E-PL1's low light performance

Hello everyone, I posted this question over at Sony Forums but I wanted to get opinion from people who use E-PL1 more frequently. Basically, I am considering buying a NEX 3 vs E-PL1. Please bear in mind that I am an advanced P&S user, do not intend to buy additional lenses or the EVF. E-PL1 is an attractive option with the lower price and low profile lens/body combination. I really like the sharp and low NR of Oly with the excellent JPEG.

My basic concern over buying the E-PL1 arises from its low light performance. Majority of my photographs will be taken indoors or outside in ow-light conditions. A lot of places I have read, mention that the quality of images degrade dramatically over ISO 800. What is the opinion of people who have used it frequently, is it just usable or a joy under low light ? Please keep in mind I won't be able to do much PP or buy new lenses for quite a while. I have read all the threads on this forum and everywhere else, but I just keep on getting more confused.

Thanks in advance everyone. Cheers

P.S As a side note, what do people think about the bkground defocus ability of EPL1

Akira Dono said:

Hello everyone, I posted this question over at Sony Forums but I wanted to get opinion from people who use E-PL1 more frequently. Basically, I am considering buying a NEX 3 vs E-PL1. Please bear in mind that I am an advanced P&S user, do not intend to buy additional lenses or the EVF. E-PL1 is an attractive option with the lower price and low profile lens/body combination. I really like the sharp and low NR of Oly with the excellent JPEG.

My basic concern over buying the E-PL1 arises from its low light performance. Majority of my photographs will be taken indoors or outside in ow-light conditions. A lot of places I have read, mention that the quality of images degrade dramatically over ISO 800. What is the opinion of people who have used it frequently, is it just usable or a joy under low light ? Please keep in mind I won't be able to do much PP or buy new lenses for quite a while. I have read all the threads on this forum and everywhere else, but I just keep on getting more confused.

Thanks in advance everyone. Cheers

P.S As a side note, what do people think about the bkground defocus ability of EPL1

Click to expand...

Given your set of criteria I'd say the Nex would be a better option for you. The EPL-1 can't compete in terms of high ISO performance against the Nex although it is not as far apart as some would suggest. The EPL-1 jpegs are better but no one camera does it all and if you are shooting more in low light and at higher ISO's with a kit lens then the NEX will do most of what you are after. It will also give you a stop better shallow dof capability - or background defocus as you like to call it .
--
It's a known fact that where there's tea there's hope.
Tony
http://the-random-photographer.blogspot.com/

I have and love an E-PL1, but for your purposes I think you will be much happier with the NEX. As the prior poster has said, the Sony sensor is better in low light, and the ability to blur backgrounds will be slightly better on the Sony also, due to sensor size.

The E-PL1 does many things quite well, but low light photography with the kit lens is definitely not it's strength. I think you will do better at this point with the Nex.

-Janet

I also use my camera a lot in low light conditions, that is why I chose the E-PL1 over the Samsung and NEX'es. I absolutely require that a camera that will be replacing my P&S has a built in flash. I don't like the NEX flash at all and the Samsung does not even come with a flash, requireing me to spend money that would have bought half an E-PL1 on a flash that's only slightly more powerful than the one built into the Oly.

However I'm no fan of the E-PL1's sensor, it's too small, feels overcrowded with pixels, has noice even at base ISO and the images looks flat and two dimentional. Compared to my compact, it's a HUGE improvement. Compared to the ultraclean and three dimentional looking files from my Canon 5D, it's not good at all.

But for me, it is an acceptable compromise. The EP-L1 goes allmost everywhere with me and has replaced my P&S and hugely improved the quality of my everyday photography.

I personally find the quality of the EPL-1 to beat the Nex for sharpness and detail right up to ISO 640. However, if you are only getting the EPL-1 with the kit lens, the f3.5 aperture of the kit lens wide open at 14mm will probably be limiting for you. I own an EPL1 with the Panasonic 20mm f1.7 lens (I sold the kit lens a week after I bought the EPL1, so this is my only lens) and I find the ISO 640 and the image stabilization works very well for me even in very dark situations without using the flash.

