carstenw wrote:
VAT is 19% and the customs guys also take something. I think I normally pay +26.7% on top, and shipping will be much more expensive. Furthermore, the warranty probably won't be there, so in the end, we can just envy you your prices, but not much more.
I believe Olympus offers worldwide warranty on their products:
Guari wrote:
Sorry I thought the OP was the thread generator at DP, I understand that hot linking is not cool
Looks like you were right! I didn't realize it was the same person.
Anyway, I processed the RAWs he generously provided and upsampled both to 50MP for easier comparison (LR4.1 processed, applied CA correction, upsampled from LR). I'll post the links for you:
I've been reading a lot about m4/3 as I'd like to get me one and the 7-14 sounds very yummy.
From what I read all m4/3 cameras correct for distortion even at RAW level, however, I read that, so it might not be true..
I had heard rumblings to that effect but had also heard that:
1. That it doesn't correct in RAW.
2. Olympus doesn't correct Panasonic lenses.
Hard to know what is true. Not that it really matters, the lack of distortion on the lens is simply amazing regardless of how it gets there.
As an aside, the quality of the OM-D5 really doesn't come through until you but a native, high quality lens on it.
My early reaction with the 12-50 and adapted Nikon lenses was so-so. Put the Panny on it and it takes on a Holy Sh*t character. Not selling the D800 but will be leaving it home a lot more.
kwalsh wrote:
Looks like you were right! I didn't realize it was the same person.
Anyway, I processed the RAWs he generously provided and upsampled both to 50MP for easier comparison (LR4.1 processed, applied CA correction, upsampled from LR). I'll post the links for you:
The D800 is clearly better, but the EM5 is really, really, good, and the 7-14mm seems good, too. In the real world, Ie taking the raws the op generously posted, and sharpening them nicely and removing CA they are even better. I bet the EM5 vs 5d2 would be really close, and the EM5 would match a d7000 or 7d or something in a case like this (and is surely more portable, but might suffer in continuous af). Let's also be honest here, at web viewing sizes, once both files are treated right, the D800 is NOT clearly better.
Panny, with the G2 for video, and Oly with the EM5 for photography, have really proved the merits of micro 4/3 and have proved to the world that they made a good call.
This is comparing RAW/TIFF files. Maybe this is the reason DXO may be scratching their heads and unable rationalize or make any sense from these results!
carstenw wrote:
VAT is 19% and the customs guys also take something. I think I normally pay +26.7% on top, and shipping will be much more expensive. Furthermore, the warranty probably won't be there, so in the end, we can just envy you your prices, but not much more.
Ouch. That's quite the "buy local" enforcement plan.
This is comparing RAW/TIFF files. Maybe this is the reason DXO may be scratching their heads and unable rationalize or make any sense from these results!
In the real world, the noise produced by the OM-D is comparable to a 7D but nowhere close to a 5DII. They also have the DR testing in the same league as the D800 and it isn't even close in real life. The more realistic real life output of the OM-D doesn't mean its a bad camera but if the test results are accurate then it does mean that it is a bad test.
Hrow wrote:
In the real world, the noise produced by the OM-D is comparable to a 7D but nowhere close to a 5DII. They also have the DR testing in the same league as the D800 and it isn't even close in real life. The more realistic real life output of the OM-D doesn't mean its a bad camera but if the test results are accurate then it does mean that it is a bad test.
I hardly call the noise difference between the 5d2 and the EM5 "nowhere close" when in fact the 5d2 enjoys a small advantage, maybe a stop. The EM5 is as good or better than the 7d at any ISO, when you get to 1600 there is clearly more detail in the EM5 shots compared to the 7d and its very close to the 5d2. That's not surprising when comparing a 4-year-old Canon sensor to a new Sony sensor. Canon's "new" sensors are clearly lagging behind Sony's offerings and if the 5d3 is any indication - that gulf is only going to widen. The EM5 is a revolutionary camera, no regrets about selling my 5d2 and replacing it with the OMD.
