real d800 vs em5

Started Mar 23, 2013 | Discussions
Robgo2
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,506
Like?
Re: D800 vs EM5 Image Comparison: proves what exactly?
In reply to joe talks photography, Mar 25, 2013

joe talks photography wrote:

Comparing the output of D800 with EM5 proves what exactly? I say, not much at all. The EM5 produces images of a decent quality...for what it is. Isn't that enough? The D800 is in a different league entirely (and I netiher own one nor am I a shill for any manufacturer).

-- hide signature --

Joe

I don't own either of these cameras, but the whole premise of the original post borders on the absurd.  Yes, the EM5 may be just as good as the D800, if your intent is to make small prints or post images on the web.  But for large prints or heavy cropping, the D800 will win by a wide margin.  And lest we forget, the D800's sensor has the highest score ever measured by DxO.  Surely that must be of some relevance to ultimate image quality.

Rob

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Vu Dang
Forum MemberPosts: 60Gear list
Like?
Re: real d800 vs em5
In reply to Adventsam, Mar 25, 2013

1. No m43 camera can take picture @ 33.34MP - 6667 x 5000

2. OP pic does not have exif on pic.

 Vu Dang's gear list:Vu Dang's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
RichRMA
Contributing MemberPosts: 804Gear list
Like?
Re: real d800 vs em5
In reply to Adventsam, Mar 25, 2013

My impressions are that the EM5 has noise in the sky, the Nikon sky is smooth but too cyan, the resolution on the D800 is better but you have to use the tree because resolution on the boat, shore is compromised due to heat waves over distance. The sharpening on the EM5 shot has resulted in halos, look at the flagpole on the dock. The Olympus holds the edges better than the Nikon, colour correction and sharpness, but that's usually the case when you compare 4/3 lenses to FF lenses, not always though.

The noise in the E5M sky would probably be visible on a 20"x24" print.  You could mitigate it by selectively unsharpening the sky in the Olympus shot.

 RichRMA's gear list:RichRMA's gear list
Nikon D200 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1 Pentax K-01 Olympus OM-D E-M5
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
GeorgeD200
Regular MemberPosts: 386
Like?
You don't have to label the images
In reply to Adventsam, Mar 25, 2013

We can tell the EM-5 by the excess of noise.  I know that's rather rude, but you keep persisting in your claim that the EM-5 is a viable match for camers with 4x larger sensors.  It's just nonsense.

I like the EM-5.  I'm thinking about buying one, to have fun with and to use legacy lenses on (which my D700 doesn't do very well), but I certainly wouldn't trade my D700 for it!

The sad fact is that if Olympus can do that with a 225mm sq. sensor, what could they do with a 370mm sq. sensor?

They hitched their wagon to smaller sensors, and are putting out a good product with them, but they're not beating the big (sensor) boys at their own game, as you seem to be claiming.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
BBViet
Regular MemberPosts: 261
Like?
Re: D800 vs EM5 Image Comparison: proves what exactly?
In reply to Adventsam, Mar 25, 2013

Adventsam wrote:

Rens wrote:

I made the comparisons with APS-C, D5200 and 24mp FF, OMD is better than aps-c 24mp d5200 and on a par with a FF D600, all the way to iso 6400

This is nonsense. Whatever its strengths, my OMD doesn't get anywhere near my D700 above ISO 1600. I don't believe the D600 is so much worse than the D700 at high ISOs

-- hide signature --

--

Rens
There are optimists and there are realists

From studio samples, iso 6400, d600 left, em5 right

Above, d5200 left em5 right, iso6400

I just checked with the DPR studio comparision tool. At ISO6400 the EM-5 had f6.3 1/1600s vs f8 1/2000s for the D5200. That's a whole stop worth of extra light the EM-5 got, so it's no surprise that the EM-5 can compete in high ISO at Olympus's overstated ISO.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Joerg V
Contributing MemberPosts: 580Gear list
Like?
Again and again and again, yawn
In reply to Adventsam, Mar 25, 2013

This is happening in almost every forum,

someone takes a decent camera and claims it produces pictures as good as the D800.

