OM-D needs more light, longer exposure times! (imaging-resource.com)

Started May 15, 2012 | Discussions
temama
Regular MemberPosts: 345
Like?
OM-D needs more light, longer exposure times! (imaging-resource.com)
May 15, 2012

New imaging-resource.com E-M5 test samples here:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/omd-em5/omd-em5A7.HTM

It seems that there was nothing wrong with dpreview's OM-D test images, what comes to exposure times of E-M5. New imaging-resource's E-M5 test samples proves that.

OM-D needs more light (longer exposure times) at same ISO value!

Is this Olympus' attempt/trick to make the sensor better looking than what it is?
Yes - I think...

Some examples:

  • Olympus E-M5, ISO 3200, 1/320sec

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/omd-em5/omd-em5A7.HTM

  • Panasonic G3, ISO 3200, 1/400sec

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/DMCG3/DMCG3THMB.HTM

  • Panasonic GF2, ISO3200, 1/500sec

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/DMCGF2/DMCGF2THMB.HTM

  • Sony NEX-5N, ISO 3200, 1/500sec

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/NEX5N/NEX5NTHMB.HTM

Fiatopichan
New MemberPosts: 20Gear list
Like?
Re: OM-D needs more light, longer exposure times! (imaging-resource.com)
In reply to temama, May 15, 2012

Not the same day test, the light doesn't always the same everyday. This doesn't prove anything.

 Fiatopichan's gear list:Fiatopichan's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Louis_Dobson
Forum ProPosts: 26,387
Like?
Re: OM-D needs more light, longer exposure times! (imaging-resource.com)
In reply to temama, May 15, 2012

Meter under reads by 1/3 of a stop, within the ISO spec, yawn, big deal.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/acam
http://thegentlemansnapper.blogspot.com

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
temama
Regular MemberPosts: 345
Like?
Studio tests
In reply to Fiatopichan, May 15, 2012

Fiatopichan wrote:

Not the same day test, the light doesn't always the same everyday. This doesn't prove anything.

Yes, it proves. They use exactly the same kind of studio lighting in these indoor samples.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
temama
Regular MemberPosts: 345
Like?
yawn, no big improvements
In reply to Louis_Dobson, May 15, 2012

Louis_Dobson wrote:

Meter under reads by 1/3 of a stop, within the ISO spec, yawn, big deal.
--

Well - at least not so much sensor improvements

If you can shoot 1/250sec (ISO1600) with Panasonic GF2 VS. 1/320sec (ISO3200) with Olympus E-M5, what does that tell you?
(that you need 1/160sec time with E-M5 at ISO 1600)

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Louis_Dobson
Forum ProPosts: 26,387
Like?
Re: yawn, no big improvements
In reply to temama, May 15, 2012

It tells me someone needs to learn how to take photographs. ISO3200 indeed! How desperate would you have to be?

In the meantime I have sitting in this room, and with loads of files on the computer, G1, E-PM1, GH2 and OM-D. I can assure you, processing the files, we've come along by leaps and bounds

temama wrote:

Louis_Dobson wrote:

Meter under reads by 1/3 of a stop, within the ISO spec, yawn, big deal.
--

Well - at least not so much sensor improvements

If you can shoot 1/250sec (ISO1600) with Panasonic GF2 VS. 1/320sec (ISO3200) with Olympus E-M5, what does that tell you?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
temama
Regular MemberPosts: 345
Like?
Re: yawn, no big improvements
In reply to Louis_Dobson, May 15, 2012

If you can shoot 1/250sec (ISO1600) with Panasonic GF2 VS. 1/320sec (ISO3200) with Olympus E-M5, what does that tell you?

Louis_Dobson wrote:

It tells me someone needs to learn how to take photographs. ISO3200 indeed! How desperate would you have to be?

...that you need 1/160sec time with E-M5 at ISO 1600

In the meantime I have sitting in this room, and with loads of files on the computer, G1, E-PM1, GH2 and OM-D. I can assure you, processing the files, we've come along by leaps and bounds

OK. I believe you.
...But did you take into account the exposure times ?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Louis_Dobson
Forum ProPosts: 26,387
Like?
Re: yawn, no big improvements
In reply to temama, May 15, 2012

I mainly shoot at base ISO, so it's not an issue. But I did a quick shot at ISO 1600, and it seems to have coped fine...

