E-M5 vs. E-P3: JPEG Image Quality @ Pekka Potka

Discussion in 'Olympus' started by krugorg, Feb 29, 2012.

  1. krugorg

    krugorg All-Pro

    Sep 26, 2011
    Minnesota USA
    Kyle Krug
  2. bilzmale

    bilzmale Super Moderator Emeritus Subscribing Member

    Jul 17, 2010
    Perth, Western Australia
    Bill Shinnick
    Thanks for this Kyle - my preorder is safe too. :smile:
  3. Armanius

    Armanius Bring Jack back!

    Jan 11, 2011
    Houston, Texas
    Perhaps a two stop advantage for OMD?
  4. Julien

    Julien Top Veteran

    Jan 6, 2012
    Paris, France
    EM-5 12800 seem to have a comparable amount of noise to EP-3 3200, but details seem more washed out on the EM-5 (to my eyes at least). I'd prefer to see raw files.

    With the tests we've seen so far I really can't see this sensor being anything but the Pana 16mp. There's not enough difference in IQ that could have justified Olympus getting a new sensor from another company. But we'll know soon enough.
  5. Luckypenguin

    Luckypenguin Hall of Famer

    Dec 24, 2010
    Brisbane, Australia
    I don't think that setting the Noise Reduction to off on the E-M5 completely disables the noise reduction. The solid areas in the grayscale wedges look like they've had NR applied. It also seems as though at least one of the cameras has a variance between actual and reported ISO since at the same settings the E-P3 is overexposing compared to the E-M5, which is contributing to the appearance of noise.
    • Like Like x 1
  6. krugorg

    krugorg All-Pro

    Sep 26, 2011
    Minnesota USA
    Kyle Krug
    Reminded me of Amin's post over on mu-43 after the E-P3 release, that showed how there was still some bit of NR applied by Viewer, even if the noise reduction was set to off.

    Olympus E-P3 Lightroom-Converted RAW and In-Camera JPEG Comparison at High ISO - Micro Four Thirds User Forum
  7. wolfie

    wolfie Veteran

    Sep 19, 2010
    From the samples around it certainly looks like a safe 2 stops improvement over the E-P3 - if it is a panny sensor, then Olympus are certainly better than they are at extracting performance out of it ...