He/she posts some pictures that should back up this claim. Those images are small (<6mp), wildly differ in exposure, white balance, view angle and - most important - were shot by someone who is not used to a D800 and thus lacks everthing necessary to get the best of the d800 (d800 = medium format resolution => medium format treatment). (My first D800 shots looked like taken by a cell phone camera because I lacked the skills necessary to handle it.) The "small camera" images are heavily processed and show tons of artifacts (sorry, details) while the D800 image is an unsharped out-of-camera image taken at the lowest jpeg quality setting bilinearily scaled down to this target size.

With this approach you could make Angela Merkel look better than any super model.

Yawn!

Joerg

 Joerg V's gear list:Joerg V's gear list
Sigma DP1 Nikon D800 Nikon AF-S Micro-Nikkor 60mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G Sigma 35mm F1.4 DG HSM +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
tgutgu
Senior MemberPosts: 3,224Gear list
Like?
Re: D800 vs EM5 Image Comparison: proves what exactly?
In reply to marike6, Mar 25, 2013

marike6 wrote:

tgutgu wrote:

joe talks photography wrote:

Comparing the output of D800 with EM5 proves what exactly? I say, not much at all. The EM5 produces images of a decent quality...for what it is. Isn't that enough? The D800 is in a different league entirely (and I netiher own one nor am I a shill for any manufacturer).

-- hide signature --

Joe

It proves that cameras like the D800 are overkill in terms of size and weight, because the difference of the results are irrelevant for most applications.

Most applications? I can only think of a few that a D800 would be overkill for, perhaps street photography or travel.

Which covers 90% of the situations a great amount of photographers do their shooting.

But if those fairly dramatic differences are irrelevant for you, then of course, you could choose either camera and be happy. But you simply cannot argue that such dramatic differences are irrelevant for the everybody.

Dramatic differences? Come on. Don't exaggerate. Most photos aren't printed larger than A2. From normal viewing distances you won't see a difference. Thus, for most applications the difference is marginal.

And even in this isolated test of only one image, the advantages in IQ (color depth, sharpness) are fairly dramatic. The OP meant intended to make his case for the EM5, but actually ended up making a great case for the D800.

So if some shoots stock or sells prints or is a hobbyist, why wouldn't they want the camera that produces the very best IQ that they can afford?

A wedding photographer who wants gorgeous shallow DOF detail shots

You are only able to enjoy images with shallow DOF? This shallow DOF is one of the most overrated hype in recent times. As an experienced photographer you should know that there are more images lacking enough DOF than vice versa. With the right lens, like the 1.8/45mm and the 1.8/75mm you can produce sufficiently enough shallow DOF. Your clients will appreciate that and that you won't come to the wedding with a black monster, but with inconspicuously small camera.

, or bitingly sharp portraits with beautiful soft backgrounds and fantastic high ISO ability for the ceremony would most certainly not think a D800 is overkill.

And the wedding photographer's customers would mostly view the images via monitor, television, beamer or the usual print or photobook formats. You won't see a significant difference.

For a portrait photographer a D800 most certainly would not be overkill.

For street photography or travel photos, I would agree. But then for street photography, even an EM5 is overkill. A Ricoh GRD can do the job as well as any camera.

I play the saxophone, and when I was a young saxophone student my parents tried to get me the best instrument they could afford. And like in the camera world, with musical instruments, money gets you quality (quality of workmanship, materials, tone). The D800 and to a certain extent the EM5 give you just that: quality. To argue that one camera is valid and but the other is overkill is just not a winnable argument to make.

What is also true is that Nikon offers hundreds of lenses from UWA to super telephotoshould of

One of its kind with good quality should be enough. m4/3 primes can be used at max apertures with no significant loss of IQ opposite to some FF glass.

Even an amateur or hobbyist can find all kinds of used lenses for dirt cheap that work perfectly on the D800 (Keep in mind that on all Nikon professional grade cameras, all Nikkors except some pre-AI lenses work perfectly and AI lenses even give you an AF confirm light).

As far as weight, when I go out specifically to shoot landscapes, I always have with me my tripod which of course does the heavy lifting (not that I consider a camera that weighs 2 lb (1 kg) heavy, and I only weight 165 lb soaking wet. And actually the larger, more robust camera actually feels better in my hands than a smaller camera like my GH2, which is so tiny it's actually cumbersome to change settings, and the small grip actually get more tiring to handhold.

Apparently, you haven't used such cameras a lot.

Anyway, I'm sure the OP could post dozens of great images from both cameras, but side-by-side is not doing the EM5 any favors of making a good case for the OP.

By the way, perhaps this forum will try some more realistic comparisons. All these OMD comparisons with the best of the best FFs don't make much sense a crop sensor cameras, even APS-C ones are pretty far away from the best FF. How about the D5200 or D7100? That might make more sense.

Cheers, and happy shooting, Markus

-- hide signature --

Thomas

 tgutgu's gear list:tgutgu's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus E-M1 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Panasonic Leica DG Macro-Elmarit 45mm F2.8 ASPH OIS +17 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
BBViet
Regular MemberPosts: 261
Like?
Re: D800 vs EM5 Image Comparison: proves what exactly?
In reply to tgutgu, Mar 25, 2013

To those who claim that the D800's advantages are not worth the significantly higher price tag:

The RX100 is half the size, weight, and cost of the EM-5. It can take photos as good as the EM-5 90% of the time, too.

The tiny, $30 camera module on your smartphone can produce photos good enough for most people, too.

Aren't you feeling a little ripped off now?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Ulric
Senior MemberPosts: 2,613Gear list
Like?
Re: real d800 vs em5
In reply to Adventsam, Mar 25, 2013

The D800 received sh-t-l--ds more light than the E-M5. It would have taken a miracle for that not to show.

 Ulric's gear list:Ulric's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF3 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Rens
Senior MemberPosts: 1,435Gear list
Like?
Image Resource comparisons are of limited value
In reply to Adventsam, Mar 25, 2013

And in any case, checking the more subtle areas of the image, the E-M5 loses out badly.

But in real life, taking real photos, I find that for anything that isn't clear cut, bold, and in bright primary colours, the OMD doesn't compare to the D700 (and presumably the D800) at higher ISOs.

The OMD has lots going for it, I carry mine with me whenever I can, and given good light am very happy with the results.  But much above base ISO the IQ degrades, lines get fuzzier and subtle contrasts get lost.
There are some situations where ISO 3200 is adequate (though never FF standard), but mostly I try to keep well below ISO 800.  Which is often difficult in our North of England winter.

Just because we like something doesn't require us to blind ourselves to its shortcomings.

Adventsam wrote:

Rens wrote:

I made the comparisons with APS-C, D5200 and 24mp FF, OMD is better than aps-c 24mp d5200 and on a par with a FF D600, all the way to iso 6400

This is nonsense. Whatever its strengths, my OMD doesn't get anywhere near my D700 above ISO 1600. I don't believe the D600 is so much worse than the D700 at high ISOs

Above, d5200 left em5 right, iso6400

-- hide signature --

Rens
There are optimists and there are realists

 Rens's gear list:Rens's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Martin.au
Senior MemberPosts: 5,833
Like?
Re: D800 vs EM5 Image Comparison: proves what exactly?
In reply to BBViet, Mar 25, 2013

BBViet wrote:

Adventsam wrote:

Rens wrote:

I made the comparisons with APS-C, D5200 and 24mp FF, OMD is better than aps-c 24mp d5200 and on a par with a FF D600, all the way to iso 6400

This is nonsense. Whatever its strengths, my OMD doesn't get anywhere near my D700 above ISO 1600. I don't believe the D600 is so much worse than the D700 at high ISOs

-- hide signature --

--

Rens
There are optimists and there are realists

From studio samples, iso 6400, d600 left, em5 right

Above, d5200 left em5 right, iso6400

I just checked with the DPR studio comparision tool. At ISO6400 the EM-5 had f6.3 1/1600s vs f8 1/2000s for the D5200. That's a whole stop worth of extra light the EM-5 got, so it's no surprise that the EM-5 can compete in high ISO at Olympus's overstated ISO.