It is a nice camera and 45mm is a good lens. However I'm not yet convinced if it is better than APS cameras. I need more investigation. Any suggestions welcome.
>>>The EM5 is as good or better than the 7d at any ISO, when you get to 1600 there is clearly more detail in the EM5 shots compared to the 7d and its very close to the 5d2.
joychris wrote:
I hardly call the noise difference between the 5d2 and the EM5 "nowhere close" when in fact the 5d2 enjoys a small advantage, maybe a stop. The EM5 is as good or better than the 7d at any ISO, when you get to 1600 there is clearly more detail in the EM5 shots compared to the 7d and its very close to the 5d2. That's not surprising when comparing a 4-year-old Canon sensor to a new Sony sensor. Canon's "new" sensors are clearly lagging behind Sony's offerings and if the 5d3 is any indication - that gulf is only going to widen. The EM5 is a revolutionary camera, no regrets about selling my 5d2 and replacing it with the OMD....Show more →
Respectfully, at lower ISO's I have to disagree relative to the 5DII. I don't disagree that Canon is falling way behind in their sensor technology (the reason I switched from Canon to Nikon) but the benefits of FF and the ability to control DOF to a higher degree is a feature that will hinder the likes of the OM-D5 regardless of how revolutionary its technology. Each to his own, but it is hard for me to imagine having to do my professional work with just a OM-D5. The counter-point is that I am very happy to have one while I am out having fun and don't want to carry 15 pounds worth of gear.
prashant wrote:
It is a nice camera and 45mm is a good lens. However I'm not yet convinced if it is better than APS cameras. I need more investigation. Any suggestions welcome.
>>>The EM5 is as good or better than the 7d at any ISO, when you get to 1600 there is clearly more detail in the EM5 shots compared to the 7d and its very close to the 5d2.
Better than APS-C? No. Better than a 7D? Yes and unequivocally so. The 7D was never a class leader in IQ, not even at introduction. Canon chose to compromise high ISO detail for noise performance at high ISO, and DR and Colour resolution at low ISO for noise performance at high ISO. At introduction the 7D was competitive but no class leader, but ever since the 16MP Sony-based bodies started shipping from Nikon, Pentax and Sony, the 7D (and the other Canon APS-C bodies) became a non-player in the APS-C IQ sweepstakes.
The Sony 16MP and 24MP based APS-C cameras match or exceed the OM-D in terms of IQ, both in DR and noise performance. But it's pretty close (probably because the OM-D sensor seems to be a cut-down version of the excellent Sony 24MP APS-C sensor in the first place).
would be interesting to do a comparison of the same with say a nikon 5100 and a sigma 8-16 (which would actually be a even wider). the aps-c combo would be cheaper, with better image, though it would be bulkier. so there you are really paying a premium for small size.
+1. As good as the OM-D is, even with an incredible lens like the 75/1.8, you cannot knock out the background like you could with a 35L, 85L or 200/2L ... and you can do more tricks with 36mp file sizes. There are compromises and trade-offs with any format and system. Pick the one or two systems that best meet your needs. Micro 4/3 certainly has its place and is here to stay. The form factor and the beautifully crafted lenses like the 7-14 and 25/1.4 are such a joy to use, and I am so looking forward to using the 75/1.8 for portraits. My 5D II and lenses are all dangerously perched at the edge of a cliff and may not last another 6 months.
Hrow wrote:
Respectfully, at lower ISO's I have to disagree relative to the 5DII. I don't disagree that Canon is falling way behind in their sensor technology (the reason I switched from Canon to Nikon) but the benefits of FF and the ability to control DOF to a higher degree is a feature that will hinder the likes of the OM-D5 regardless of how revolutionary its technology. Each to his own, but it is hard for me to imagine having to do my professional work with just a OM-D5. The counter-point is that I am very happy to have one while I am out having fun and don't want to carry 15 pounds worth of gear. ...Show more →
