Previous page Next page

Resolution Chart Comparison (JPEG and RAW)

Images on this page are of our standard resolution chart which provides for measurement of resolution up to 4000 LPH (Lines Per Picture Height). A value of 20 equates to 2000 lines per picture height. For each camera we use the relevant prime lens (the same one we use for all the other tests in a particular review). The chart is shot at a full range of apertures and the sharpest image selected. Studio light, cameras set to aperture priority (optimum aperture selected), image parameters default. Exposure compensation set to deliver approximately 80% luminance in the white areas.

What we want to show here is how well the camera is able to resolve the detail in our standard test chart compared to the theoretical maximum resolution of the sensor, which for the charts we shoot is easy to work out - it's simply the number of vertical pixels (the chart shows the number of single lines per picture height, the theoretical limit is 1 line per pixel). Beyond this limit (which when talking about line pairs is usually referred to as the Nyquist frequency) the sensor cannot faithfully record image detail and aliasing occurs.

This limit is rarely attained, because the majority of sensors are fitted with anti-aliasing filters. Anti-aliasing filters are designed to reduce unpleasant moiré effects, but in doing so, they also reduce resolution (the relative strength and quality of these filters varies from camera to camera). In theory though, a sensor without an AA filter, when coupled with a 'perfect' lens, will deliver resolution equal to its Nyquist limit. Therefore, even though it may be effectively unattainable with normal equipment in normal shooting situations, an understanding of a sensor's theoretical limit provides a useful benchmark for best possible performance. Nyquist is indicated in these crops with a red line.

On this page we're looking at both JPEG and Raw resolution. For a (more) level playing field we convert the latter using Adobe Camera Raw. Because Adobe Camera Raw applies different levels of sharpening to different cameras (this confirmed) we use the following workflow for these conversions:

  • Load RAW file into Adobe Camera RAW (Auto mode disabled)
  • Set Sharpness to 0 (all other settings default)
  • Open file to Photoshop
  • Apply a Unsharp mask tuned to the camera, here 200%, Radius 0.3, Threshold 0
  • Save as a TIFF (for cropping) and as a JPEG quality 11 for download
JPEG (4032 x 3024) 3.9MB RAW (4032 x 3024) 3.2MB

Vertical resolution

JPEG
RAW

Horizontal resolution

JPEG RAW

The E-P3 produces results in our resolution test that are to all intents and purposes the same as the E-PL2. Its relatively light anti-aliasing filter allows it to render the lines on the chart with good separation to at least 2300 LPH, and the image processing removes moire very effectively. It's worth noting though that the default JPEG sharpening is quite aggressive, resulting in very obvious haloing artefacts around the lines and numbers of the chart (which is fairly typical for Olympus).

The processed raw (using a Beta varsion of ACR 6.5) likewise shows impressively fine resolution, and while there's visibly more colour moire, the narrower-radius sharpening we've applied results in a cleaner image without sharpening artefacts. Overall the E-P3's results are very good for a 12MP sensor, but naturally it can't quite match the resolution offered by the likes of the 16 MP Panasonic G3.

Previous page Next page
152
I own it
23
I want it
71
I had it
Discuss in the forums
Oops. We couldn't find the price for this product. Click here to search for this product on Amazon.

Comments

reanim888

Very nice review. Hey, I just wanted to point out a small typo I came across in the article, "A full run-down of very feature is far" should read, "of every feature". Hope this helps.

1 upvote