Not satisfied with m43

[toyanucci]

Shot taken tonight with the 45mm at f1.8 and ISO 1250. Edited in LR & PS.

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

ISO 800

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

 

[50orsohours]

Lets be honest here, the image quality is definitely inferior to that of an APS-C .

Right! But how can DP Review be so out of touch and say this about the EM-1?

The E-M1 provides the excellent image quality that you'd expect from a camera of its semi-pro level. Its Four Thirds sensor is smaller than the APS-C imagers of its Nikon D7100 and Canon EOS 70D peers, but we think the difference it makes in real world shooting is hard to spot. You need to put the E-M1 up against a full frame camera to really see a significant difference in image quality.

 

[AlanU]

Setting up a preset in Lightroom for what you expect is your solution. I have one preset where no sharping occurs, no noise reduction, no Auto Tone adjustments, and use Camera Natural Camera Calibration. Because I often shoot many photos in nearly similar situations at once, this is a preferred Import preset for me to use for these types of photos.

Once my photos are imported I cull my photos deleting what I don't like, then adjust the first image to my liking, and synch those changes to all of the rest. From there I spend a minimal amount of time on each of the rest. My best photos may get 15 seconds to several minutes worth of adjustments and/or a trip to Photoshop and back.

Post processing RAW images can make or break photos from any camera manufacturer.

Sounds like an effective workflow process.

I use a similar setup with certain presets for virgin RAW files for all of my Camera's. After I hit them with a generic preset I categorize them in the type of lighting. This is where I have a good 25+ different xrite passport presets. For example "shade sunny day", "pic behind sun", "pic direct sun", "indoor ambient cloudy day" with all of my presets they have an effect on the colours. Not a perfect system but streamlines alot and typically heck of alot better than sitting infront of LR playing with vibrance, shadows, highlight etc. Yes I play with those settings but I use presets to get more realistic colours especially for dark/light skin tones of subjects.

 

[AlanU]

Right! But how can DP Review be so out of touch and say this about the EM-1?

APS-C sensors should fear the IQ the M43 sensor provides. I'll give credit to M43 for providing such great IQ for the limitations of sensor size.

As are as FF is concerned I'd have to say time does not stand still for advances....just like how m43 has evolved. Full frame is king for resolution, noise control and most importantly dof.

I still find the prime lenses to be the essential tool for the m43 to maximize the utmost maximum IQ. In the dslr world (canon anyways) the mk2 revision zoom and lenses available at f/2.8 provide prime quality with beautiful micro contrast. The Mk2 revision of Canon's prime lenses also produce an incredible micro contrast. This is something the m43 (to my eyes) cannot achieve. The sharpness from the M43 is very good like the old generation canon lenses. On print there would be a subtle difference but on a high gamut monitor there would be a distinct noticeable difference even without pixel peeping.

Today lugged my gh3 w/ 25 f/1.4 and was very pleased for my casual outing with the family (normally I'd use my em-5 for higher IQ). However if I had to do a similar environment for an E session I could not use that same combo. This comes as a personal preference and in my LR workflow I can tell the difference in IQ between the two systems. What is most noticeable is how solid the set is when it comes to AF accuracy.

 

[Growltiger]

. On print there would be a subtle difference but on a high gamut monitor there would be a distinct noticeable difference even without pixel peeping.

A properly calibrated high gamut monitor should look identical to a properly calibrated normal gamut monitor except when the colours shown are out of gamut - which is not common in nature. If you think your high gamut monitor looks wonderful in comparison then you don't have it set up properly. This is a common problem and helps sell them for the wrong reasons.

 

[DennisC]

Right! But how can DP Review be so out of touch and say this about the EM-1?

Well they completely missed the shutter shake on the E-M10.
I sent the first copy back after all of my lenses were not performing as they had. The second copy was about to go back too when Olympus issued the firmware fix.

Now I use the Electronic Shutter and dumped the EZ kit lens to get the results I'd expected in the first place.

Basically DPReview only says nice things and plays down difficulties.....I'm thinking of Sony and Fuji cameras that I own.

 

[Drdave944]

I just happened to take these comparative shots yesterday. This should settle the question. My wife spotted these mushrooms growing out of the porch. There was heavy shade. All pictures were taken hand held at f2.8 for the 60mm macro and 35mm at f2.2 with the Canon. All lenses were image stabilized. I processed each picture in Lightroom with no adjustments except for cropping. All pictures are raw files.No extra sharpening or noise reduction was applies. The cameras were set on auto WB auto focus and S-AF and evaluative metering. No post processing was done I did later run Nik Define noise reduction on the Oly picture with complete elimination of the noise with no significant degradation of the image. Initially I posted the first picture as a Canon pict. (thanks to Zee for catching it)

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

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

first OLY; second Panny
See below for Canon Pic





My observations conclude that the Canon didn't a great deal less noise less noise. It was more difficult to get my auto focus and the image stabilization was not as good and having no tilt screen made it harder to handle. The colors seem better than the M43s which are somewhat drab . It would be difficult to get them identical using PP Each camera will have its strengths and weakness ,so take your choice No one camera will be perfect in all circumstances. In this example the big concern of noise seems moot

 

[Zee]

Ermmm...

"Panasonic DMC-GX7 | 60mm F2.8 1/320 ISO200 | 2014:09:20 14:11:38 | Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.6 (Windows)" is the top pic,according to EXIF...

Z...

 

[Drdave944]

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

See above This is the Pic taken with the Canon Rebel.

 

[fortwodriver]

Canon's secret sauce includes warmth. I always used to dial down the "brown" in my Canon RAW files in favour of a cooler rendition.

Hey, my 7D is much more noisy than my E-M1 and the 7D images fall apart far faster than the E-M1 when doing extensive editing - even if that editing is just to see how far I can pull/push the RAW file for poops and giggles.

 

[AlanU]

A properly calibrated high gamut monitor should look identical to a properly calibrated normal gamut monitor except when the colours shown are out of gamut - which is not common in nature. If you think your high gamut monitor looks wonderful in comparison then you don't have it set up properly. This is a common problem and helps sell them for the wrong reasons.

skin texture looks much more detailed on a high gamut monitor. Using my spyder elite monitor calibrator in conjuntion with xrite color passport this system is working perfectly with all of my prints.

 

[AlanU]

Canon's secret sauce includes warmth. I always used to dial down the "brown" in my Canon RAW files in favour of a cooler rendition.

Hey, my 7D is much more noisy than my E-M1 and the 7D images fall apart far faster than the E-M1 when doing extensive editing - even if that editing is just to see how far I can pull/push the RAW file for poops and giggles.

Common to see 7d files to fall apart at iso 1250 with my experience. 7D exhibits a soft hazy file that is difficult to get clean images when you push the ISO. That is a common complaint. It probably has a very strong AA filter. 60d and 70d doesn't output files like a 7d.

 

[fortwodriver]

Common to see 7d files to fall apart at iso 1250 with my experience. 7D exhibits a soft hazy file that is difficult to get clean images when you push the ISO. That is a common complaint. It probably has a very strong AA filter. 60d and 70d doesn't output files like a 7d.

Oh, I wasn't even pushing ISO that far on my 7D. At ISO 100, I'd often get mottling and odd effects in the green channel on my 7D raw files. It didn't matter if I did work in Photoshop, DPP, or Aperture. It was as if the green channel data was somehow bandwidth-limited during capture leaving a very poor green channel.
Strangely, I never really had an issue with it's AA filter - images were always sharp, just not very malleable. But yeah, I've heard the 60d and 70d are better.

 

[AlanU]

Oh, I wasn't even pushing ISO that far on my 7D. At ISO 100, I'd often get mottling and odd effects in the green channel on my 7D raw files. It didn't matter if I did work in Photoshop, DPP, or Aperture. It was as if the green channel data was somehow bandwidth-limited during capture leaving a very poor green channel.
Strangely, I never really had an issue with it's AA filter - images were always sharp, just not very malleable. But yeah, I've heard the 60d and 70d are better.

The 7D has one of the most rigid RAW files I've dealt with for a more modern dslr. The 50D seemed to have a more flexible RAW files but the noise was worst than the 7D. Older Canon Dslr like the xti, t2i, didn't have a very flexible RAW file aswell.

This is where I find my EM-5 very good for RAW files but I find my Canon 5dmk2 much more kind in pushing/pulling raw.

 

[pake]

Full frame is king for resolution, noise control and most importantly dof.

So what's medium format then?

 

[microfourthirdsnut]

On the noise issue I find it interesting. I was wondering how many old timers who use to shoot film shot over iso 400 film? Grainy pictures, the same as noise, I always shot at 400 or under. So many digital guys and girls are to young to remember film and grainy pics.

Cheers and keep snapping.

 

[fortwodriver]

On the noise issue I find it interesting. I was wondering how many old timers who use to shoot film shot over iso 400 film? Grainy pictures, the same as noise, I always shot at 400 or under. So many digital guys and girls are to young to remember film and grainy pics.
Cheers and keep snapping.

Aha!

Yes. In fact I nearly always shot above iso400! I used to buy bricks of iso1000 colour negative film and I even had some bizarre high speed Agfa Colour high speed transparency film over the years. I always liked what those films did with otherwise boring subjects.

 

[AlanU]

So what's medium format then?

So true about medium format as "king". I bet a high percentage of people using medium format digital rents 30grand camera's rather than purchase Many can afford dlsr's though.

 

[zathras]

On the noise issue I find it interesting. I was wondering how many old timers who use to shoot film shot over iso 400 film? Grainy pictures, the same as noise, I always shot at 400 or under. So many digital guys and girls are to young to remember film and grainy pics.

Cheers and keep snapping.

I used to shoot Delta 3200 until earlier this year when I switched to m43. My folks have a photo of mine on their wall that was shot on 35mm Delta 3200 pushed 3 stops which is roughly ISO 25000. Looks great, I can post a scan if you want

 

[Ulfric M Douglas]

What the hell?!
How is looking at in-shop pictures on the back of a camera any guide to how this thing is going to take pictures in the real world?

Sigh, I didn't start this thread expecting to get flamed and cussed out, in all honesty I was trying to be constructive and helpful to those on the fence. Not to sway them away from m43 but for them to do thorough testing before deciding which way they want to go. I was in Stockholm for a week and tested out the em1 in a camera store, I went their daily and was pleased with the results I saw on camera (I didn't think to take my sd card and examine the pictures)..

Brain cells!

Troll!;

in all honesty I was trying to be constructive