fredmiranda.com
Login

  

  Previous versions of cputeq's message #10857818 « Oh boy.... (Nokton 17.5 f/0.95) »

  

cputeq
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
Re: Oh boy.... (Nokton 17.5 f/0.95)


Makten wrote:
Jman13 wrote:
...modern m4/3 is not two stops worse than FF.


The OM-D is not even close to the NEX-5N at ISO 200-800. It\'s at least one stop difference, probably more. I\'ll have to do a shootout some day.



I\'m not sure what you mean by this (the OM-D sensor behind the NEX5N, or the low ISO is worse?)

I had to sate my curiosity, though.

Here we go:

Olympus OM-D vs NEX-5N at ISO1600.
Tripod mounted, evaluative metering, F/4 resulting in almost exact exposure settings (A priority mode).
Framed as closely as possible, autoWB on both cameras.
Olympus gradiation was set to \"normal\" I believe, and shadows and highlights were both zeroed.

RAW, default profile in LR 4.1, exported to JPEG with no resizing, etc.

To all who would slander this test - this is an operational test, meaning if two people were after the same framing and let the camera pick the shutter speed, etc, this is what you\'d get. I didn\'t match exact camera settings, etc, because camera ISO values don\'t match up exactly, t-stops of lenses, etc. etc.

See my flickr for the full-sized jpegs.

Olympus (WB set to \"keep warm = off\")
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jl_smith/7713582174/

Sony (WB set to \"i\'m nowhere close, but call me Auto\")
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jl_smith/7713582642/

My results seem to bear what I see in the field - about on par with NEX-5N at pretty much any ISO.

OM-D seems to drop off a cliff at ISo 6400, though, so I\'m going to try that next.

In fact, I\'ve got a 5D2 and 7D. I might get bored tonight.



------

That said, in a very informal test (5D2 with 100 f/2 vs OMD with oly 45) comparing portrait \"looks\" and ISOs, etc, the 5D2 appeared to be approximately 1 stop ahead of the Oly when it came to noise, so I could actually see it being two stops behind a D4.

But I mean, c\'mon, 2 stops behind the world\'s best FF low-light camera, especially for a \'tiny\' 43 sensor, is damn good.

----

Edit - This post corrected, I posted the ISo 1600 shots, not the 3200. I have the 3200 series, though - will upload those next.




Aug 04, 2012 at 07:23 PM
cputeq
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
Re: Oh boy.... (Nokton 17.5 f/0.95)


Makten wrote:
Jman13 wrote:
...modern m4/3 is not two stops worse than FF.


The OM-D is not even close to the NEX-5N at ISO 200-800. It\'s at least one stop difference, probably more. I\'ll have to do a shootout some day.



I\'m not sure what you mean by this (the OM-D sensor behind the NEX5N, or the low ISO is worse?)

I had to sate my curiosity, though.

Here we go:

Olympus OM-D vs NEX-5N at ISO1600.
Tripod mounted, evaluative metering, F/4 resulting in almost exact exposure settings (A priority mode).
Framed as closely as possible, autoWB on both cameras.
Olympus gradiation was set to \"normal\" I believe, and shadows and highlights were both zeroed.

RAW, default profile in LR 4.1, exported to JPEG with no resizing, etc.

To all who would slander this test - this is an operational test, meaning if two people were after the same framing and let the camera pick the shutter speed, etc, this is what you\'d get. I didn\'t match exact camera settings, etc, because camera ISO values don\'t match up exactly, t-stops of lenses, etc. etc.

See my flickr for the full-sized jpegs.

Olympus (WB set to \"keep warm = off\")
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jl_smith/7713582174/

Sony (WB set to \"i\'m nowhere close, but call me Auto\")
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jl_smith/7713582642/

My results seem to bear what I see in the field - about on par with NEX-5N at pretty much any ISO.

OM-D seems to drop off a cliff at ISo 6400, though, so I\'m going to try that next.

In fact, I\'ve got a 5D2 and 7D. I might get bored tonight.



------

That said, in a very informal test (5D2 with 100 f/2 vs OMD with oly 45) comparing portrait \"looks\" and ISOs, etc, the 5D2 appeared to be approximately 1 stop ahead of the Oly when it came to noise, so I could actually see it being two stops behind a D4.

But I mean, c\'mon, 2 stops behind the world\'s best FF low-light camera, especially for a \'tiny\' 43 sensor, is damn good.



Aug 04, 2012 at 07:22 PM
cputeq
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
Re: Oh boy.... (Nokton 17.5 f/0.95)


Makten wrote:
Jman13 wrote:
...modern m4/3 is not two stops worse than FF.


The OM-D is not even close to the NEX-5N at ISO 200-800. It\'s at least one stop difference, probably more. I\'ll have to do a shootout some day.



I\'m not sure what you mean by this (the OM-D sensor behind the NEX5N, or the low ISO is worse?)

I had to sate my curiosity, though.

Here we go:

Olympus OM-D vs NEX-5N at ISO3200.
Tripod mounted, evaluative metering, F/4 resulting in almost exact exposure settings (A priority mode).
Framed as closely as possible, autoWB on both cameras.
Olympus gradiation was set to \"normal\" I believe, and shadows and highlights were both zeroed.

RAW, default profile in LR 4.1, exported to JPEG with no resizing, etc.

To all who would slander this test - this is an operational test, meaning if two people were after the same framing and let the camera pick the shutter speed, etc, this is what you\'d get. I didn\'t match exact camera settings, etc, because camera ISO values don\'t match up exactly, t-stops of lenses, etc. etc.

See my flickr for the full-sized jpegs.

Olympus (WB set to \"keep warm = off\")
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jl_smith/7713582174/

Sony (WB set to \"i\'m nowhere close, but call me Auto\")
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jl_smith/7713582642/

My results seem to bear what I see in the field - about on par with NEX-5N at pretty much any ISO.

OM-D seems to drop off a cliff at ISo 6400, though, so I\'m going to try that next.

In fact, I\'ve got a 5D2 and 7D. I might get bored tonight.



------

That said, in a very informal test (5D2 with 100 f/2 vs OMD with oly 45) comparing portrait \"looks\" and ISOs, etc, the 5D2 appeared to be approximately 1 stop ahead of the Oly when it came to noise, so I could actually see it being two stops behind a D4.

But I mean, c\'mon, 2 stops behind the world\'s best FF low-light camera, especially for a \'tiny\' 43 sensor, is damn good.



Aug 04, 2012 at 07:19 PM
cputeq
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
Re: Oh boy.... (Nokton 17.5 f/0.95)


Makten wrote:
Jman13 wrote:
...modern m4/3 is not two stops worse than FF.


The OM-D is not even close to the NEX-5N at ISO 200-800. It\'s at least one stop difference, probably more. I\'ll have to do a shootout some day.



I\'m not sure what you mean by this (the OM-D sensor behind the NEX5N, or the low ISO is worse?)

I had to sate my curiosity, though.

Here we go:

Olympus OM-D vs NEX-5N at ISO3200.
Tripod mounted, evaluative metering, F/4 resulting in almost exact exposure settings (A priority mode).
Framed as closely as possible, autoWB on both cameras.
Olympus gradiation was set to \"normal\" I believe, and shadows and highlights were both zeroed.

RAW, default profile in LR 4.1, exported to JPEG with no resizing, etc.

To all who would slander this test - this is an operational test, meaning if two people were after the same framing and let the camera pick the shutter speed, etc, this is what you\'d get. I didn\'t match exact camera settings, etc, because camera ISO values don\'t match up exactly, t-stops of lenses, etc. etc.

See my flickr for the full-sized jpegs.

Olympus (WB set to \"keep warm = off\")
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jl_smith/7713582174/

Sony (WB set to \"i\'m nowhere close, but call me Auto\")
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jl_smith/7713582642/

My results seem to bear what I see in the field - about on par with NEX-5N at pretty much any ISO.

OM-D seems to drop off a cliff at ISo 6400, though, so I\'m going to try that next.

In fact, I\'ve got a 5D2 and 7D. I might get bored tonight.






Aug 04, 2012 at 07:06 PM





  Previous versions of cputeq's message #10857818 « Oh boy.... (Nokton 17.5 f/0.95) »