If you are interested in using the flash on the EPL1, I should point out that I have been very disappointed with the EPL1 flash (in particular I was disappointed with the exposure, the colour of the light from the flash, and also with the fact that flash strobe doesn't help with autofocus much when using contract detect AF).

If you go with the new though, the fastest kit lens is f2.8, and does not have IS, so the ISO advantage is a wash for non-moving subjects. The nex clearly has better performance from ISO 1600 and up (maybe even from ISO 1250 and up). Another thing to consider is that the dynamic range of the Nex sensor is quite a bit better than the EPL1.

All in all, if you are talking kit lens only, the Nex will probably satisfy you more, but I personally prefer the sharper, more detailed low ISO pictures of the EPL1 (particularly when used with the 20mm f1.7 lens).

Akira Dono said:

Hello everyone, I posted this question over at Sony Forums but I wanted to get opinion from people who use E-PL1 more frequently. Basically, I am considering buying a NEX 3 vs E-PL1. Please bear in mind that I am an advanced P&S user, do not intend to buy additional lenses or the EVF.

Click to expand...

You can be anything you want to be, but you will find that the reason to get an Interchangeable Lens Camera is so that you can get additional lenses. And in fact, the system is engineered this way. The difference between an ILC and a non removable lens camera is that such a camera can be built with more and more zoom, whilst the ILC starts with only 3x zoom and you need to buy different lens to have more zoom and more freedom.

Akira Dono said:

E-PL1 is an attractive option with the lower price and low profile lens/body combination. I really like the sharp and low NR of Oly with the excellent JPEG.

Click to expand...

The sensor is bigger than a point and shoot and that leads to easier to achieve visible sharpness with less NR.

Akira Dono said:

My basic concern over buying the E-PL1 arises from its low light performance. Majority of my photographs will be taken indoors or outside in ow-light conditions. A lot of places I have read, mention that the quality of images degrade dramatically over ISO 800.

Click to expand...

They do.

Akira Dono said:

What is the opinion of people who have used it frequently, is it just usable or a joy under low light ?

Click to expand...

In any camera, you will have limits. Even if you buy a big and expensive Nikon D3s you will have limits except that the limits are relatively higher.

So whether it is a joy or just useable depends on our personal style and choice of when to fight the noise and when to call it a day as much as the gear. With any gear if you choose to fight its limits, you will be dissatisfied.

To compare the NEX vs the PEN, you have definite criteria, stay away from subjective "much better" or "much worse".

The NEX uses one size bigger sensor than the PEN. The Nikon D3S uses one size sensor bigger than the NEX. In practical terms, the sensor is one size bigger.

In terms of low light performance, it usually means 1 setting or if one person is biased another way, 2 settings between NEX and PEN.

So, if you can shoot the PEN at ISO 800, let us say you can shoot at ISO 1600 (1 setting) better. Maybe 2 settings if you are biased towards the NEX. That's it - not "much better" or "much worse" - just the reality of one setting or 2 settings.

How much do you want that 1 or 2 settings - you are already and advanced point and shooter. You can take your present camera and measure / experience what this one setting or two settings are in the scenes you shoot. Then decide how desperate you are to hit that extra 1 or two settings.

Akira Dono said:

Please keep in mind I won't be able to do much PP or buy new lenses for quite a while. I have read all the threads on this forum and everywhere else, but I just keep on getting more confused.

Click to expand...

Because people have a habit of personalising or using subjective words like "much better"

Akira Dono said:

P.S As a side note, what do people think about the bkground defocus ability of EPL1

Click to expand...

The background blur is due to

• distance
• f/no
• optical focal length (not equivalent)
• how much you enlarge

f/no depends on what lens you use - most of the cameras come with similar lenses let us say f/4 ish.

optical focal length is indirectly related to the sensor size.

Yes, same story, NEX vs PEN is 1 sensor size. This translates to one setting for f/no. So if you use f/4 on the Sony lens, you will need to use f/2.8 on the PEN to get the same blur.

How much blur is 1 setting? Is f/4 on the PEN kit lens blur enough? Well, it should be many settings more blur than the point and shoot. But is it blur enough for you? That is something that you cannot measure because blur is a visual thing. However it is 1 setting worth of blur.

--



Ananda
http://anandasim.blogspot.com
https://sites.google.com/site/asphotokb

'Enjoy Diversity - Live a Little'

Hi there,

Please keep the lenses in mind. Both issues you mention depend largely (low light ability) or wholly (control of DOF) on the lens you use. I realise you say that you do not intend to get another lens, and in that case, the NEX might suit you better than the E-PL1 (for pure low light, high ISO and a bit more shallow DOF). At the same time, many people will prefer the Olympus jpeg output which is superior to the NEX right up ISO1200-1600. There's a useful direct comparison here:
http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/review/special/20100520_368000.html

Notice how the metering and jpeg processing gives different pictures (brightness, colours, contrast etc.) for each camera. Pick something that appeals to you. At the same time, you can see in the full size images that the E-PL1 is considerably sharper and better processed for most of the normal ISO range (up to ISO1600). Sometimes, a little bit of noise grain will be less distracting than colour desaturation ro detail smearing. Of course, IQ requirements depend on your way of showing the pictures (web, small print or large print, slideshows?)

But the big advantage of these systems is that you can use a compact pancake lens for ulitmate portability. I would certainly advise you to get one somewhere down the line, whether you get the NEX or the Olympus.

As Ananda wrote extensively, the DOF depends on the lens you use (focal length and aperture) and the distance to subject. The Panasonic Lumix 20mm f/1.7 will give you a more shallow DOF than the NEX kit lens at the comparable 26mm (f/4.5 or so?).

The same goes for low light. With the Panasonic 20mm, you have a lens that is 2 stops brighter than the kit lens. Compared to the (currently) brightest lens for the NEX (16mm f/2.8) the difference is still 1.5 stops.

Or in terms of ISO: you need ISO2000 on the NEX+16mm to match ISO 800 on the PEN+20mm. That will even out much of the sensor advantage of the NEX. The point is that there is currently no native NEX lens that allows you to capitalise on the sensor's performance.

And finally, the most important thing is whether you actually like to use the camera you get. Does it fit your hands and brains (control logic)? If possible, try that out in a store.

Here's one of my favourite night shots with the E-PL1. This was handheld at 1/6 seconds which worked thanks to the IS in the PEN body. Note that with the NEX + 16mm, I would have had to add 1.5 ISO stops to compensate for the lens, and another 1.5 stops for the lack of IBIS. That would have meant ISO6400 to get the same exposure level

Akira Dono said:

Hello everyone, I posted this question over at Sony Forums but I wanted to get opinion from people who use E-PL1 more frequently. Basically, I am considering buying a NEX 3 vs E-PL1. Please bear in mind that I am an advanced P&S user, do not intend to buy additional lenses or the EVF. E-PL1 is an attractive option with the lower price and low profile lens/body combination. I really like the sharp and low NR of Oly with the excellent JPEG.

My basic concern over buying the E-PL1 arises from its low light performance. Majority of my photographs will be taken indoors or outside in ow-light conditions. A lot of places I have read, mention that the quality of images degrade dramatically over ISO 800. What is the opinion of people who have used it frequently, is it just usable or a joy under low light ? Please keep in mind I won't be able to do much PP or buy new lenses for quite a while. I have read all the threads on this forum and everywhere else, but I just keep on getting more confused.

Thanks in advance everyone. Cheers

P.S As a side note, what do people think about the bkground defocus ability of EPL1

Click to expand...

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bilgy_no1

Akira Dono said:

Hello everyone, I posted this question over at Sony Forums but I wanted to get opinion from people who use E-PL1 more frequently. Basically, I am considering buying a NEX 3 vs E-PL1. Please bear in mind that I am an advanced P&S user, do not intend to buy additional lenses or the EVF.

Click to expand...

