With a PEN and the sharp F/1.7 20mm pancake, you could have used ISO800 (or less) instead of ISO 3200. The image would have been noticeably superior.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Sony NEX vs Olympus Pen
- Thread starter bosoxfanx
- Start date
FlyPenFly
Senior Member
At base ISO you can see a difference. I've owned the EPL2 and taken many shots with it and currently own the NEX5N.
If you rely on autofocus and plan to buy a lot of lenses, get the EPL2. If you're open to manual focus and even better lenses, get the NEX5N.
If you rely on autofocus and plan to buy a lot of lenses, get the EPL2. If you're open to manual focus and even better lenses, get the NEX5N.
JJJPhoto
Senior Member
I have both an E-PL1 and E-PL1s (Japanese exclusive predecessor to the E-PL2) and the NEX-3 (I've also pre-ordered the NEX-7).
The big advantages of the Pen cameras are in-body image stabilization (LOVE it), small lens size (although not as smaller as anti-NEX m4/3 fans want you to believe) and GREAT lens selection.
The big disadvantages of the Pen cameras are noisy high ISO shots and less dynamic range (leading to clipped highlights if you don't take steps to avoid it ... such as neutral density filters or controlling the light to avoid high contrast lighting).
The NEX doesn't have the noisy high ISO issue (even pre-production image samples from the NEX-7 look better at high ISO than the Pen cameras) and the NEX cameras have better dynamic range with less highlight clipping. The NEX cameras also have faster burst/continuous shooting speed.
The disadvantages of the NEX system are fewer "native" lenses (you can't count adapted "legacy" lenses because the m4/3 cameras can use all the same MF lenses) and no in-body image stabilization. Again, lenses are larger than equivalent m4/3 lenses, but not insanely larger.
For now I am pretty happy with both my Olympus Pen cameras and my NEX gear, but if the NEX-7 lives up to the hype then I will probably sell all my Olympus m4/3 gear.
The only NEX pancake lens sucks at 2.8 aperture.
http://www.lenstip.com/...ens_review-Sony_E_16_mm_f_2.8_Image_resolution.html
The NEX system is not pocketable or portable if you want to take quality photos in low light.
Says who exactly ?
Even I can say the moon is red at 1 am. Where's the beef ? What are the alternatives ? M43 at 1600 iso ? No thank you. Case closed.
Even I can say the moon is red at 1 am. Where's the beef ? What are the alternatives ? M43 at 1600 iso ? No thank you. Case closed.
A 1.5 crop factor is enough of a hit trying to adapt legacy lenses. 35mm becomes 'like' a 50mm (except for DOF), 24 like at 35mm, etc.
But going to the m4/3 crop factor is even less attractive. Even more DOF is lost, even fewer wide angle options. So I say you should count adapted legacy lenses on the NEX. I'd say for some applications (where wide angle and shallow DOF are big factors) you should assign them a usefulness that is the reciprocal of the crop factor, making them about 33% more useful on APS-C than on m4/3.
But going to the m4/3 crop factor is even less attractive. Even more DOF is lost, even fewer wide angle options. So I say you should count adapted legacy lenses on the NEX. I'd say for some applications (where wide angle and shallow DOF are big factors) you should assign them a usefulness that is the reciprocal of the crop factor, making them about 33% more useful on APS-C than on m4/3.
JJJPhoto
Senior Member
So, you're saying you wouldn't cry "foul" if Nikon or Canon launched a new mirrorless camera system with only two or three native lenses and a bunch of adapters then advertised their systems as having 100+ lenses?
Adapted lenses are a nice "bonus" but the overwhelming majority of people only look at "native" lenses (with AF) when they consider a modern camera system.
Read the review:
http://www.lenstip.com/287.11-Lens_review-Sony_E_16_mm_f_2.8_Summary.html
The 16mm lens at 2.8 aperture is garbage plain and simple.
I like this quote from the review: "It makes the Olympus 2.8/17 and the Panasonic 1.7/20 unbeatable when it comes to reaching fully satisfying images at the maximum aperture; unfortunately the Sony product fails to perform so well."