You cant use  shutter and aperture to judge exposure in the studio scene. DPR do not ensure controlled lighting.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
tgutgu
Senior MemberPosts: 3,224Gear list
Like?
Re: D800 vs EM5 Image Comparison: proves what exactly?
In reply to BBViet, Mar 25, 2013

BBViet wrote:

To those who claim that the D800's advantages are not worth the significantly higher price tag:

The RX100 is half the size, weight, and cost of the EM-5. It can take photos as good as the EM-5 90% of the time, too.

The tiny, $30 camera module on your smartphone can produce photos good enough for most people, too.

Aren't you feeling a little ripped off now?

None of your "alternatives" have interchangeable lenses and the focal lengths I need. So your comparison is pointless.

-- hide signature --

Thomas

 tgutgu's gear list:tgutgu's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus E-M1 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Panasonic Leica DG Macro-Elmarit 45mm F2.8 ASPH OIS +17 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
slimandy
Forum ProPosts: 14,464Gear list
Like?
Re: real d800 vs em5
In reply to Adventsam, Mar 25, 2013

A sample of one image where both cameras are capable of good results is hardly a basis for making a decision. There are shots the D800 can get that the OMD simply can't. In many situations the D800 will knock spots off the OMD.

When you want to travel light or be a bit less conspicous, or it's just not worth the extra effort or expense, the OMD has it's place.

-- hide signature --

www.andrewsandersphotography.co.uk

 slimandy's gear list:slimandy's gear list
Sony RX100 II Nikon D200 Nikon D700 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Fujifilm X-E1 +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
tt321
Senior MemberPosts: 3,514Gear list
Like?
Re: D800 vs EM5 Image Comparison: proves what exactly?
In reply to Adventsam, Mar 25, 2013

In both comparisons, on my monitor, the E-M5 image is inferior and obviously so. How could you draw the conclusion that they are the same?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
tt321
Senior MemberPosts: 3,514Gear list
Like?
Re: D800 vs EM5 Image Comparison: proves what exactly?
In reply to tgutgu, Mar 25, 2013

tgutgu wrote:

BBViet wrote:

To those who claim that the D800's advantages are not worth the significantly higher price tag:

The RX100 is half the size, weight, and cost of the EM-5. It can take photos as good as the EM-5 90% of the time, too.

The tiny, $30 camera module on your smartphone can produce photos good enough for most people, too.

Aren't you feeling a little ripped off now?

None of your "alternatives" have interchangeable lenses and the focal lengths I need. So your comparison is pointless.

To be fair in the current state of affairs FF offers vastly more versatility than M43. You might say that for your personal needs (and mine, indeed) these extra facilities are not needed, but the personal needs of a large section of the public are probably fully satisfied by mobile phones and they are as valid photographers as you and me.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
BBViet
Regular MemberPosts: 261
Like?
Re: D800 vs EM5 Image Comparison: proves what exactly?
In reply to Martin.au, Mar 25, 2013

Mjankor wrote:

BBViet wrote:

Adventsam wrote:

Rens wrote:

I made the comparisons with APS-C, D5200 and 24mp FF, OMD is better than aps-c 24mp d5200 and on a par with a FF D600, all the way to iso 6400

This is nonsense. Whatever its strengths, my OMD doesn't get anywhere near my D700 above ISO 1600. I don't believe the D600 is so much worse than the D700 at high ISOs

-- hide signature --

--

Rens
There are optimists and there are realists

From studio samples, iso 6400, d600 left, em5 right

Above, d5200 left em5 right, iso6400

I just checked with the DPR studio comparision tool. At ISO6400 the EM-5 had f6.3 1/1600s vs f8 1/2000s for the D5200. That's a whole stop worth of extra light the EM-5 got, so it's no surprise that the EM-5 can compete in high ISO at Olympus's overstated ISO.