(Oh, and ISO 1600 works out about about 1200 if the metering were spot on, I know)

temama wrote:

Louis_Dobson wrote:

In the meantime I have sitting in this room, and with loads of files on the computer, G1, E-PM1, GH2 and OM-D. I can assure you, processing the files, we've come along by leaps and bounds

OK. I believe you.
...But did you take into account the exposure times ?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Fiatopichan
New MemberPosts: 20Gear list
Like?
Re: Studio tests
In reply to temama, May 15, 2012

Oh I forgot to scroll down, just thought about the outdoor shot. That's my mistake.

 Fiatopichan's gear list:Fiatopichan's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Adventsam
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,983
Like?
Re: OM-D needs more light,cheats ISO
In reply to temama, May 15, 2012

We know this for sure now;
ISO200=aprox iso130(maybe 125) cw. reference.
Therefore ISO400=aprox250
ISO1600=ISO1000.

They cheat by 2/3 ev. Louis and I agree it matters not a jot but why do it? I prefer to see iso50/80/100 lets get max dr @base, forget the high iso shenanigans.

temama wrote:

New imaging-resource.com E-M5 test samples here:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/omd-em5/omd-em5A7.HTM

It seems that there was nothing wrong with dpreview's OM-D test images, what comes to exposure times of E-M5. New imaging-resource's E-M5 test samples proves that.

OM-D needs more light (longer exposure times) at same ISO value!

Is this Olympus' attempt/trick to make the sensor better looking than what it is?
Yes - I think...

Some examples:

  • Olympus E-M5, ISO 3200, 1/320sec

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/omd-em5/omd-em5A7.HTM

  • Panasonic G3, ISO 3200, 1/400sec

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/DMCG3/DMCG3THMB.HTM

  • Panasonic GF2, ISO3200, 1/500sec

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/DMCGF2/DMCGF2THMB.HTM

  • Sony NEX-5N, ISO 3200, 1/500sec

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/NEX5N/NEX5NTHMB.HTM

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Adventsam
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,983
Like?
Re: OM-D needs more light, longer exposure times! (imaging-resource.com)
In reply to temama, May 15, 2012

Didn't realise the G3 is a bit of a cheat too,hmm.
So, no magic just smoke and mirrors LOL.

temama wrote:

New imaging-resource.com E-M5 test samples here:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/omd-em5/omd-em5A7.HTM

It seems that there was nothing wrong with dpreview's OM-D test images, what comes to exposure times of E-M5. New imaging-resource's E-M5 test samples proves that.

OM-D needs more light (longer exposure times) at same ISO value!

Is this Olympus' attempt/trick to make the sensor better looking than what it is?
Yes - I think...

Some examples:

  • Olympus E-M5, ISO 3200, 1/320sec

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/omd-em5/omd-em5A7.HTM

  • Panasonic G3, ISO 3200, 1/400sec

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/DMCG3/DMCG3THMB.HTM

  • Panasonic GF2, ISO3200, 1/500sec

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/DMCGF2/DMCGF2THMB.HTM

  • Sony NEX-5N, ISO 3200, 1/500sec

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/NEX5N/NEX5NTHMB.HTM

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Susan G
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,440
Like?
Re: OM-D needs more light, longer exposure times! (imaging-resource.com)
In reply to temama, May 15, 2012

Maybe slightly off your original intent in this post, but I got "lost" in the review with their "comparometer" and looked at various resolution samples (b&w and color), not the outdoor ones, from the OMD and the e30 (which is my current camera), though I don't know what lens they used for that test. The difference was very noticeable, even to my rather un-trained eye. Am I missing something?

Susan
--

http://www.pbase.com/susan_gordon

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Just Having Fun
Senior MemberPosts: 3,869
Like?
reason why EM5 images beat GH2?
In reply to Adventsam, May 15, 2012

So is that why almost every review site says the EM5 images are better?