It's certainly up to you what to do, but the idea to buy interchangeable lens camera and do not change lenses is fundamentally flawed: you will be paying for the features that you are not going to use. A high end compact with fast lens (e.g. Olympus XZ-1) would do no worse in low light than either NEX or E-PL1 with kit lens AND it will be much smaller and quieter.

Akira Dono said:

My basic concern over buying the E-PL1 arises from its low light performance.

Click to expand...

If you buy 20mm f1.7 lens for it, the low light performance will be better than you can get on NEX with native lenses (here's what you get when shooting handheld at night with noise filter off and processing that exacerbates the noise)





If you insist on sticking with kit zoom, you won't be happy for many reasons.

Akira Dono said:

Majority of my photographs will be taken indoors or outside in ow-light conditions.

Click to expand...

You've got to be honest with yourself. I am a night person who often wakes up at 5pm and enjoys a night photography, yet even for me the ratio of good light to low light photographs is more than 5:1.

Akira Dono said:

A lot of places I have read, mention that the quality of images degrade dramatically over ISO 800. What is the opinion of people who have used it frequently, is it just usable or a joy under low light ?

Click to expand...

Joy with an appropriate lens. Kit lens is a daylight lens only.

Akira Dono said:

Please keep in mind I won't be able to do much PP or buy new lenses for quite a while. I have read all the threads on this forum and everywhere else, but I just keep on getting more confused.

Click to expand...

That idea that buying additional lenses is a money pit is very natural and understandable. Probably everyone coming from compacts has it, I've certainly had it too. At the same time, it's just a simple fact that one lens cannot be good for everything, not on NEX, not on m4/3. Therefore the smart thing to do is to figure out your needs and budget for the lenses that can do the job. There is 0 native lenses on NEX that work well in low light. There are a couple of such lenses on m4/3, of which probably only Panasonic 20mm f1.7 can appeal to a budget minded photographer.

If you are buying a camera primarily for a low light my order of preference would be
E-pl1 with 20mm> > XZ-1 > Nex with kit lens > > E-PL1 with kit lens.

Akira Dono said:

P.S As a side note, what do people think about the bkground defocus ability of EPL1

Click to expand...

Same story. Depends on the lenses that you use and what your subject is. Ok but not great on the long end of kit lens for people shots, but excellent for flower shots (macro). However, if you are willing to manual focus, cheap (read $10-30) lenses are plentiful that allow you to blur portrait shots as much as you could possibly want.

Can't speak for the Nex, but here's my experience with the E-PL1 in low light:

-- The slow kit lens makes AF very difficult - sometimes impossible with very low light
such as with a single tungsten lamp.
--- Color balance is sometimes off when set to auto
--- Exposure in general is very good and low noise up to ISO 800.

--- the flash is very effective in low light except for the AF problem caused by the lack of
an IR assist lamp -- does the Nex have one?

In general, I am satisfied with the E-PL1's performance in low light. Adding the 20 1.7 would make my experience much more enjoyable

Bilgy_no1 wrote:
[snip]

Bilgy_no1 said:

As Ananda wrote extensively, the DOF depends on the lens you use (focal length and aperture) and the distance to subject.

Click to expand...

FWIW, it also depends on the sensor size (in the DOF formula, sensor size affects the Circle of Confusion value).

larsbc

MNE said:

Can't speak for the Nex, but here's my experience with the E-PL1 in low light:

-- The slow kit lens makes AF very difficult - sometimes impossible with very low light
such as with a single tungsten lamp.
--- Color balance is sometimes off when set to auto
--- Exposure in general is very good and low noise up to ISO 800.

--- the flash is very effective in low light except for the AF problem caused by the lack of
an IR assist lamp -- does the Nex have one?

In general, I am satisfied with the E-PL1's performance in low light. Adding the 20 1.7 would make my experience much more enjoyable

Click to expand...

I second the advice to get the Olympus XZ-1 if he isn't interested in an interchangeable lens camera. The XZ-1 has a 1.8 lens. It is widely regarded as the best low light lens in that category of camera.

The NEX 3 is interchangeable but there are something like only 3 total lenses available for the camera! Also, the NEX doesn't have IS in the body. So you will get worse performance from legacy lenses.

A second low cost option is to get the EPL1 for $335.00 dollars from newegg.com:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16830111413

Then get the Olympus 17mm 2.8 lens for $250.00. This is cheaper than the $400.00 Panny 20mm.

You then have a body with 2 lenses and have then only spent slightly more than the cost of the NEX 3 with kit lens at $500.00, and less than the cost of the NEX 5 ($600 to $700).

Answering strictly within the parameters of your original post,

based on spec alone, the NEX with a 18-55 would probably be your best shout- though I have the EPL-1 and no longer have t he NEX, so make of that what you will

SENSOR - The NEX has a superb sensor, it is the latest generation sensor and noted for its good ISO capability, that combined with it's greater size will help your low light shooting.

FLASH - The NEX has a flash attachment, it is not to everyones taste, the EPL has a built in flash, they are both about the same power. The EPL flash can be pulled back with the finger, so that in effect it bounces off the ceiling - but these are such low powered flashes that that does not count for much.

LENS - I had the 16mm lens and did not enjoy it as a 'general lens', I think I would have been better with the 18 -55, your needs may differ.

PRICE - This weekend there have been some real big drops in price on the EPL-1, making that camera a superb buy.

TRUTH - most low light shooting can be pretty poo - so differences between models can be fairly marginal and because of that, handling and other types of use that you have for your camera may have more impact on your final buying decision.

buying an interchangeable lens camera with the intention of never changing lenses. As others have said, you would be better off with a fast lens point n shoot.

As to NEX v. E-pl1 and low light it is a wash for many subjects. Neither are going to focus well in low light with their slow kit lenses. NEX pictures do look better above ISO 1600 (edge to E-pl1 below ISO 1600) but if you don't have a lot of motion in your shots, Oly IBIS gives you a few more F stops of hand held shutter speed so in those situations it is a wash at best. If you can keep the E-pl1 below ISO 1600 at night, it will give better results based on the tests I have seen. Honesly, there are very few situations I have been in where ISO 1600 with IBIS was not enough.

Really, the better low light machine is the E-pl1 with a fast legacy lens (e.g. 50mm f 1.4, ect.) This lens is low cost and stabilized on the E-pl1 whereas it is not stabilzed on NEX. Hand holding an E-pl1 at 1/4 sec. with IBIS is relatively easy. At ISO 1600 and f/1.4 this is very low light. If you are taking low light action shots where a higher shutter speed is needed, NEX gets the nod. If you can use a tripod, E-pl1 gets a slight nod, if you are shooting low light non-action then definately e-pl1 plus legacy glass gets the nod. Ask yourself how often you will be shooting low light action photos? If it is a minority of the time, the E-pl1 will give better JPEGs the rest of the time.

Tedolph

As has been touched on earlier, it really depends on your lens choices.

From worst to best in low light, i think it shakes out like this:

worst: e-pl1 with kit lens
nex with kit lens
nex with f2.8 pancake
best: e-pl1 with f1.7 pancake

The nex sensor is better, but so far they don't have a lens that can keep up with the speed of the 1.7 lens. On top of that, the e-pl1 adds image stabilization.

From worst to best for dof control, it works out more like this:

worst: e-pl1 with kit lens
nex with kit lens
nex with 2.8 pancake
best: e-pl1 with 1.7 pancake.

As far as DOF control and background blur go, the nex will be better with the kit lens, the e-pl1 will be better with the pancake.

Overall, I think the e-pl1/2 with panasonic 1.7 lens is the best lowlight combination you can get in a compact camera system. The lesson of the day? When it comes to interchangable lens systems, the lens makes the camera!

I can't speak about background defocus since that is dependant on the lens used.

The E-PL1 can do ok in low light, but you will be pushing it to the limits and beyond that if light is lower than what's in a decently lighted room.

I would check out the E-PL2, then an A55 over NEX (55 only for more lens options).
The E-PL2 menu might be a quicker access from better controls.

I would be more confortable using a NEX 3 or 5 (have 5) or A33 (have 33) when pushing low light hard. The night shot feature is an advantage too.
You would find the menu access much quicker with an A55.

The NEX may have lens options by adapters, but I haven't done anything with it.
Get the 18-55 lens for NEX which is apparently sharpest.

Reviews of out of camera sharpness of the E-PL1 is what attracted me to it.

--

Torch

E-pl1 ability to defocus background. This is a function primarily of focal length, subject distance, aperture and then camera format in that order. There is not much difference in DOF control between 4/3 and APS-c formats at all. 4/3 and u 4/3 can easily defocus a background depending on the focal lenght and subject distance used. Here are two examples of the same scene, both at a 53mm focal lenght (oly 40-150mm zoom), one at f/5.0 and the other at f/8.0. The flowers in front and ceter focus were about five feet in front of the lens, the fowers in the backgrouind about ten feet from the lens. Do a full size comparison of the ring like flower structure in the upper left corner to see the difference:









Tedolph

Yes, but in that case the smaller sensor gives you less DOF because the image has to be enlarged more to make the same print size.

Really, the CoC is related to printed output and these days, the term just adds confusion....

larsbc said:

larsbc said:

As Ananda wrote extensively, the DOF depends on the lens you use (focal length and aperture) and the distance to subject.

Click to expand...

FWIW, it also depends on the sensor size (in the DOF formula, sensor size affects the Circle of Confusion value).

larsbc

Click to expand...

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bilgy_no1

XZ-1 ?

First of all let me say thank you to every one for replying to me question and giving me such in depth advice. This has certainly been very educating for me.

I would also clarify, I did not mean to say I will never buy a new lens - Probably at least not in the near future though.

Now, it amazes me how such an amazing camera (E-PL1) is available for such a low price. Quite honestly, I am surprised how such a (relatively) low-cost camera has superior image processor. Hence, it was a really tough decision for me and in the end I did go for NEX. I tried it out in a store and it just really appealed to me, better LCD (making MF such a joy), clean interface, excellent video and high dynamic range. My wife also liked the NEX more due to things like auto-HDR, sweep panorama etc. I completely agree though that the lack of native E-mount lenses and sacrificing AF and IS on legacy lenses, feels like a big bottleneck to me.

Now, I have an event coming up and that will be a big test for the NEX. If the IQ does not live up to my expectations, I may end up returning it. In that case, I will most likely go for the E-PL2 ($150 extra for better lens + better LCD + better body + extra control dial) + 20/1.7 lens in the future.

Hi,

I am in the same situation, I also own an E-PL1, in normal day-light conditions the images form this camera are hard to beat. I use kit lens supplied.

Last Sat., I attended a wedding party at night and I took my E-PL1, most of the shots were taken under low light conditions indoors of closeup to 4-10 feet of portraits or bride and groom and friends. I was UNABLE to get consistent quality images from this camera, I have to modify my techniques drastically for low light compared to normal outside good lighting conditions. I use various techniques like Aperture Priority or preset setting from the camera on Portraits, both these setting don't really are very satisfactory results.

My friend brought with her Nikon7000 and she set it at "Auto", her images when viewed from the camera's LCD were very good enough brightness and sharp images whereas mine are dark in the background on many shots(because the flash is not good enough).

I strongly suggest you look at a different camera for low light conditions, try NIKON D5100, it has the same sensor as D7000 and has all the attributes of the D7000 but the price. Just read the reviews on this site, the rating is 76points compared to E-PL2 at 72pts. I am seriously considering buying this camera.

I find the deficiencies from E-PL1 are:

1. Weak flash
2. NO Viewfinder(I have to buy a VF2 costing $300 min)
3. Poor to bad auto focus in low light conditions
4. Not cheap after you add the VF2

Nikon D5100 is about $900 including a built-in view finder and kit lens(18-55mm)and I would consider it a a better buy now compared to E-PL1 or 2, Nikom5100 is an all rounder.