1. Reminder: Please user our affiliate links to get to your favorite stores for holiday shopping!

OM5 vs nex 5n

Discussion in 'Olympus Cameras' started by latifron, Jun 9, 2012.

  1. latifron

    latifron Mu-43 Rookie

    21
    Apr 28, 2012
    anyone own both camera?

    i want to know which camera has better performance in picture qualities. any comment?
     
  2. Grinch

    Grinch Mu-43 Top Veteran

    813
    Jan 9, 2011
    Canada
    I'd suggest going to Flickr or the likes, and look at shots from both and decide for yourself. Or I think DPR will let you do a comparison of the two.
     
  3. fooddude

    fooddude Mu-43 Regular

    131
    May 22, 2012
    I just sold my 5N... awaiting OMD in the mail :)

    I'd like to find out more on this comparison too...in both stills And Video.

    So far, I've only seen a few at 25,600iso. And, it beats the 5n by a lot.

    I was actually very content and impressed with the 5N's iq and noise; even coming from a 5D2, it was just really good

    ...my only reason replacing the 5N for the OMD was the IBIS, which is more important to me than sensor size...but after further research, the OMD just may have an edge in IQ over the 5N too.

    We'll just have to wait for some good comparo pics and vids.
     
  4. Sammyboy

    Sammyboy m43 Pro

    Oct 26, 2010
    Steeler Country
    How about the Leica S2 or the Nikon D4, anyone compared their M5 against these two gems ?
     
  5. dcisive

    dcisive Mu-43 Veteran

    460
    Feb 19, 2010
    Salt Lake City, Utah
    Lee
    Ironically I just sold off an entire D7000 system with lenses as well as a complete NEX 5N system with extra lenses and flashes to get a OMD. After a week I am quite happy having sold off all the rest of that gear for the OMD with the Kit 12-50 having added a 45mm f1.8 and a M. Zuiko 75-300. The 75-300 easily outresolves both the Nikon 70-300vr as well as the Sony 55-210OSS. Both of those other cameras do a fine job don't get me wrong. It's just the special things the OMD brings to the table for me I prefer as well as those yummy Oly colors I had missed. The IBIS truly is a dream come true, especially for video. I love the fit for my hands. It's like a mini pro DSLR which is exactly what I wanted long term. The performance without the build. The menu so many have issues with on the OMD to me is superb and I have no problems with it. To ME it is intuitive by comparison to what Sony is doing. I'm not handholding shots I only dreamed of getting successfully with the other systems. There is just something jewel like on the OMD with it's solid sealed body. The D7000 was that way but man after a day of lugging that around it got old. That's why I was using the Sony almost all the time, it was just so light and easy. But indeed in all ways the OMD trumps the Sony so it's a moot point to me. The lightning fast focus on the OMD is what hooked me first, the IBIS abilities did secondly and then the shear build quality and viewfinder did it for me. I wasn't about to shell out hundreds more for a NEX7 and have overheating short lived video and limited lens selection for native lenses. It was a tough call to let go of my DSLR stuff, and I would have minded if it weren't for the fact the OMD performs every bit as well. Better longer video to boot. All in all it ended up a good move.
     
  6. latifron

    latifron Mu-43 Rookie

    21
    Apr 28, 2012
    i want to know picture quality from both camera only. please anyone with real experience on both camera?
     
  7. Promit

    Promit Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 6, 2011
    Baltimore, MD
    Promit Roy
    The NEX will give you moderately better images for equivalent lenses. But the OM-D is a vastly better camera, and has access to better lenses.
     
  8. WT21

    WT21 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Feb 19, 2010
    Boston
    Are you sure? I honestly don't know. The sensor will give cleaner higher ISO, and more DR, but there are few lenses that are direct competitors between the two systems, to it's hard to tell, and with NEX's flange back distance, they could have issues.

    But it's hard to do direct comparisons. The better lenses on both sides aren't too comparable. What about the Oly 45/1.8 vs. NEX 50/1.8. Wonder how they compare (though the effective AOV is still different between them).

    edit: did a quick Google search. I can't believe there aren't many head-to-head comparisons between the O.45 and Nex.50.

    I found this page: http://3d-kraft.com/index.php?optio...asph-et-al&catid=40:camerasandlenses&Itemid=2 which is actually testing a bunch of lenses, and these two pics (both at 1.8):

    NEX7 w/e-mount 50:
    6817837146_fe816b0d1c_b.

    GH2 q/Oly 45:
    6963994371_deef0592d8_b.

    Fairly comparable, though the NEX with the 50 is showing more astigmatism. They've also locked onto different focus points. The NEX seems focused on the orange string the basket, the GH2 on the rabbits "fur" and the paintbrush.

    Why aren't there more direct comparisons of these two lenses?
     
  9. fooddude

    fooddude Mu-43 Regular

    131
    May 22, 2012
    Go on the Dpr DR page for OMD... the OMD beats all apsc cameras regarding DR..which is unheard of and unbelievable..by a huge margin too, as well as the older FFs. It's actually close to a tie with the newest FF's like the D800, D4, 5D3... wow.

    As for noise..unsure yet.. but I saw a post in another forum I will link later...

    As for tests...it would be better to use the same lens, and just adapted, no? ..of course, the effective FL's would be totally diff.. but diff FL using the same exact lens I think is a closer and much better comparo than a totally diff lens, whom will have totally diff Everything (ca, color, sharpness, dr, etc., etc)


    edit:

    Best 5N vs OMD high iso comparo (this test is ONLY for noise/iso comparison (as the shutter, ap and FLs are diff, and the focus is a lil off too..but it shows noise differences pretty well)

    http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1115509/3#10663729

    http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1115509/4#10664187

    ...pretty easy to see that the OMD not only is good at high iso..but pretty much mops the floor of an APSC low-light monster, the 5N :)
     
  10. WT21

    WT21 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Feb 19, 2010
    Boston
    Depends on what you are looking for adapted lenses are MF. I think Promit's point was that m43 has access to more/better AF lenses. If you use the same adapted lens, then you are only testing the sensor. If all you want is MF, then that's an OK test. For me, I wouldn't mind seeing AF comparison tests.
     
  11. latifron

    latifron Mu-43 Rookie

    21
    Apr 28, 2012
    i am more for picture quality only rather than camera feature. DR review is not suitable for me.

    Thank you for posting pictures from both camera. now, i know which one has better image quality
     
  12. Promit

    Promit Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 6, 2011
    Baltimore, MD
    Promit Roy
    Cameras are not sensors. And more importantly, sensors are not cameras. Most important of all, cameras are not sensors. If you select based on image quality alone, you're essentially choosing a camera at random and your odds of getting one that is actually right for you are low.

    Actually I'm inclined to phrase it more strongly than that -- if image quality is a metric in your camera selection, your priorities are badly distorted. Image quality is only really relevant in selecting a category of camera: compact, large sensor compact, large sensor ILC, etc. Experts will see things a bit differently, as they have a workflow and want specific things from their sensor data. That doesn't apply to you. Oh, and image samples are not indicative of image quality.

    Assume that the OM-D and NEX-5N are completely identical in image quality. Completely identical. Now pick a camera. If you don't have a strong opinion about what to pick, you have no business buying either camera. If you have a strong opinion, real image quality is not different enough between the two cameras to justify changing your choice.
     
    • Like Like x 4
  13. WT21

    WT21 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Feb 19, 2010
    Boston
    That's crazy! I wouldn't have expected that. Though the ISO is silly (25,600). You'd need comparisons all the way through the ISO range, with recovery and push/pull tests, under controlled circumstances, etc.

    Promit's point is therefore well taken, and cameras are more than just sensors. But, if you've got the sensor and the lenses, then the next test is comfort/fit.
     
  14. latifron

    latifron Mu-43 Rookie

    21
    Apr 28, 2012

    if both camera are identical in image quality, i will definitely buy OM-d.
     
  15. latifron

    latifron Mu-43 Rookie

    21
    Apr 28, 2012

    if both camera are identical in image quality, i will definitely buy OM-d.

    the above image samples show enough information for me
     
  16. Serhan

    Serhan Mu-43 Top Veteran

    533
    May 7, 2011
    NYC
    I have both. I haven't done a direct comparison, eg still need to check raw images from omd but from what I saw in dpreview raw comparisons, the high iso might be a little better with nex-5n, similarly also the dynamic range. You need viewfinder with nex-5n, then you cannot use the flash. For manual lenses, nex peaking is very nice, but maybe not very accurate wide open. OMD has IS and also faster AF. Again I haven't checked how effective new IS with OMD is but the lens IS is better with nex-5n in comparison to e-p3 with longer lenses. Maybe the body shape helped though the ep/omd bodies look nicer. M43 has more variety of lenses. The AF lenses are bigger with nex so you might need a bigger bag for comparable set-up but the gain is depth of field. So you have to see which is more important for you, eg IQ difference might not be that much. Here is some of the photos that I posted on my wife's website:

    Flickr: gry_winther's Photostream

    First 3 are with omd, last 3 nex 5n+zeiss 24mm. First 4 are direct jpegs and I think second photo is with panaleica 25mm and the rest might be 45mm or 25mm.
     
  17. dre_tech

    dre_tech Mu-43 Veteran

    314
    Jan 31, 2012
    If you care about IQ only:
    1. They're very very close in IQ. Choose the one you like best.
    2. You may trouble yourself with a 30 day trial of Lightroom, you'll be surprised how much more detail is in your photos with difficult lighting.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  18. Without being rude: if you can't work out the difference in image quality yourself from the review sites, then any differences won't matter to you in real life.
    Any recent camera from m43 sensor size up gives very useable IQ to any moderately skilled photographer. Choose yours based on other features: price, speed of focus, lens selction, size of lenses and body, evf/ ovf/ lcd etc.
    While you may feel you are comparing similar cameras based on MP count etc, they are very different when you take those other features into account.
    If the price difference doesn't matter to you, choose the E-M5. Good luck.
     
  19. latifron

    latifron Mu-43 Rookie

    21
    Apr 28, 2012
    thank you, as i said before, the above pictures shows me enough information. i prefer sony nex5n regarding picture quality.
     
  20. Liamness

    Liamness Mu-43 Veteran

    375
    Apr 20, 2011
    The OM-D has all the features of the Nex-7 at the same price (at least in the UK). It also edges it on image quality (both because of the lenses available, and the strange issues the sony's sensor has) and portability due to the non-massive lenses. It also has very effective image stabilisation built in.

    Why I am talking about the Nex-7 and not the Nex-5n like you asked? Well, because I don't think the 5n looks like a very fun camera to use. It has pretty much no external controls, so you'd need to use the touchscreen for everything, and no EVF built in so it would be difficult to use it sunlight. Pretty much all it has over the OM-D is price, and if you want a cheap mirrorless camera the G3 would be my pick atm.

    So; G3 or OM-D. Those are the two best choices if you want to buy a new mirrorless camera body atm. The only consideration is how much you want to pay really. As others have pointed out, these supposed image quality differences won't make much difference in real life. I would say the primary differences between these cameras are in the way they operate. If you are still unsure, I'd suggest you try them out in person.