I can't wait for the new 75mm lens too. You will have to lug around a tripod or shoot at over 1/150th of sec to get a sharp image. Meanwhile I can shoot indoors at night at 1/30th of a second with that new amazing lens.

I am with Louis. Always try to shoot at base ISO. Thankfully IBIS really helps with that!

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Jman13
Senior MemberPosts: 1,424
Like?
Re: OM-D needs more light, longer exposure times! (imaging-resource.com)
In reply to temama, May 15, 2012

Everyone is inferring things from pictures taken on different days with different cameras under possibly different lighting.

I, however actually own an E-M5, and a GX1 and a GH2. I have tested the E-M5 at the same settings vs the GH2 and the GX1 and in BOTH cases, when shot under constant light at the same time, with the same ISO, shutter speed and aperture, the E-M5 image is BRIGHTER or the same as the GH2 and GX1.

I took a shot of the same subject this morning after seeing this thread, at the same time with the exact same settings on both cameras (ISO 200, f/2.8, 1/15s, 45mm). When sampling the dead center of the same middle toned square (it was a calendar I shot) on the shot from each camera:

The dead center of the GX1 shot showed values in Lightroom of: 60.9, 60.4, 64.0

The E-M5 in the exact same spot? 60.5, 60.9, 64.1.

-- hide signature --

Admiring Light - http://www.admiringlight.com
Jordan Steele Photography - http://www.jordansteele.com

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Adventsam
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,983
Like?
Re: OM-D needs more light, longer exposure times! (imaging-resource.com)
In reply to Jman13, May 15, 2012

Jman13 wrote:

Everyone is inferring things from pictures taken on different days with different cameras under possibly different lighting.

I, however actually own an E-M5, and a GX1 and a GH2. I have tested the E-M5 at the same settings vs the GH2 and the GX1 and in BOTH cases, when shot under constant light at the same time, with the same ISO, shutter speed and aperture, the E-M5 image is BRIGHTER or the same as the GH2 and GX1.

I took a shot of the same subject this morning after seeing this thread, at the same time with the exact same settings on both cameras (ISO 200, f/2.8, 1/15s, 45mm). When sampling the dead center of the same middle toned square (it was a calendar I shot) on the shot from each camera:

The dead center of the GX1 shot showed values in Lightroom of: 60.9, 60.4, 64.0

Well, aint it funny how everything else seems to say otherwise. OMD is 2/3ev overstated, it may be worse, and in fact actually at iso1600 is the same as most things out there at iso800-1000, that's a big difference. If Oly feel they need to do this and people lap it up, good for both heh! but the facts are the facts and the comparison is made against their controlled lighting btw in a studio; they have no reason to lie, unlike Oly?

-- hide signature --

Admiring Light - http://www.admiringlight.com
Jordan Steele Photography - http://www.jordansteele.com

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Adventsam
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,983
Like?
Re: OM-D needs more light, longer exposure times! (imaging-resource.com)
In reply to Susan G, May 15, 2012

Susan G wrote:

Maybe slightly off your original intent in this post, but I got "lost" in the review with their "comparometer" and looked at various resolution samples (b&w and color), not the outdoor ones, from the OMD and the e30 (which is my current camera), though I don't know what lens they used for that test. The difference was very noticeable, even to my rather un-trained eye. Am I missing something?

Don't think so, the improvement is real over the e30.

Susan
--

http://www.pbase.com/susan_gordon

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Jogger
Veteran MemberPosts: 8,389Gear list
Like?
Just wait for DxO Mark (nt)
In reply to temama, May 15, 2012

temama wrote:

New imaging-resource.com E-M5 test samples here:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/omd-em5/omd-em5A7.HTM

It seems that there was nothing wrong with dpreview's OM-D test images, what comes to exposure times of E-M5. New imaging-resource's E-M5 test samples proves that.

OM-D needs more light (longer exposure times) at same ISO value!

Is this Olympus' attempt/trick to make the sensor better looking than what it is?
Yes - I think...

