OM D has better dynamic range than X-Pro1 and Nex 7

Discussion in 'Olympus Cameras' started by KVG, Apr 27, 2012.

  1. KVG

    KVG Banned User

    May 10, 2011
    yyc(Calgary, AB)
    Real Name:
    Kelly Gibbons
  2. Ned

    Ned Mu-43 Legend

    Jul 18, 2010
    Alberta, Canada
    I agree, this is exciting. ;)
  3. krugorg

    krugorg Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jul 18, 2011
    Minnesota USA
    The Techradar results and test method have been questioned quite a bit on other, less cool forums. I don't know what I don't know, but I would be shocked if this sensor outperforms the best APS-C sensors in dynamic range.

    It does make me wonder if Oly could have done differently with their RAWs or other processing/NR to make the camera test better?

    Pekka Potka also posted his raw tests (using the new LR):
    pekkapotka - Journal
  4. Promit

    Promit Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 6, 2011
    Baltimore, MD
    Real Name:
    Promit Roy
    I'm very suspicious of the TechRadar results, and would suggest waiting for DXO before jumping to any conclusions.
  5. flash

    flash Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Apr 29, 2010
    1 hour from Sydney Australia.
    Real Name:
    Don't jump and down too hard yet. While pretty everyone agrees that the DR in the EM5 is the best for 4/3 and m4/3 yet, not everyone is seeing what tech radar did compared to the NEX and (especially) the Fuji. Now that LR and soon ACR accept EM5 raw files I think we'll see more definitive comparisons soon. Unfortunately I have found that, in the past, tech radars findings don't always translate to real world performance.

    Having now be able to download and process some raw files from all three cameras, personally, I have yet to see the EM5 outperform either the NEX or Fuji at base ISO.

    I sincerely hope it does do as well as they say. But it's not like the people here are seeing the same thing as they receive their cameras. And many have also used the other two cameras.

  6. Luckypenguin

    Luckypenguin .

    Oct 9, 2010
    Brisbane, Australia
    Real Name:
    I want this to be true as much as anyone, but for the E-M5 to rate above the X-Pro1 doesn't seem entirely plausible to me. That it is an improvement on any Olympus that has gone before it is enough for me.

    So far the discussion over DR from people who have received their E-M5s has been very quiet, although that may be largely due to a lack of RAW support.
  7. Ray Sachs

    Ray Sachs Super Moderator

    Apr 17, 2010
    Near Philadephila
    I'm using the OMD and X-Pro pretty extensively and if those numbers hold up, I'll conclude that numbers matter even less than I thought they did. The OMD is excellent in both DR and low light - a big step from previous Oly m43 and a less big step from the current Panys. Its really nice. But the X-Pro 1 appears to me to be notably better in DR (although I don't know how much is raw sensor and how much is the push-pull thing they do with jpegs) and its in another world in low light. And the two are generally related. I'm not all that anxious to see the DXO results either because I evaluate cameras by using them and trusting my eyes, but I find these conclusions pretty questionable based on my non-scientific observations. Which is not a knock on the OMD - its amazing and is better than the Fuji in some ways, but I don't see DR or low light being all that close.

  8. Dave in Wales

    Dave in Wales Mu-43 All-Pro

    Nov 5, 2011
    West Wales
    Techradar awarded 4 out of 5 stars, seems a little low for what they describe as a 'fantastic camera'