EM-5 vs EM-1 image quality

jerrykur

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Aug 23, 2012
Messages
81
Location
Northern CA
Is there much of a difference between the image quality (raw images) between the two?

I currently have an EM-5 and am happy, but not thrilled with the images. Most of the issue is sharpness and detail. I am shooting with the kit lens some of the time, but also with a Pana 25 1.4. I am wondering if the EM-1 would be much of a change.

Also, how does the Pana 25 1.4 compare to the Oly 12-40 f 2.8? If I stay with 4/3 the Oly is on my list.

FWIW, my other gear is Canon 5DMK3, 1DMK3, and a stack of L lenses.

Thanks,

Jerry
 

Livnius

Super Moderator
Joined
Jul 7, 2011
Messages
2,256
Location
Melbourne. Australia
Real Name
Joe
If you are unhappy with the sharpness and level of detail you're getting from your EM5 and PL25 then you will see no improvement in that regard with either the EM1...or for that matter the two new generation Panasonics the GH4 or GX7 since all 4 of those cameras share 2 sensors...a Panasonic and a Sony sensor. Getting the olympus 12-40 won't be much help either on any of those combinations. Dare I say it, but if you find the sharpness not satisfactory for your needs then perhaps you're best suited to sticking to the gear you are able to get preffered results from. I must say though, I am surprised that sharpness is your complaint...DOF, resolution, I would get, but sharpness...hmmmm. I can only assume you know what you're doing and it's simply a matter of your own personal standard not bein met.

Good luck.
 

jnewell

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Jun 23, 2011
Messages
1,751
Location
Boston, MA
Is there much of a difference between the image quality (raw images) between the two?

I currently have an EM-5 and am happy, but not thrilled with the images. Most of the issue is sharpness and detail. I am shooting with the kit lens some of the time, but also with a Pana 25 1.4. I am wondering if the EM-1 would be much of a change.

Also, how does the Pana 25 1.4 compare to the Oly 12-40 f 2.8? If I stay with 4/3 the Oly is on my list.

FWIW, my other gear is Canon 5DMK3, 1DMK3, and a stack of L lenses.

Thanks,

Jerry
I have both - in terms of pure IQ, there is no meaningful difference.
 

wildwildwes

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
Jun 9, 2012
Messages
456
Location
Brooklyn, NY
As Joe already asserted, I too find it odd that you aren't pleased with the sharpness of the images captured with your E-M5. For me, the E-M5 was a total game changer. Not only did I find the files RAZOR TACK sharp, but its other attributes practically swore me off lugging around my monster FX Nikons (which at the time was the basis of my "walk around" kit). Is it possible that you are not using the camera properly? You may already be aware that you can set your focus preferences in a myriad of different configurations. I have both my E-M1 & E-M5 setup in AF / M mode (autofocus with manual focus override). This allows me to get in the zone quickly with the aid of AF-S and then fine tune tweak the focus further with the manual override).

Good luck. Hope you find your way...

Wes
 

LowriderS10

Monkey with a camera.
Joined
May 19, 2013
Messages
2,482
Location
Canada
From everything I've read...nope...no real IQ difference.

FWIW, I switched from a Canon 5D Mark II full frame camera with top-notch L lenses to the E-M5 and have zero complaints about IQ, sharpness, etc. More than a year and nearly 10,000 shots later, I'm 100% happy with my decision. I've even exhibited and sold A2 prints out of this camera and the lowly 9-18!
 
Joined
Oct 9, 2010
Messages
7,397
Location
Brisbane, Australia
Real Name
Nic
I didn't really find an increase in image sharpness going from the E-M5 to an E-M1, but when I used my E-M5 LR profile on E-M1 images they seemed to come out a touch cleaner. Something that you should consider is whether the results you are getting from your E-M5 are representative. For instance, my E-M5 can produce moire and aliasing at times which are not symptoms of softness.
 

2mnycars

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2012
Messages
285
Location
Toronto
Real Name
DaveL
I have found the transition to Oly gear very hard. I question whether my settings are the optimum. I have two camera bodies. Oly E-M5 and E-PM2, which is a recycled body.