Some examples:

  • Olympus E-M5, ISO 3200, 1/320sec

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/omd-em5/omd-em5A7.HTM

  • Panasonic G3, ISO 3200, 1/400sec

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/DMCG3/DMCG3THMB.HTM

  • Panasonic GF2, ISO3200, 1/500sec

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/DMCGF2/DMCGF2THMB.HTM

  • Sony NEX-5N, ISO 3200, 1/500sec

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/NEX5N/NEX5NTHMB.HTM

 Jogger's gear list:Jogger's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 Nikon D700 Nikon Df Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Just Having Fun
Senior MemberPosts: 3,869
Like?
Re: OM-D needs more light, longer exposure times! (imaging-resource.com)
In reply to Adventsam, May 15, 2012

Adventsam wrote:

Jman13 wrote:

Everyone is inferring things from pictures taken on different days with different cameras under possibly different lighting.

I, however actually own an E-M5, and a GX1 and a GH2. I have tested the E-M5 at the same settings vs the GH2 and the GX1 and in BOTH cases, when shot under constant light at the same time, with the same ISO, shutter speed and aperture, the E-M5 image is BRIGHTER or the same as the GH2 and GX1.

I took a shot of the same subject this morning after seeing this thread, at the same time with the exact same settings on both cameras (ISO 200, f/2.8, 1/15s, 45mm). When sampling the dead center of the same middle toned square (it was a calendar I shot) on the shot from each camera:

The dead center of the GX1 shot showed values in Lightroom of: 60.9, 60.4, 64.0

Well, aint it funny how everything else seems to say otherwise.

From my testing it was very very close. 1/3rd EV at most..if that.

No matter what you do the blacks are much blacker with the EM5 while still retaining all the detail, which I love. I think this fools a lot of people.

Anyway YOU have an agenda and can't be trusted.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
NuFonaut
Senior MemberPosts: 2,211
Like?
Re: OM-D needs more light, longer exposure times! (imaging-resource.com)
In reply to Jman13, May 15, 2012

There have been comparison shots between GH2 and EM-5 on another M4/3 forum (am trying to find it) which showed equally bright pictures with the completely same settings. I have no reason to believe the EM-5 differs more than 1/3 EV which is neglible.

The old Panasonics were underrated in terms of Isos, the newer ones aren´t so it makes basically no difference.

Jman13 wrote:

Everyone is inferring things from pictures taken on different days with different cameras under possibly different lighting.

I, however actually own an E-M5, and a GX1 and a GH2. I have tested the E-M5 at the same settings vs the GH2 and the GX1 and in BOTH cases, when shot under constant light at the same time, with the same ISO, shutter speed and aperture, the E-M5 image is BRIGHTER or the same as the GH2 and GX1.

I took a shot of the same subject this morning after seeing this thread, at the same time with the exact same settings on both cameras (ISO 200, f/2.8, 1/15s, 45mm). When sampling the dead center of the same middle toned square (it was a calendar I shot) on the shot from each camera:

The dead center of the GX1 shot showed values in Lightroom of: 60.9, 60.4, 64.0

The E-M5 in the exact same spot? 60.5, 60.9, 64.1.

-- hide signature --

Admiring Light - http://www.admiringlight.com
Jordan Steele Photography - http://www.jordansteele.com

-- hide signature --

What´s that noise?

From one of the Canon Forums:

'I just came back from my first holiday with the 5D II (I think my wife was there as well). '

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Jman13
Senior MemberPosts: 1,424
Like?
Re: OM-D needs more light, longer exposure times! (imaging-resource.com)
In reply to Adventsam, May 15, 2012

No, everything else that 'says' otherwise is comparison shots that were taken on different days.

Here are shots, taken about one minute apart, from the same location, on the same day, under the exact same lighting, with the same lens on each camera.

ISO 200, f/1.8, 1/100s for both images. The sample spot for the values under the histogram is the center of the box opening tab flap.

GH2, ISO 200:

E-M5, ISO 200:

ISO 1600, f/1.8, 1/800s for both cameras, same sample spot:

GH2, ISO 1600:

E-M5, ISO 1600:

-- hide signature --

Admiring Light - http://www.admiringlight.com
Jordan Steele Photography - http://www.jordansteele.com

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads