1. Welcome to Mu-43.com—a friendly Micro 4/3 camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

OM-D test shots vs my D7000

Discussion in 'Olympus Cameras' started by kevitra, Jun 26, 2012.

  1. kevitra

    kevitra Mu-43 Regular

    Jun 26, 2012
    I've owned and loved my D7000 since I purchased it at release. It has been an incredible camera but like a lot of others I find it often too big to bring to places and incredibly heavy.

    My gear consists of the D7000, 18-105, 50mm 1.8 G, Tamron 28-75 2.8, and Sigma 75-300 APO DG.

    After reading a lot about the OM-D I decided that it just might be the camera for me with the correct lenses. I ordered from Amazon last with with the 12-50 last week and received it yesterday. I am getting the Panny 20mm 1.7 tomorrow (birthday present) and if I like the kit I will probably get the Oly 40-150mm to cover my tele needs. The only lens I cannot duplicate is the Tamron but I can live with good primes.

    Over the next couple of weeks I plan on hauling both cameras and shooting with each. The photos below were just me messing around, in the future I plan on using a tripod and trying to match up the focal lengths. I am usually not a pixel peeper but I do care about sharpness. So far the 12-50 easily matches the 18-105 which was a relief. Reading some of the reviews of the 12-50 make me doubt that lens. If I keep the Oly kit I will use it for a lot of video so the power zoom is a very nice feature.

    In the images below Nikon is always on the left, Oly on the right. All JPEG images are straight out of the camera.

    ISO 3200 RAW images, 18-105 at 105mm f/5.6, Oly 12-50 at 50mm f/6.3
    View attachment 213892

    Same image JPEG.
    View attachment 213893

    Base ISO RAW images, 18-105 at 18mm f/8.0, Oly 12-50 at 12mm f6.3 zoomed in Lightroom
    View attachment 213894

    Bottom left corner of an image, base ISO RAW images, 18-105 at 18mm f/8.0, Oly 12-50 at 12mm f6.3
    View attachment 213895
    There is extreme CA with the 18-105.

    Same image jpeg:
    View attachment 213896

    18mm f/8.0, 12mm f/5.0
    View attachment 213897
    The OM-D sky looks like I had a polarizer on the lens. Does LR pull in info from the JPEG processing? Maybe it's the difference between 12mm and 18mm? This is one reason why I need to "normalize" the focal lengths when comparing.

    There is a huge difference in the white balance record in the RAW images. The noise is comparable and the OM-D keeps up with the D7000 really well.

    I am impressed so far but it is still the honeymoon period. Of the photos I've taken (not shown) I am really liking the look of the SOOC JPEGs of the OM-D. With my D7000 I usually do a lot of post processing, almost always with the white balance (see ISO 3200 image above). Lightroom's Auto white balance does not do as good of a job as the OM-D did SOOC.

    Tonight I am golfing with my son and I plan on bringing the OM-D to put it through it's paces. I've taken the D7000 many times so it will be interesting to see how I like the size and the results of the night (both golf and photography).
    • Like Like x 1
  2. dhazeghi

    dhazeghi Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 6, 2010
    San Jose, CA
    I think the main difference is that Olympus uses more saturation by default, as well as more contrast and a bias in the blue channel towards purple (Nikon tends more toward green). Nikon also tends to meter less conservatively, resulting a bright image. Most prefer the Olympus approach, though the Nikon can be tweaked somewhat.

    Does look like Olympus needs to give some thought to cleaning up the CA in their JPEGs. Uncorrected, the corners look pretty bad.

    • Like Like x 1
  3. FlyPenFly

    FlyPenFly Mu-43 Veteran

    Feb 15, 2011
    You really need to use the same exposures if you're doing comparisons.

    You also should get a sharper lens than the 12-50.
  4. kevitra

    kevitra Mu-43 Regular

    Jun 26, 2012
    Why should I get a sharper lens than the 12-50? I am comparing it to what I use a lot now - the 18-105. Kit lens vs kit lens.

    Once I get my Panny 1.7 I will compare it to my Nikon 50mm 1.8 and I might as well do the Tamron also. The focal lengths are different but it is the gear I have.

    Re: exposure - I set the ISO and aperture and let both cameras decide the shutter speed. This is how I typically shoot and I wanted to see the differences. I understand your point though and I will do that later.
  5. Thank you so much for these results. I am really quite pleased seeing way that the E-M5 and D7000 almost match in ISO at 3200. Reading reports would make one believe that the D7000 was clean at this setting and all it's praise presumes it is a superior camera.

    I think this should give confidence in the E-M5 ability and as well how useful the 12-50 lens can be. I personally do not call it a kit lens - it's retail price reflects that, plus what kit lens is weatherproofed and has power zoom. It's not as fast as my 12-60 f2.8/4 - but it's also less than half the price and even cheaper in when combined with the camera purchase. I think it is a very useful lens for most people who would never think of spending close to $1000 for a lens.