You cant use shutter and aperture to judge exposure in the studio scene. DPR do not ensure controlled lighting.

Just because DPR says they aren't controlling the lighting doesn't mean the lighting varies wildly enough between cameras to warrant as much as 1 stop of difference in exposure.

Take DPR's reviews of the NEX series for example, over the course of 3 years the shutter speeds at F8 and ISO 1600 of the 7 cameras have remained stable between 1/400s and 1/500s.

The EM-5 may still be an exception, but other Olympus cameras also have these large exposure discrepancies so I will go with Olympus being generous (compared to other manufacturers) with their ISO ratings.

But if controlled testing is what you want then look at DxO scores for the EM-5 and D5200.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
BBViet
Regular MemberPosts: 261
Like?
Re: D800 vs EM5 Image Comparison: proves what exactly?
In reply to tgutgu, Mar 25, 2013

tgutgu wrote:

BBViet wrote:

To those who claim that the D800's advantages are not worth the significantly higher price tag:

The RX100 is half the size, weight, and cost of the EM-5. It can take photos as good as the EM-5 90% of the time, too.

The tiny, $30 camera module on your smartphone can produce photos good enough for most people, too.

Aren't you feeling a little ripped off now?

None of your "alternatives" have interchangeable lenses and the focal lengths I need. So your comparison is pointless.

-- hide signature --

Thomas

Feel free to substitute the RX100 for any of the entry-level DSLR: D5100, A57, 600D, etc...

You can also replace the phone camera with any $300 superzooms. They surely cover most of the focal length you need.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
RealPancho
Senior MemberPosts: 1,018Gear list
Like?
Actually....
In reply to Adventsam, Mar 25, 2013

Adventsam wrote:

Yes the d800 is better, but not enough imo! (not my images btw)

The colors look quite a bit better to me, and it makes me a bit suspicious. I never get colors that cold from my E-M5.

Perhaps I should mention that I'm viewing these on an iPad, just as a minor FYI.

-- hide signature --

Frank

 RealPancho's gear list:RealPancho's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-TS3 Olympus E-620 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus E-M1 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm 1:4.0-5.6 +9 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
amtberg
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,394
Like?
Color and exposure....
In reply to Joerg V, Mar 25, 2013

Joerg V wrote:

This is happening in almost every forum,

someone takes a decent camera and claims it produces pictures as good as the D800.

He/she posts some pictures that should back up this claim. Those images are small (<6mp), wildly differ in exposure, white balance, view angle and - most important - were shot by someone who is not used to a D800 and thus lacks everthing necessary to get the best of the d800 (d800 = medium format resolution => medium format treatment). (My first D800 shots looked like taken by a cell phone camera because I lacked the skills necessary to handle it.) The "small camera" images are heavily processed and show tons of artifacts (sorry, details) while the D800 image is an unsharped out-of-camera image taken at the lowest jpeg quality setting bilinearily scaled down to this target size.

With this approach you could make Angela Merkel look better than any super model.

Yawn!

Joerg

The most obvious difference between the images is the color and exposure, where I prefer the Nikon's choices.  If you adjust the EM-5 image it would be hard to distinguish one from the other at normal viewing distances.  Can you tell which is which?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Don Karner
Contributing MemberPosts: 771Gear list
Like?
Re: real d800 vs em5
In reply to Adventsam, Mar 25, 2013

Cameras are tools.  Use the right tool for the intended result.

I like (and have a use for) large prints. Print these pictures at 24 x 36 inches and then see which one is better.  If you have no need for large prints then the OMD is just fine.  But if you do....

-- hide signature --

Ol' Don in Broken Arrow

 Don Karner's gear list:Don Karner's gear list
Canon PowerShot SX230 HS Canon EOS M Panasonic Lumix DMC-G6 Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads