LR's file management side of things, so I'm yet to work out where it fits into my workflow. And I've invested quite a few $'s in LR plugins to justify ditching it.
     
  13. 50orsohours

    50orsohours Mu-43 All-Pro

    Oct 13, 2013
    Portland Oregon
    Not to ditch it, but initially you'd upload your raw files to OV3 and transfer the TIFF files over to LR and do your thing.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  14. JBoot

    JBoot Mu-43 Regular

    106
    Dec 4, 2012
    Scotch Plains, NJ
    Jerry
    Lurch,

    My take is maybe a bit different.

    I have both the mk i and mk ii and have to agree with everything said above and particulary the comments from MadMarco.

    With that said, I also professionally shoot with D750's with 2.8/1.8/1.4 lenses just to give you my frame of reference.... AND yet I'm TOTALLY in love with m4/3 and my E-M5s.

    Would I have liked a new chip in the mk ii... yes... however, it's already plenty good 99% of the time already and for those few occasions when I get upset image quality is not better... as long as my images tells the story I intended I'm happy.... and I regularly shoot low light/natural light up to 3200 and will push that if necessary (I shoot raw and process through LR).

    Absolute image quality is really just one factor in the overall experience and I know my D750 beats my E-M5 in that department every time.... YET, my D750 stays home while my E-M5s travel with me EVERY TIME!

    I'm finding I'm loving the better build quality and viewfinder while leveraging all of the new features regularly (wifi, silent shutter, faster shutter, video improvements, mic input, etc.) that I am confident the purchase was a good one for me.

    Hope I didn't make things worse for you.
     
  15. T N Args

    T N Args Agent Photocateur

    Dec 3, 2013
    Adelaide, Australia
    call me Arg
    The DxOMark sensor scores (I hate these things) are as follows, for Low-light ISO:
    E-M5I....826
    E-M1.....757
    E-M5II...896

    SNR looks to be about 1-1.5 dB better in the M5II than the M5.

    Certainly not identical -- but the improvement is small.
     
    Last edited: Apr 22, 2015
  16. pake

    pake Mu-43 All-Pro

    Oct 14, 2010
    Finland
    Teemu
    Not entirely true. I've read a couple of reviews that claim there's ~one stop difference in RAW. For example here: "My humble opinion, judging from these and other samples, is that the mk2 gains about a stop of noise and DR/Color depth vs. the E-M5 mk1. It can, under circumstances, get slightly better than the E-M1 too, mainly from ISO6400 and up" (source: http://www.eyesuncloudedphoto.com/b...resolutions-and-high-sensitivities-and-ninjas)
     
  17. VooDoo64

    VooDoo64 Mu-43 Veteran

    240
    Jul 17, 2010
    Zagreb - Croatia
    Davor Vojvoda
    but E-M1 got so much nicer Noise pattern than E-M5mk1 and pleasing to the eye, noise from E-m1 to me is lot less annoying and ugly than than from E-M5mk1 and LowISO function addition for taking picture on a sunny day gives me far less artifacts on a blue sky than the E-M5mk1, in general it seems to me Panasonic sensor in the E-M1 works much more pleasing to the eye and nicer image (warmer) than Sony's sensor in the E-M5, something like Leica vs. Zeiss..
     
  18. T N Args

    T N Args Agent Photocateur

    Dec 3, 2013
    Adelaide, Australia
    call me Arg
    Way off topic mate....
     
  19. LovinTheEP2

    LovinTheEP2 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    619
    Feb 15, 2011
    Toronto
    Any chance you can do the long exposure lens cap test of both and see if the lower noise profile of the em5 stayed the same..
     
  20. Drdave944

    Drdave944 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    698
    Feb 2, 2012
    If you like the EM-5 you will love the EM-5 II ,everything from the much more beautiful build to the superb IS --- its only competition is the EM-1. Noise? I never take it off ISO 200 except for trick shots at night.