    It is quite amazing how the camera software corrects for the Nikon CA in jpeg. I wouldn't worry too much about comments to the contrary - even with the mismatches, this is a very useful test. Most important is what you stated : "This is how I typically shoot and I wanted to see the differences". That is how I like to test gear as well. Just make sure it will work for me.
    • Like Like x 1
  6. FlyPenFly

    FlyPenFly Mu-43 Veteran

    Feb 15, 2011
    The 18-105mm Nikon is actually a incredibly sharp zoom. The Oly 12-50 is one of the weaker kit zooms although it is weather sealed.
  7. kevitra

    kevitra Mu-43 Regular

    Jun 26, 2012
    What is a sharper m43 zoom? The Panny 14-45? (I've read it is good).
  8. FlyPenFly

    FlyPenFly Mu-43 Veteran

    Feb 15, 2011
    The Panny 14-45 is an unusually good kit lens.
  9. With_Eyes_Unclouded

    With_Eyes_Unclouded Mu-43 All-Pro

    Apr 17, 2012
    Thanks for the comparison! As noted though, you really have to much focal lengths for a more complete comparison.

    It seems that the OM-D has a pretty aggressive noise reduction algorithm for JPEGs by default. You could set the Noise Filter to Off and also set sharpnening to lower (like -1), because results may look slightly oversharpened sometimes.

    My experience from the first serious shooting with the OM-D were similar with yours concerning RAW post processing. I did messed up white balance (was indoors shooting) because I forgot to take my white balance card with me :frown: (always use it, just to be safe). But when corrected for white balance, I found I had very little to do in LR4.1. Perhaps very minimal exposure/shadow adjustments in a few cases, absolutely NO color adjustments. It's the first time most JPEGs actually looked better than what I could do with the RAWs (I shoot L-JPEG+RAW with any camera). That means a lot, esp. if you have to browse through 300+ pics to choose your 30-40 keepers.
  10. lenshoarder

    lenshoarder Mu-43 All-Pro

    Nov 7, 2010
    I have to say it. You have a huge backyard.
  11. kevitra

    kevitra Mu-43 Regular

    Jun 26, 2012
    Ha. The entire lot is a 1/4 acre. For reference the patio is 20' deep from where I was standing.
  12. kevitra

    kevitra Mu-43 Regular

    Jun 26, 2012
    Thanks for the information. The saturation is a bit much and I can see myself toning it down a bit.
  13. dcisive

    dcisive Mu-43 Veteran

    Feb 19, 2010
    Salt Lake City, Utah
    Some people sure do love to dis the 12-50 kit lens. It may not be the equal to fast pro glass, but it's not shabby either. I have been there and done that with your comparisons prior to my letting my D7000 and NEX-5N go for this OMD. I'm very happy with the results of the 12-50 kit lens for walk around purposes or travel. If I'm doing a portrait for pay I'll slap on my 45mm f1.8 and if I want to capture wildlife or compress a distant subject I'll slap on my M. Zuiko 75-300, but otherwise the kit stays firmly on the OMD. Nothing to apologize for. There are a number of factors you aren't considering. Firstly flip the Gradation to AUTO and NOT Normal. It will bring those shadows up likity split. I don't use any enhanced color settings either just Neutral. If I shoot in RAW then Lightroom seems to do the trick. Yours is habitually underexposing. The D7000 typically goes the other direction hence the differences. The OMD handily competes with the D7000 or I would not have let it go. The kit 12-50 when used properly (assuming not a bad copy) is a fine lens and doesn't deserve the maligning it has been receiving. It's not intended to compete with primes, but does just fine on it's own merits.
    • Like Like x 2
  14. kevitra

    kevitra Mu-43 Regular

    Jun 26, 2012
    While at high ISO they are similar, the D7000 is much] cleaner at lower ISOs. I took an indoor headshot of my daughter at ISO 400 (aperture/shutter identical) and the D7000 had a lot less noise than the OM-D. With a proper lens (ie: fast) I could have exposed the photo properly but I wanted to test how well I could pull up an underexposed photo. I can clean it up in LR but the D7000 was noticeably cleaner.
  15. bcaslis

    bcaslis Mu-43 Veteran

    Jul 3, 2011
    Wilsonville, OR, USA
    Brian Caslis
    I am very pleased with the 12-50 as a general purpose lens. Much better dedicated lens (like the 12, 25, 45 primes) but I don't understand the constant bashing of it especially for the 14-42. Weather sealed, perfect focal length range, really good macro, manual and electronic zoom, and acceptable sharpness. What's not to like about it.

    I agree that the OM-D pictures here seem to be underexposed. I'm not sure why. I used to have a D7000 and I don't see any real exposure difference with the OM-D.
  16. RichA

    RichA Mu-43 Regular

    Mar 28, 2012
    Nikon's "blue grass" is a bit off

    I had the D7000 for about three weeks. I thought it did a credible job, great DR, but I was so used to the more rounded, less abrupt D300 grip and feel, the D7000 never grew on me.
    The E-M5 feel is radically different so I accept it as such. Overall, I prefer it, no fine-tuning of lens focusing and the magnified views in the EVF make manual focusing (I've got a lot of manual lenses) much easier than with the optical viewfinder. I think the default JPEG setting with the E-M5 is to "warm" the image. There is a more neutral setting.
  17. With_Eyes_Unclouded

    With_Eyes_Unclouded Mu-43 All-Pro

    Apr 17, 2012
    Custom Menu G --> '(WB Auto) Keep Warm Color'

    You can set this to "off" and it will get rid of the "warming". :wink:
  18. kevitra

    kevitra Mu-43 Regular

    Jun 26, 2012
    This is one of the first things I did when I got the camera. I love the forums and the user guides that people make.

    Here is one from tonight's golf outing with the 12-50. After shooting my kids today it is soft compared to the 18-105, although it does great for landscapes. I am really interested to see what the 20mm 1.7 does with the camera.

    I am digging the tilt screen.

    "The Golfer"
    Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.