My concern is fast moving subjects. Cars. Puppies. I simply am not getting the number of keepers that I would like. (And I had a photo business for years, with Nikon F2-3's, and Leica rangefinder equipment.)

I respect those of you that are happy with your choices. I have a lot to learn.
 
Joined
Dec 23, 2009
Messages
570
Location
Westchester, IL
Real Name
Bob
I have found the transition to Oly gear very hard. I question whether my settings are the optimum. I have two camera bodies. Oly E-M5 and E-PM2, which is a recycled body.

My concern is fast moving subjects. Cars. Puppies. I simply am not getting the number of keepers that I would like.
I have found that, no matter which camera/lens combination I've tried (and that includes EM-1 and EM-5 with high-end m-4/3 lenses plus E-30 and E-5 with SHG glass) NONE of them are great for fast moving subjects. I love using the m-4/3 stuff for everything else, but recently went back to a well-used Nikon D300 with a couple of fast Nikkor lenses for the action shots that so disappointed me with 4/3 and m-4/3.

I shoot canine frisbee, dog agility and dock diving. Keeper rate with m-4/3 was about 3% to 4% and that was all attributable to pure luck, not for lack of skill: keeper rate with my old film Nikons and Minoltas shooting action (even with manual focus) was ten times that. Keeper rate with the Nikon D300 kit varies between 85% to 95%. Needless to say, I'm thrilled with the change.
 

jnewell

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Jun 23, 2011
Messages
1,751
Location
Boston, MA
I have found the transition to Oly gear very hard. I question whether my settings are the optimum. I have two camera bodies. Oly E-M5 and E-PM2, which is a recycled body.

My concern is fast moving subjects. Cars. Puppies. I simply am not getting the number of keepers that I would like. (And I had a photo business for years, with Nikon F2-3's, and Leica rangefinder equipment.)

I respect those of you that are happy with your choices. I have a lot to learn.
I have had very good luck with moving subjects using SAF and continually "touching up" focus between shots by pressing and releasing the shutter release to make the camera re-focus. This works well with subjects that are moving are relatively consistent speed but probably would work less well for subjects that change direction and/or speed frequently. The newer m4/3 bodies focus very fast but CAF is generally not their strength (the E-M1 and GH-4 have recently changed that, however).
 

dhazeghi

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Aug 6, 2010
Messages
4,365
Location
San Jose, CA
Real Name
Dara
Is there much of a difference between the image quality (raw images) between the two?
There's no difference to speak of.

I currently have an EM-5 and am happy, but not thrilled with the images. Most of the issue is sharpness and detail. I am shooting with the kit lens some of the time, but also with a Pana 25 1.4. I am wondering if the EM-1 would be much of a change.
How are you processing them? Lenses don't really come much sharper than the 25/1.4 (except in the corners of the frame).
 

jerrykur

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Aug 23, 2012
Messages
81
Location
Northern CA
Thanks for all of the replies. I think I need to do some more testing. One thing may be that I tend to be very conservative with sharpening in Lightroom. With the 5DMK3 you don't want to use much sharpening to avoid oversharpening images.
 

tyrphoto

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
May 25, 2014
Messages
1,444
Location
Seoul | NYC
Real Name
ㅇtㅈyㅅr
For all intents and purposes, the sharpness of the EM5 vs EM1 are identical. Getting the 12-40/2.8 won't be of help either over 25/1.4.

I use a 5D Mk.II with L lenses and find my EM1 with either the 25/1.8 or the 45/1.8 to be just as sharp as the Canon after post process.
 

Pili

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
Jul 16, 2012
Messages
224
Location
Boulder, CO
Real Name
Alex
I tend to sharpen between 65-90 in LR, 0.5/0.6 radius and leave detail settings on the low end. I also find that I need to be liberal with NR settings as there is a fine grained noise (even at base iso) that bothers me a little. NR set to 6-10 @ iso 200 seem to take care of this though with minimal loss of detail.
 

CarlG

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Jun 6, 2013
Messages
134
Location
Tampa, FL
Real Name
Carl
I tend to sharpen between 65-90 in LR, 0.5/0.6 radius and leave detail settings on the low end. I also find that I need to be liberal with NR settings as there is a fine grained noise (even at base iso) that bothers me a little. NR set to 6-10 @ iso 200 seem to take care of this though with minimal loss of detail.
You can't just give a basic setting without knowing the type of output the OP is expecting. 65-90 in LR with an E-M5 or E-M1 file is good for a web file. But for printing, that takes on a whole different strategy and set of parameters.
 

yakky

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Jul 1, 2013
Messages
661
I have found the transition to Oly gear very hard. I question whether my settings are the optimum. I have two camera bodies. Oly E-M5 and E-PM2, which is a recycled body.

My concern is fast moving subjects. Cars. Puppies. I simply am not getting the number of keepers that I would like. (And I had a photo business for years, with Nikon F2-3's, and Leica rangefinder equipment.)

I respect those of you that are happy with your choices. I have a lot to learn.
Contrast detection cannot keep up with phase detection, it is that simple. What I have found works fairly well on moving objects is the touch screen shutter. C-AF TR is not very effective on the M5 and PM2.
 

pdk42

One of the "Eh?" team
Joined
Jan 11, 2013
Messages
6,555
Location
Leamington Spa, UK
Whilst there is little difference in sharpness between the two (but the E-M1 wins by a hair), I think the overall colours from the E-M5 are slightly better than the E-M1. In many shots you won't notice, but with reds in particular I think the E-M5 manages better.
 

TransientEye

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Sep 18, 2013
Messages
154
Location
Barcelona
Real Name
Mark
I tend to sharpen between 65-90 in LR, 0.5/0.6 radius and leave detail settings on the low end
The problem with the E-M5/E-M1 PL25 images is not usually sharpness but micro-contrast.

It is instructive to compare the processed output from Lightroom and either in-camera JPEG or ORF files processed in Olympus view. With Lightroom's default settings, I have always found the E-M5 output disappointing. At the pixel level, the Lightroom images lack the crispness that was a hallmark of the (lower resolution) GF1, and compare badly to my other cameras (a FF canon and an APSC Ricoh) with the same settings.

However, if you shoot JPEG or use Olympus viewer, the output is much much better. The reason seems to be because Olympus applies judicious sharpening and local contrast adjustments by default. Wit care, you can replicate these in Lightroom and save the settings as a preset to apply automatically when importing RAW files. I usually use a small amount of clarity (+5 to +10) with some subtle sharpening (seldom more than +25).

I think image quality is the only drawback to the u4/3 system at present - it is closer to cameras such as the diminutive RX100 than to the A7. However, I guess that is the tradeoff you have to make in order to have excellent in-camera IS and the small size.
 

Pili

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
Jul 16, 2012
Messages
224
Location
Boulder, CO
Real Name
Alex
You can't just give a basic setting without knowing the type of output the OP is expecting. 65-90 in LR with an E-M5 or E-M1 file is good for a web file. But for printing, that takes on a whole different strategy and set of parameters.
Sure, this is true. I was just giving the values I like to start with, maybe it will help. At the end of the day, the files are good, not great and you can only do so much given the sensor size.

I would personally like 2 choices in available sensor for the system, a modern 10-12mp sensor for better sensitivity/file size in an em-1 body and a faveon/high mp sensor with a focus on resolution/low iso IQ (i.e. A7r). The 16mp sensor seems like a compromise at times.
 

mattia

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
May 3, 2012
Messages
2,391
Location
The Netherlands
I think image quality is the only drawback to the u4/3 system at present - it is closer to cameras such as the diminutive RX100 than to the A7. However, I guess that is the tradeoff you have to make in order to have excellent in-camera IS and the small size.
I own the E-M1, owned an E-M5, and have an rx100 and A7r. I can't say I agree with the above characterization. The rx100 is sort of in a class of its own in terms of size/image quality ratio, and it is quite excellent, but the level of detail and smoothness in the files is still significantly better for the MFT gear, in my experience.

I do find Lightroom does not easily give me the quality I like, and renders very flat. I know that's by design, but I much prefer DxO as my raw converter for the initial process, then either Lightroom or PS (as tiff) if local adjustments/NIK plugins get used.
 
Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Mu-43 is a fan site and not associated with Olympus, Panasonic, or other manufacturers mentioned on this site.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2009-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom