Olympus OM-D E-M10 or Sony A6000?

Started 5 months ago | Discussions thread
tjuster1
Senior MemberPosts: 1,458
Like?
Re: Olympus OM-D E-M10 or Sony A6000?
In reply to blue_skies, 5 months ago

blue_skies wrote:

tjuster1 wrote:

captura wrote:

telefunk wrote:

The difference between an APS sensor and 4/3 are negligeable. Both are small compared to FF, which itself was considered small in the film days. I myself use even smaller for art galleries or magazine prints because there are certain advantages to each size.

NOT negligible. The FF sensor is 2X the surface area of the Sony APS-C sensor. The Sony APS-C sensor is 50% larger in area, than the M43 sensor.

Do the math.

Sigh. And the math says what about IQ? You know darn well it doesn't say a thing.

Sigh, who is perpetuating myths now?

You and captura are. You're equating larger sensor size (which no one disputes) with commensurately better IQ (which everyone who's tested the cameras, or used both, refutes). Read the comments in this very thread from people who've used both cameras. You're trying to confuse the OP by implying that the much larger APS-C sensor will result in much better IQ. It doesn't.

Nothing's worse than when a newbie asks a reasonable question and the old guard--who knows better--perpetuates lies.

Not really, it is answers like yours that confuse the newbees and make people believe in myths.

Captura is right, the APS-C sensor is nearly twice the size, and check the DxOmark sensor ratings - it matters.

Now you're being deliberately dense, which is again consistent with my whole point. You know damn well that although the APS-C sensor is nearly twice the size it doesn't have nearly twice the IQ, by any measure. This point has made to you multiple times, in this forum and others, so unless you're a total moron (I doubt) or a total zealot (bingo!) you should have it down by now. Again, read the posts in THIS VERY THREAD from people who've used m43 an NEX and they say, over and over again, that the differences in IQ are slight. So, regardless of what DxOmark says, the differences are slight.

I guess it might be a good time to remind you, once again, that I'm making this claim from experience as well, since I own both NEX and m43 cameras. Just like the other people who've chimed in on this thread with the same conclusion.

Yes the APS-C sensor is larger, but no it doesn't make much difference to IQ. The OP should feel free to corroborate that him/her self, since this is the SONY forum so the zealots will quickly rise to defend their brand and put down any other (especially m43).

So we are condemned for speaking up? On the Sony forum?

No, you're condemned for being deceitful, on any forum.

As I've written many times, both on here and in the m43 forum, I own cameras from both systems and the images are, for all practical purposes, indistinguishable. By far the biggest factor is the lens on the camera. By far.

Sure, get the most expensive f/1.4 lenses to catch up with the very good f/1.8 lenses on the APS-C cameras. More money. Still, you only get 16Mp. The A6000 has 24Mp. But you conveniently forget that - after all it is only math.

Nice red herring. I was commenting about captura's bogus claim that the larger sensor produces a commensurate increase in IQ, which both he and you know is false. However, if you want to make the argument that the A6000 is better because it has more Mp, go for it. It does have more Mp, and there might be situations in which it's an advantage. To me, it wouldn't be worth it but go ahead and make the argument. You could start by pointing out that the gain is actually lot less than many think (as you undoubtedly know): 22% more pixels horizontally and vertically. And without good glass to resolve detail, all those Mp don't gain you anything anyway. You're not suggesting the Nokia camera phone with 41Mp has better IQ (nearly twice as good!) as the A6000 are you?

But if it makes you feel superior to have a bigger sensor, then go for it.

Per my math, larger sensor + more megapixels - sounds like a winner. Or, hasn't the Nex-7 reigned in IQ since its introduction? Or is that also only math?

No, it's a stupid and deliberately misleading argument because you're implying proportionality when none exists. Sure, all things being equal a larger sensor will produce better output than a smaller output. And more megapixels should, theoretically, allow you to resolve more detail. But--AND YOU DAMN WELL KNOW THIS--the differences in IQ that result from these differences in specifications are very small, and for most people, shooting under most conditions, will not be noticed. I make that claim because I've actually examined prints taken with my APS-C and m43 cameras, up to 16x24, and cannot see a difference. Others have found the same result. Have you?

Math wins over myths, every time.

The OP should decide on his/her needs, and pick the format that fits. Making them equal sounds a bit like a stretch, on all accounts.

Equal in what? They're in fact very different cameras, and I certainly wasn't claiming otherwise. In my experience, the NEX is much easier to grip and is better for legacy glass. The m43 cameras have a much better native lens selection and IBIS is the cat's meow. What isn't very different, however, is the IQ they produce in images, and that was my point.

Like I said in my other answer - April is another month away - wait for reviews to come out, check the DxOmark sensor ratings when published, visit a store to compare. Forget the myths...

One more thing . . . if you have experience shooting with m43 and APS-C, please share your results with us. And if you don't please shut the hell up about criticizing the results by those who have, since you obviously don't know what you're commenting on.

-- hide signature --

Cheers,
Henry

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