Is M43 really so bad at high ISO? Comparison to A7Sii and X-T1

50orsohours

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 13, 2013
Messages
2,420
Location
Portland Oregon
i tried to find an example of base ISO noise, but i can't explain it better or find a better example of what @piggsy already posted.

in the end, i agree with @Clint , while i do think there is some noise, it's minimal. Also, pixel peeping is bad and we should all feel bad :) And looking at my first post, i made a mistake in saying "noisy". What i wanted to say "certain/minimal level of noise at base ISO".

All that said, it is possible that i'm mistaking certain things in the OOF area with noise.
You know, we have a really nice large HD tv. Beautiful picture. But when I am putting a DVD in the dvd player and the programming starts and if I am right up on the tv, the pixelation is terrible!!! So I personally don't put much faith in pixel peeping. Doesn't improve my artistry (or lack of it) one bit. And the pictures on the wall look just fine. :)
 

piggsy

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Jun 2, 2014
Messages
1,470
Location
Brisbane, Australia
If you are fine with compressed 720x480 in 2016 then you are pretty much fine with any camera from the Nintendo DSi up :D

There has gotta be a pretty high correlation between the "m43 doesn't have noise problems" and the "who even wants a 4k tv" people from last year, back before Olympus had a camera that did it :D
 

Ramsey

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Jan 9, 2013
Messages
745
Location
Zagreb, Croatia
You know, we have a really nice large HD tv. Beautiful picture. But when I am putting a DVD in the dvd player and the programming starts and if I am right up on the tv, the pixelation is terrible!!! So I personally don't put much faith in pixel peeping. Doesn't improve my artistry (or lack of it) one bit. And the pictures on the wall look just fine. :)
I know, lack of noise is not what makes or breaks a photograph. I never once said it does. Light, subject, composition, story, etc etc. From what i've seen from your work, you have much better eye and technique than i do in all of those areas. A great photo taken with an iPhone will trump mediocre photo taken by a mediocre photographer with a 5d mark 4 or latest hasselblad.

But the truth is, to some people it (ISO and noise) matters. Moreso than size of the camera or the cost or the handling. It is no surprise that, due to sensor size, m43 handles noise "worse" than APSC which handles it "worse" than FF. You or anyone else may think it's petty, but in the end it's their call. We cannot change those people, nor should we. If someone is not happy, so be it. Plenty of great cameras and systems, both with mirrors and without them.

From what i've seen, these threads usually end up badly. People get upset about claims on equivalence, size, handling, DOF, ISO, AF speed and pretty much everything else. I see no reason to get defensive about the bad sides of m43, but that's just me. I can accept it's bad sides and still want more in the future generations of m43 cameras. I will still use the system, because it suits me more than e.g. Sony FF line up.

I think we can all agree that every system has it's good and bad sides. Most of us can also agree that pretty much every modern camera is good enough for most purposes.

Cheers.
 

50orsohours

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 13, 2013
Messages
2,420
Location
Portland Oregon
I know, lack of noise is not what makes or breaks a photograph. I never once said it does. Light, subject, composition, story, etc etc. From what i've seen from your work, you have much better eye and technique than i do in all of those areas. A great photo taken with an iPhone will trump mediocre photo taken by a mediocre photographer with a 5d mark 4 or latest hasselblad.

But the truth is, to some people it (ISO and noise) matters. Moreso than size of the camera or the cost or the handling. It is no surprise that, due to sensor size, m43 handles noise "worse" than APSC which handles it "worse" than FF. You or anyone else may think it's petty, but in the end it's their call. We cannot change those people, nor should we. If someone is not happy, so be it. Plenty of great cameras and systems, both with mirrors and without them.

From what i've seen, these threads usually end up badly. People get upset about claims on equivalence, size, handling, DOF, ISO, AF speed and pretty much everything else. I see no reason to get defensive about the bad sides of m43, but that's just me. I can accept it's bad sides and still want more in the future generations of m43 cameras. I will still use the system, because it suits me more than e.g. Sony FF line up.

I think we can all agree that every system has it's good and bad sides. Most of us can also agree that pretty much every modern camera is good enough for most purposes.

Cheers.
I agree with your post 100% - that is why I feel, that if you need something that the D500 shines at, get the D500. Complaining about your FF gear not fitting into a small shoulder bag, is not going to change physics. Get a bigger bag, or get a smaller system.
 

50orsohours

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 13, 2013
Messages
2,420
Location
Portland Oregon
If you are fine with compressed 720x480 in 2016 then you are pretty much fine with any camera from the Nintendo DSi up :D

There has gotta be a pretty high correlation between the "m43 doesn't have noise problems" and the "who even wants a 4k tv" people from last year, back before Olympus had a camera that did it :D
Who are you talking to?
 

Latest posts

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