Stick with Nex or Head Back to Micro Four Thirds

Started 7 months ago | Discussions thread
Bart Hickman
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,881
Like?
You can't compare at equal ISO
In reply to m_appeal, 7 months ago

m_appeal wrote:

Disclaimer: Don't own either but from what I've seen and read here and elsewhere, people who have tried both say that om-d is a bit better than nex 7 and on par with 5n when it comes to high iso.

Here is one comparison giving the e-m5 the edge over nex 7... certainly not to say it's right, but it's really not the first time I've read it, so I'm inclined to believe it

http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Olympus_OM-D_E-M5/Olympus_E-M5_vs_Sony_NEX-7_vs_Nikon_D3200_noise_RAW.shtml

spacemn wrote:

m_appeal wrote:

the om-d e-m5 is on par with 5n in low light. However the 5n would have better dynamic range...

m_appeal wrote:

the om-d e-m5 is on par with 5n in low light. However the 5n would have better dynamic range...

What makes you say that?

From a quantitative test perspective the 5N has better low light performance and so does NEX-7 (c.f. DXOMark).

The OMD ISO settings are unusually inaccurate, being a full stop low.  eg., ISO1600 is really only ISO800.  This is apparent in the dpreview test shots as well as the DxO tests.

So if you think they're about equal at equal ISO settings, that means the NEX 7 actually wins by a stop (it actually doesn't win by a full stop--more like 1/2 to 3/4--but it's noticeable if you're looking closely).

Bart

--
http://bhimages.zenfolio.com

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow