M43 vs SuperZoom

Started Jul 9, 2013 | Discussions
Shop cameras & lenses ▾
Teru Kage
Teru Kage Contributing Member • Posts: 644
Under ideal lighting, even a smartphone is hard to identify

First off, I'd guess that the top photo was done by the M4/3, since the hair detail is much finer.

But photos shot under such ideal conditions will always minimize the  gap between different formats. The photos you used were shot under bright sunlight with a large subject occupying most of the frame, and very little small details.

Disregarding the focal length, it would be valid to argue that even a smartphone could produce a photo that was indistinguishable from the others. But not all real world usage photos are shot outdoors under the sun; try comparing the 2 cameras indoors using a wider angle and the differences should start becoming obvious.

BTW, I'm not trying to disparage superzooms; any gear that fulfills the role it was designed for is a good piece of equipement. I often use superzooms to shoot movies when I go wakeboarding and the results are usually satisfying.

-- hide signature --

Photography - It's not what you look at that matters; it's what you see.
Galleries: http://www.photo.net/photos/teru
http://www.fotop.net/teruphoto

 Teru Kage's gear list:Teru Kage's gear list
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III Nikon D700 Olympus OM-D E-M10 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm f/4G ED VR Olympus 12-40mm F2.8 +21 more
Donald Chin
Donald Chin OP Veteran Member • Posts: 5,556
And the answer is...

If you want to see more real world comparison, here the links for SuperZoom shots this year and M43 shotsfrom last year, have fun.

emd5 001 Regular Member • Posts: 106
Re: And the answer is...

sweet... i thought the background blur on the m43 was stronger as opposed to the superzoom

 emd5 001's gear list:emd5 001's gear list
Canon PowerShot S3 IS Olympus E-M1 Panasonic Leica Summilux DG 25mm F1.4 Panasonic Lumix G X Vario PZ 45-175mm F4.0-5.6 ASPH OIS Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-140mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH. / Power O.I.S +2 more
Donald Chin
Donald Chin OP Veteran Member • Posts: 5,556
Re: Under ideal lighting, even a smartphone is hard to identify

Teru Kage wrote:

First off, I'd guess that the top photo was done by the M4/3, since the hair detail is much finer.

But photos shot under such ideal conditions will always minimize the gap between different formats. The photos you used were shot under bright sunlight with a large subject occupying most of the frame, and very little small details.

Disregarding the focal length, it would be valid to argue that even a smartphone could produce a photo that was indistinguishable from the others. But not all real world usage photos are shot outdoors under the sun; try comparing the 2 cameras indoors using a wider angle and the differences should start becoming obvious.

BTW, I'm not trying to disparage superzooms; any gear that fulfills the role it was designed for is a good piece of equipement. I often use superzooms to shoot movies when I go wakeboarding and the results are usually satisfying.

-- hide signature --

Photography - It's not what you look at that matters; it's what you see.
Galleries: http://www.photo.net/photos/teru
http://www.fotop.net/teruphoto

I hope what you said is truth! 

clack
clack Regular Member • Posts: 211
Re: And the answer is...

I'm relieved that I got it right... at 50:50 chance it could be accidental though...

But if the majority doesn't notice, and the other part have to look at 100%...
maybe we worry too much about equipment?

peevee1 Senior Member • Posts: 6,247
Re: M43 vs SuperZoom

Donald Chin wrote:

Just came across having two similar photo one with a Panasonic G1 + 45~200 and the other with a Canon SX50HS, can you tell the difference under real world usage?

-- hide signature --

In the originals, the difference is very obvious - in the first one the skin is smooth and hair sharp, while in the second one the skin is grainy and the hair is blurred (by the noise reduction?)

I even surprised that at those ideal conditions one of the cameras did so badly, the difference between sensor sizes is usually high when light is low, not in the sunlight (or at least manifested in the blown sky which is not visible here - and G1 is not a good camera for that anyway, its 5 years old, take at least last year E-PM2 for comparison).

Are you sure it was out of camera, with no processing?

peevee1 Senior Member • Posts: 6,247
Re: And the answer is...
2

Donald Chin wrote:

If you want to see more real world comparison, here the links for SuperZoom shots this year and M43 shotsfrom last year, have fun.

-- hide signature --

Exposure values don't match! 1/320s f/5.6 vs 1/800s f/9, about 3 EV difference. Only 1 EV difference in ISO. Looks like the second one was underexposed by 2 EV and then artificially brightened, that is why the noise so apparent.

slimandy Forum Pro • Posts: 16,269
Re: And the answer is...

clack wrote:

I'm relieved that I got it right... at 50:50 chance it could be accidental though...

But if the majority doesn't notice, and the other part have to look at 100%...
maybe we worry too much about equipment?

If you only every shoot relatively static subjects in very favourable light you may be right.

My interests are more varied.

-- hide signature --

www.andrewsandersphotography.co.uk

 slimandy's gear list:slimandy's gear list
Sony RX100 II Nikon D200 Nikon D700 Fujifilm X-E1 Fujifilm X-T1
sigala1 Senior Member • Posts: 3,634
G1 sure has a lousy sensor for a "big sensor" camera

Donald Chin wrote:

If you want to see more real world comparison, here the links for SuperZoom shots this year and M43 shotsfrom last year, have fun.

-- hide signature --

I actually think the one on top has better image quality.

The G1 has a really lousy sensor. DXOMark didn't lie when it gave it such a low rating.

You really need to use G5 or E-M5 level of camera to get better IQ than a modern small sensor camera.

shea241 Junior Member • Posts: 37
Re: And the answer is...
2

Nice catch, this is such a disappointing comparison. I would call it incompetence, but since it must have been brightened in post, it seems more like lying.

The noise reduction on the G1 seems especially strong, too. Someone should post a correct comparison

There is clearly more disparity between the SX50 and any of the M43 cameras than there is between the M43s and the FF. Yet, it's often asked 'does it really matter in day-to-day usage?' when comparing compact to M43, versus the opposite statement 'it absolutely DOES matter in every way' when comparing M43 and FF. What's the deal? Pick one!

Also, spend more time on actual photography, you'll feel better.

clack
clack Regular Member • Posts: 211
Re: And the answer is...
1

To illustrate why I think the details are really bad in the Superzoom, and how it looks smudged...

I took the images in Photoshop, applied "Invert", changed mode to "Grayscale", scaled up 200%, saved to maximum quality JPEG....

Superzoom

M43

IT looks like the top one has the "cartoon" filter on

Sudo Nimh Regular Member • Posts: 281
Not a fair comparison

The part of the dragon with detail missing was in shadow in the Canon photo and in sunlight in the Panasonic photo. That is why the Panasonic captured more detail. The parts of the shirt that were equally well lit are equally detailed in both photos.

And the Canon skin tones are much better.

Vlad S Veteran Member • Posts: 3,658
Old news
2

Donald Chin wrote:

Just came across having two similar photo one with a Panasonic G1 + 45~200 and the other with a Canon SX50HS, can you tell the difference under real world usage?

These two shots do not encompass the totality of "real world usage." Under conditions optimal for small sensors they will give great results. But they are less versatile, and ILC can continue producing great images where small sensor cameras struggle. When Olympus XZ1 came out DPReview commented how it was a better option than an Olympus micro 4/3 camera if you plan on using only the kit lens. This was years ago. So what's new this time?

Vlad

 Vlad S's gear list:Vlad S's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm F4.0-5.6 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Panasonic Lumix G Vario 100-300mm F4-5.6 OIS +2 more
Just Having Fun Veteran Member • Posts: 3,869
2008 model vs. 2013 model?
1

Not sure what this "test" is trying to prove.  The G1 is about 5 years old, but I guess it does hold up pretty well.

Bassam Guy Regular Member • Posts: 312
Re: M43 vs SuperZoom

BTW: You can look at 100% crops & loupe to greater magnifications if you click on the photos. You'll see a bit more detail in the u43 shot and more moire in the SX50 shot.

The OP is obviously trolling. He knows the SX50 HS is stuck with one lens and f3.4-6.5.

 Bassam Guy's gear list:Bassam Guy's gear list
Olympus E-M5 II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm F1.8 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12mm 1:2 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 60mm 1:2.8 Macro +2 more
peevee1 Senior Member • Posts: 6,247
Re: M43 vs SuperZoom
1

Bassam Guy wrote:

BTW: You can look at 100% crops & loupe to greater magnifications if you click on the photos. You'll see a bit more detail in the u43 shot and more moire in the SX50 shot.

The OP is obviously trolling. He knows the SX50 HS is stuck with one lens and f3.4-6.5.

Of course he is trolling. 2EV discrepancy in ISO-adjusted exposure does not come from nowhere.

Donald Chin
Donald Chin OP Veteran Member • Posts: 5,556
Re: M43 vs SuperZoom
1

peevee1 wrote:

Bassam Guy wrote:

BTW: You can look at 100% crops & loupe to greater magnifications if you click on the photos. You'll see a bit more detail in the u43 shot and more moire in the SX50 shot.

The OP is obviously trolling. He knows the SX50 HS is stuck with one lens and f3.4-6.5.

Of course he is trolling. 2EV discrepancy in ISO-adjusted exposure does not come from nowhere.

I use the SX50HS to complete 5 projectsin past 30 days, so what did you do with your M43 instead of just trolling in the forum? 

Donald Chin
Donald Chin OP Veteran Member • Posts: 5,556
Re: M43 vs SuperZoom

Bassam Guy wrote:

BTW: You can look at 100% crops & loupe to greater magnifications if you click on the photos. You'll see a bit more detail in the u43 shot and more moire in the SX50 shot.

The OP is obviously trolling. He knows the SX50 HS is stuck with one lens and f3.4-6.5.

Show me some of your best shots with your M43 before trolling in the forum please! 

Martin.au
Martin.au Forum Pro • Posts: 10,273
Re: M43 vs SuperZoom
1

Donald Chin wrote:

peevee1 wrote:

Bassam Guy wrote:

BTW: You can look at 100% crops & loupe to greater magnifications if you click on the photos. You'll see a bit more detail in the u43 shot and more moire in the SX50 shot.

The OP is obviously trolling. He knows the SX50 HS is stuck with one lens and f3.4-6.5.

Of course he is trolling. 2EV discrepancy in ISO-adjusted exposure does not come from nowhere.

I use the SX50HS to complete 5 projectsin past 30 days, so what did you do with your M43 instead of just trolling in the forum?

-- hide signature --

Relevant much? Sure looks to me like you are trolling.

 Martin.au's gear list:Martin.au's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus E-M1 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm F4.0-5.6 Panasonic Lumix G Fisheye 8mm F3.5 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-50mm 1:3.5-6.3 EZ +6 more
JosephScha Veteran Member • Posts: 4,507
Re: And the answer is...

I guessed correctly. And the reason why I could guess is the water is bluer in the Canon image, it is greyer in the Panasonic m43 image.  I won't venture a guess on which is truer.  Canon tends to produce strong, bright colors and Panasonic (and Nikon) tend to more muted.

-- hide signature --

js

 JosephScha's gear list:JosephScha's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-G7 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 45-200mm F4-5.6 OIS Panasonic Leica Summilux DG 25mm F1.4 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-140mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH. / Power O.I.S +4 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads