Thread: OMD studio samples in DPReview - AWESOME!

I've got one word to describe the OMD samples --- WOW!!!

The OMD JPG and RAW studio samples are now up in the DPReview's database.

I've been looking at the RAW samples at ISO6400, comparing the OMD to the GX1, GH2, NEX-5n, Pentax K-5 and Nikon D7000. The last three cameras are presumably some of the better APS-C cameras, using the same 16mp Sony sensor. Can't compare with the XPro1 yet, because it's not in DPReview's database.

To my eyes, the OMD's RAW files, yes RAW files, are better than the GX1, GH2 and NEX-5n. The NEX-5n might be a tad better on the red channel. The OMD is very close to the D7000, and only slightly behind the K-5 (which applies noise reduction to the RAW files).

Use the following link to the comparometer in the GX1's review, and use the pull down menu to choose Olympus OMD EM5. If you weren't impressed with what we've been seeing before, I think you will be impressed now!!

Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX1 Review: Digital Photography Review

I think m4/3 may have caught up with APS-C now. Whereas the GH2, G3, GX1 are arguably one stop behind in terms of noise control at high ISO, the OMD's sensor seems to be on par now.

The OMD images look quite spectacular. Here are a few I came across which seems unbelievable for a small camera -












The blog and review -
¼¯´ó³ÉÕß °ÂÁÖ°Í˹OM-D E-M5ÆÀ²â±¨¸æ - ´º¾íµÄBLOG - PCHOME²©¿Í


Some very worrying reports on the dpreview forums of the image stabilizer jumping around on start-up though.

It's looking good, but comparing the base ISO samples between the D5100/D7000 and the OM-D I still see more noise in the OM-D.

And the first two shots in Boid's post are cleared labeled "with Nikon D300s" :)

I see no significant difference in noise handling between the E-M5 and GX1 (maybe 1/3 stop difference) on the dpreview comparison at ISO 6400, only a better white balance on the E-M5. The NEX-5N I feel is quite a bit better. Maybe I'm losing my eyesight. I have to say I'm not the best at judging picture quality in studio like this.

Originally Posted by Chris2500dk

It's looking good, but comparing the base ISO samples between the D5100/D7000 and the OM-D I still see more noise in the OM-D.

And the first two shots in Boid's post are cleared labeled "with Nikon D300s" :)

Right you are, removing the first two images.

Don't know if I should open a new thread just for this so I'm posting it here. DigitalRev aren't exactly known as being the most reliable reviewers out there, but I thought I'd share that screen cap from their latest video (8m04s) :

I think that Kai, like a good amount of people, prefers the styling of the E-P3, compared to the E-M5 and maybe it clouds his view of the new camera. On one part of the review, he says the E-M5 is perfectly useable at ISO 3200 and 6400 and then later he says it is really just another PEN camera. I don't know about his PEN, but I don't feel like my E-P3's color ISO 3200 and 6400 shots are all that useable.

It does seem like the Fuji's high ISO is pretty amazing and interesting for me that, though Kai mentions the struggle with its AF, he was still able to get shots with prefocus, etc.

Oh, and I know this was a high ISO test, but I wish he would have used the CZ on the Sony and the PL25 on the E-M5.

Originally Posted by Julien

I see no significant difference in noise handling between the E-M5 and GX1 (maybe 1/3 stop difference) on the dpreview comparison at ISO 6400, only a better white balance on the E-M5. The NEX-5N I feel is quite a bit better. Maybe I'm losing my eyesight. I have to say I'm not the best at judging picture quality in studio like this.

I had the same thoughts. The OMD is very good and most people will never see the difference. Still, the NEX images look better.

Did we reach "good enough" on pretty much all of these new cameras?

I'm still holding out for the E-P4/5, but excited to be able to use 3200. With the 20/1.7 and 25/1.4 and I can't imagine a time when I would need ISO 6400 or 12800 to get a shot?

Yes, I think we're reaching a point where all those cameras deliver good images in most low light situations. I don't see future high iso improvements as pointless though, as they will allow the use of smaller aperture in handheld shooting, meaning big(er) f1.4 lenses won't be required, more freedom with the dof, better sharpness, and the ability to capture moving subjects in low light with long telephoto lenses (and more). Plenty of refinements to look forward to.