The m4/3 pancakes (14mm, 17mm and 20mm) wipe the floor with this piece of chit that Sony has conned you into buying.
http://www.lenstip.com/287.11-Lens_review-Sony_E_16_mm_f_2.8_Summary.html
The 16mm lens at 2.8 aperture is garbage plain and simple.
I like this quote from the review: "It makes the Olympus 2.8/17 and the Panasonic 1.7/20 unbeatable when it comes to reaching fully satisfying images at the maximum aperture; unfortunately the Sony product fails to perform so well."
The m4/3 pancakes (14mm, 17mm and 20mm) wipe the floor with this piece of chit that Sony has conned you into buying.
Let's see a PEN with thesharp F/1.7 pancake vs. the NEX with the terrible F/2.8 pancake.
If you shoot at ISO64000 with the NEX, you could shoot at ISO800 with the PEN... 1+ stop faster for the lens, and at least 2 more stops for IBIS.
A blurry ISO6400 pic vs. a sharp ISO800 pic. Easy choice.
Case closed.
Enir4
Senior Member
In search for a good quality small camera, I had the Olympus E-P1, E-P2 and E-PL3. Sold them and bought the NEX C3. I also had the NEX 5 before.
The sensors of the NEX cameras are much better in terms of noise, gradations and DR, no comparison. The sensor of the Olypus Pen cameras is noisy even at base ISO, clips highlights easily and, to me, feels closer to P&S cameras than to DSLR's. M4:3 cameras have right now a broader line of lenses to choose from. But the difference in sensor is such that I prefer to do with the 16mm and the 18-55mm, and wait for other lenses to come.
I find DxO quality index a good indication of IQ. Pen cameras score 55, while the NEX C3 scores 74. As a reference, the Canon 5D is 72, I think, and the Canon S90 pocket camera scores 46.
Enrique
The sensors of the NEX cameras are much better in terms of noise, gradations and DR, no comparison. The sensor of the Olypus Pen cameras is noisy even at base ISO, clips highlights easily and, to me, feels closer to P&S cameras than to DSLR's. M4:3 cameras have right now a broader line of lenses to choose from. But the difference in sensor is such that I prefer to do with the 16mm and the 18-55mm, and wait for other lenses to come.
I find DxO quality index a good indication of IQ. Pen cameras score 55, while the NEX C3 scores 74. As a reference, the Canon 5D is 72, I think, and the Canon S90 pocket camera scores 46.
Enrique
So how do you work into this IQ comparison the quality of lenses or the IQ boost you get from stabilization?
What does 74 mean for practical purposes anyway? It's a useless number created to stir the pot at internet forums. You think that Nex C3 IQ is higher than Canon 5D? Leica M9 has 69 btw. Congratulations on buying a pocket camera with higher IQ than $7K Leica.
Go with NEX, either model, as someone stated before there is no comparison concerning IQ, no matter what others try to talk you into. Or to be entirely sure for yourself take a laptop with you and visit your local camerastore to try both systems first hand.
Good luck!
Good luck!
Hmm, can you show me a 2.8mm autofocussing MFT lens with an effective FL of 24mm? Yes the 16mm 2.8 pancake lens is not stellar but when you need the FOV for a picture of a 24mm lens on 35mm film then the Panasonic lens will not do will it?
When you want to compare it with an prime from the Nex range well it is a little bit harder, you could go for the Zeiss 24 mm 1.8 lens (yes The pana will still not see the whole picture compared with that lens), but oh wait, the light that lens gives us on the way better chip is about the same as the Panasonic will do...
OK you can go for the 30 mm macro lens, oh but how good is the macro capability of the Panasonic? So that closeup you will miss and we will get.... Then there is the 50mm 1.8 OSS lens for the Nex, oh the light, AND it is stabelized zo what camera will winn with that lens?
Don't get me wrong, I am a litle bit yealous for the many MFT lenses there are, but the line of nex lenses is growing and we only here you about the 16mm lens, as far as I can se not as bad as you draw it, in fact, as I've seen a lot of pictures taken with that lens it will do very well on the new Nex 5N, that has the same immage prosessing as your MFT for lens defects
With a 40mm lens IBIS is a lot more needed then on a 14mm lenst so most of the 2 stops are needed for that, but yes you forget that in your world...
And what with the 50mm 11.8 OSS what camera wins then? And with the 24mm Zeiss 1.8 what camera will winn then? Ah come on you can do better then that...
Or a blurry macro for you, or not the whole group in that small room on your picture, or ....
OK You like your camera and lenses, and you made a good choice, I wish you well with it. And the people buying a Nex do have a very good camera too. Most of the so called lens defects will not be realy noticable on prints and can be overcome in PP (that goes for both cameras, as the MFT do some lens corrections in camera, just as the Nex 5N, making an average lens a lot better).
Do you realy think so?Case closed.
You can't fix the blurred mess that the Sony 16mm makes of textures or fine detail when used at the 2.8 aperture.
http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2011/08/26/sony-nex-c3-vs-olympus-e-p3-jpeg-test/
Look at this review. The texture in the boards of the 16mm shot is gone.
The lens takes crap shots.
And you are never going to get them back.
JJJPhoto
Senior Member
Since I have an Olympus E-PL1 with 20mm f/1.7 pancake and the NEX-3 with 16mm f/2.8 pancake I figured I could do that test very easily. These were taken in JPEG with auto white balance.Let's see a PEN with thesharp F/1.7 pancake vs. the NEX with the terrible F/2.8 pancake.
If you shoot at ISO64000 with the NEX, you could shoot at ISO800 with the PEN... 1+ stop faster for the lens, and at least 2 more stops for IBIS.
A blurry ISO6400 pic vs. a sharp ISO800 pic. Easy choice.
Case closed.
Here is a bowl of fruit taken with the NEX-3 and 16mm lens at f/2.8, 1/30s shutter speed and auto ISO (camera selected ISO 1000):
Here is the same subject taken with the E-PL1 and 20mm lens at f/1.7, 1/30s shutter speed and auto ISO (camera selected ISO 400):
100% crop of the NEX-3 + 16mm f/2.8 image at 1/30s shutter speed and ISO 1000:
100% crop of the E-PL1 + 20mm f/1.7 image at 1/30s shutter speed and ISO 400:
Excusing the differences in composition and focus that occurred because this wasn't done on a tripod and both lenses and sensor crop factors are different, I'd say the "real world" differences are pretty subtle.
At the very least I would not say that one image is sharper/blurrier enough to declare "case closed."
JJJPhoto
Senior Member
One could make the counter argument that m4/3 image sensors take crap (noisy) shots ... and that you are never going to rescue the detail that was lost/obscured because of all that noise.
Just playing devil's advocate. I'm allowed because I spend my hard-earned cash on BOTH m4/3 and NEX gear.
Which is right and it works out that way for most real life comparisons. This is completely opposite to all "case closed" and "there is no comparison" comments in favor of either system.
Try duplicating the same photograph of a person under the same conditions. Then print an 8x10.
The NEX print will have no detail in the eye of subject. The pupils will be slurred blurs of color.
In the PEN print the details of the eyes of the subject will be there. This is the basic stuff that distinguishes good photographs from bad.
On the other hand, the NEX + 16mm lens at 2.8 aperture is a great camera when used for viewing photographs on facebook.
The NEX totally dominates the cameras found in most portable phones.
bosoxfanx
Active member
ok so my photography IQ is not that high
but how come the colors in the NEX 3 picture is much more "lively"? was it due to white balance? the apple in nex3 looks "more red" than pen..
bluevellet
Senior Member
Probably just have the saturation levels boosted on the NEX3 while they're not on the Pen (in comparison). Pretty much every half decent camera have that kind of settings.
It is a bit strange that the guy who owns both isn't using similar settings for both. cameras.
Similar threads
- User review
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum