Image quality - EM1 MK II / EM1X vs Nikon D500

Giiba

Something to someone somewhere
Joined
Aug 19, 2016
Messages
1,430
Location
New Westminster, BC
I don't own either camera so I when to Photons to Photos.

I see the D5 being a huge step up, the Z6 being a bit better and the rest all the same... the D500 doesn't seem much better from the data.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


These debates always get so heated...
 

Retief

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
May 14, 2019
Messages
131
Location
Marysville, WA
Real Name
Bill Dewey
I don't own either camera so I when to Photons to Photos.

I see the D5 being a huge step up, the Z6 being a bit better and the rest all the same... the D500 doesn't seem much better from the data.

...

These debates always get so heated...
I used to read all the charts, Bill Claff, DXO, George the Plumber. Finally I decided after listening to experts who had different opinions based on the same data that the only way to figure it out was to try with the types of things I shoot. My goal for years was to able to shoot at ISO's around, maybe a bit above, 3200. I find that anything where I really needed higher, the light just wasn't good enough to portray the image I wanted anyway, so for me a bland ISO 25,600 with clean background and good detail wasn't something I would print and display anyway. For reference photos I can deal with the noise. We sure did back in the film days, no doubt about that.

When these debates get heated, I find the heat comes from nit-picking and heavy pixel peeping, I'm too lazy for either at my advanced age :biggrin:
 

Nick779

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Jun 14, 2018
Messages
123
Location
Pittsburgh, PA
I don't own either camera so I when to Photons to Photos.

I see the D5 being a huge step up, the Z6 being a bit better and the rest all the same... the D500 doesn't seem much better from the data.

View attachment 764124

These debates always get so heated...

What exactly is that graph showing? Ive tried to figure out the shadow improvement chart but im apparently missing something. The d5 seems to crush all other options in this chart, and one of the Olympus bodies beats the D500 in most ISOs.

I plan on staying with my EM1.2 for a while, get some more prints made, and generally just get out more. I still cant help but peer over the fence at a hybrid D500/Z6 kit

I need to make some Nikon buddies. Id love to borrow a D500 and a 200-500F5.6 or something that gives me 500-600mm eq reach just to test it out. The 80-400 would be REALLY nice but a bit too expensive.
 

whumber

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
Jun 13, 2017
Messages
473
What exactly is that graph showing? Ive tried to figure out the shadow improvement chart but im apparently missing something. The d5 seems to crush all other options in this chart, and one of the Olympus bodies beats the D500 in most ISOs.
It's basically telling you how much less shadow noise you get by increasing ISO rather than amplifying digitally after the fact. Ideally it would be a flat line but in the chart shown the D5 is the worst performer by a large margin.
 

Giiba

Something to someone somewhere
Joined
Aug 19, 2016
Messages
1,430
Location
New Westminster, BC
It's basically telling you how much less shadow noise you get by increasing ISO rather than amplifying digitally after the fact. Ideally it would be a flat line but in the chart shown the D5 is the worst performer by a large margin.
I thought it was the other way around... the D5 crushes the others because the chart shows how many stops the shadows improve with a raised iso. A flat line would indicate there is no point increasing iso past base iso as the shadows never improve. The chart shows that most of the cameras gain about 1 stop, while the D5 improves by over 3 stops.

See:
http://photonstophotos.net/GeneralTopics/Sensors_&_Raw/Sensor_Analysis_Primer/Photographic_Dynamic_Range_Shadow_Improvement.htm
 

Nick779

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Jun 14, 2018
Messages
123
Location
Pittsburgh, PA
I thought it was the other way around... the D5 crushes the others because the chart shows how many stops the shadows improve with a raised iso. A flat line would indicate there is no point increasing iso past base iso as the shadows never improve. The chart shows that most of the cameras gain about 1 stop, while the D5 improves by over 3 stops.

See:
http://photonstophotos.net/GeneralTopics/Sensors_&_Raw/Sensor_Analysis_Primer/Photographic_Dynamic_Range_Shadow_Improvement.htm
Im not so sure. When playing with the DPR exposure latitude tool, the D5's shots look terrible a few stops earlier than most modern cameras. I re-read that abstract from P2P a few more times and the D5 technically has better shadow improvement than everything else.

I think that what the graph is signifying is that it makes more sense to shoot at a higher ISO with the D5 than to try to heavily lift shadows in post.

"
Observe this snapshot from the interactive chart available at my site:

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

It's clear that for the D7000 going beyond ISO 400 has no advantage and that even at ISO 400 the shadow gain is minimal.



The D3S shows strong shadow improvement through at least ISO 3200.
The "bump" at ISO 25600 is due to in camera Noise Reduction (NR)"
 
Last edited:

Cederic

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Nov 14, 2012
Messages
556
Location
Nottingham
High ISO image test
So, I found marguerite shrub in the shade in my backyard, and took shots with three cameras,
This may sound silly but comparing the same ISO is a flawed test - as demonstrated by the need to push the exposure half a stop on the Olympus. A better test would be identical aperture and shutter speed, and if that results in a different ISO level then it merely means the camera manufacturers are measuring ISO differently.

I don't generally select high ISO because I want extra noise, I select it because I need the faster shutter speed. Selecting a constant shutter speed thus better compares the image quality I'll get in difficult conditions.
 

Bagrphotography

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Dec 28, 2018
Messages
54
Interestingly, I would love to have a lower ISO level for m4/3 - the sun is so freaking bright down here (in Australia)

I want to use a larger aperture at slower speeds.

Is that weird?

And yes I have recently had a bit of a 'do I need to change' moment - I missed what I thought were easy shots (broad-daylight) with my G85 .. so I used a G85 with kit lens and borrowed a D7100 with kit lens. And tried them out.

Now, I have rented a 40-150 f2.8 lens to try with the G85 just to see if it is the system, the gear OR me (my technique).

I also changed the focus-zones on the G85.. playing around with the settings. And I got more keepers :) (my best shot of test (motorsport) was with an old adapted M42 200mm lens, at f8, at 1/60th.
Technique. But still I think about this.

Lower ISO please not just Higher :D
 

mawz

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Mar 2, 2013
Messages
38
I agree on the lower ISO thing, I'd kill to have ISO32 base (my dream is a camera with an ISO 6-6400 range, I almost never go over 6400, but regularly want less than 100).

But that's more to stretch out shutter speeds for water smoothing than anything else. Modern electronic shutters get you wide apertures just fine in sunlight at current base ISO's, it's hard to bounce off the 1/16000 or 1/32000 max shutter speed we now have with electronic shutters. Of course, that assumes more static subjects, electronic shutters don't help at all for action.
 

Nick779

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Jun 14, 2018
Messages
123
Location
Pittsburgh, PA
Interestingly, I would love to have a lower ISO level for m4/3 - the sun is so freaking bright down here (in Australia)

I want to use a larger aperture at slower speeds.

Is that weird?

And yes I have recently had a bit of a 'do I need to change' moment - I missed what I thought were easy shots (broad-daylight) with my G85 .. so I used a G85 with kit lens and borrowed a D7100 with kit lens. And tried them out.

Now, I have rented a 40-150 f2.8 lens to try with the G85 just to see if it is the system, the gear OR me (my technique).

I also changed the focus-zones on the G85.. playing around with the settings. And I got more keepers :) (my best shot of test (motorsport) was with an old adapted M42 200mm lens, at f8, at 1/60th.
Technique. But still I think about this.

Lower ISO please not just Higher :D
Id definitely love a native ISO100 that nets us an extra .5-1.0 stop of DR. Im not so sure that a better lens is really going to show you much on your G85. If youre having focus issues, you need a body that has a better AF system.

I agree on the lower ISO thing, I'd kill to have ISO32 base (my dream is a camera with an ISO 6-6400 range, I almost never go over 6400, but regularly want less than 100).

But that's more to stretch out shutter speeds for water smoothing than anything else. Modern electronic shutters get you wide apertures just fine in sunlight at current base ISO's, it's hard to bounce off the 1/16000 or 1/32000 max shutter speed we now have with electronic shutters. Of course, that assumes more static subjects, electronic shutters don't help at all for action.
E shutters arent bad on the EM1.2 with its readout speed. Most other cameras are significantly slower. I was a bit surprised when I read that the Z6 was 1/15"
 

Bagrphotography

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Dec 28, 2018
Messages
54
And that is why the renting of the lens -better to spend near $200 for 6months on the 40-150mm than buy it and go .. ugh.. I really should have got the 100-400/300mm/200mm etc.

I want to push the G85 to it's limit..., that way I can learn too (IMO) :)

Sure, a G9 would be WONDERFUL or one of the EM1 series... but if I can still sell images from my Panasonic G3 (doing motorsports today).
Agreed about the eshutters - for panning/blurred images the eshutter is not that great...

Mmmm. that is an idea for me to try this weekend :)
 

whumber

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
Jun 13, 2017
Messages
473
m not so sure. When playing with the DPR exposure latitude tool, the D5's shots look terrible a few stops earlier than most modern cameras. I re-read that abstract from P2P a few more times and the D5 technically has better shadow improvement than everything else.

I think that what the graph is signifying is that it makes more sense to shoot at a higher ISO with the D5 than to try to heavily lift shadows in post.
You got it. The older Canon DSLRs also have much "better" shadow improvement charts. It's not a good thing as it means that there's a large amount of noise being introduced between the amplifier and the analogue to digital converter, the shadows improve with increasing ISO because the signal coming out of the amplifier gets larger with increasing ISO while the electronic noise remains constant so the SNR in the shadows improves just due to the drowning out of the noise. In the cameras with lower shadow improvement there's less electronic noise to drown out so there's not nearly as much difference between shoot at high ISO vs shoot low ISO and brightening the image in post.
 
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