Reading mode: Light Dark

E-M5 sensor from Sony

Go to last post
Jerodequin said:
Interesting news (and good news if correct!) I just replied to the other thread on this subject though - how come, if the sensor is the same or very similar to that used in the NEX series, base ISO on the EM5 is 200 yet on the NEX series it's ISO50.

Wonder if we will ever get a lower base ISO than 160/200 on new M4/3 cams?
Click to expand...
I'm wondering the same. IF EM5 really has Sony's sensor, why didn't / couldn't Olympus use lower base ISO than 200?

Maybe they wanted to leave some room for improvement? Or because it would have required too big design changes to justify it?
 
Being wrong in a polite manner is no problem Brian. :-)

I wonder where are those "experts", I mean of course sociopaths, jerks and idiots that were so sure it was Panasonic, second grade sensor from Panasonic, no better than G3, exactly same sensor as G3 or GX1 etc, that were terrorizing the forum when the EM-5 was released.

If I was one of them I would never ever appear here knowing that I made fool of myself big time, but knowing the way such people work, they will be back again when they feel the irresistable urge to show us their "superiority' and "knowledge".
 
Jeff Tokayer said:
mfbernstein said:
LTZ470 said:
Now lets see if Sony has enough sense to borrow the IBIS from Olympus...
Click to expand...
They (or rather their camera division) invented it. So Olympus is the borrower in this case.
Click to expand...
You mean they acquired it from Minolta.
Click to expand...
I thought that providence only covered film ?
Jeff Tokayer said:
--
My nickel, since the penny is being discontinued...

Jeff.
Click to expand...
--
Riley

any similarity to persons living or dead is coincidental and unintended
support 1022 Sunday Scapes'
 
dgrogers said:
Can't wait to see that bamboo biological microscope.
Click to expand...
if its what I think it is you better take up yoga first !
dgrogers said:
dpalugyay said:
http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fheadlines.yahoo.co.jp%2Fhl%3Fa%3D20120702-00000049-jijc-biz
Click to expand...
--
Completely infatuated with the "OMG"
Click to expand...
--
Riley

any similarity to persons living or dead is coincidental and unintended
support 1022 Sunday Scapes'
 
Im guessing they are reserving that for the pro model?
--
Krishnan
Olympus EM-5, 45/1.8, 20/1.7, 11-22, 50mm
For sale: EP2, VF2, 14-42, E510, 14-42, 40-150
Considering PL 25/1.4, m9-18
 
It was always a possibility, but the least likely.

I'm also surprised it performs as well as the NEX, despite being smaller.

Shame, I think. I hoped Oly had found someone who could keep them a step ahead.

Let's hope it means Panny actually make some proper sensors now to compete. The GH2 sensor showed they can do it when they try.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/acam
http://thegentlemansnapper.blogspot.com
 
Im not sure I completely buy it however
if true, it does indicate there is more afoot than we think

--
Riley

any similarity to persons living or dead is coincidental and unintended
support 1022 Sunday Scapes'
 
Karma81 said:
I'm wondering the same. IF EM5 really has Sony's sensor, why didn't / couldn't Olympus use lower base ISO than 200?

Maybe they wanted to leave some room for improvement? Or because it would have required too big design changes to justify it?
Click to expand...
Sony provide sensors with different specs. The Pentax K5 with the Sony 16MP Exmor could go down to ISO 80, but the NEX C3, which has a very similar sensor was limited to ISO 200
 
Jerodequin said:
Interesting news (and good news if correct!) I just replied to the other thread on this subject though - how come, if the sensor is the same or very similar to that used in the NEX series, base ISO on the EM5 is 200 yet on the NEX series it's ISO50.
Click to expand...
DxO's 'measured' base ISO (that's telling us how much exposure the sensor can 'handle') for the NEX-7 is ISO 78, and I'll guess that the measured base ISO on the E-M5 will be something like ISO 125, and if so, then the difference is less than a stop. A lower base ISO would improve "SNR 18%", but not necessarily the dynamic range, and a lower base ISO could come at the cost of an increased read noise across the whole ISO range (= less DR at higher ISOs), so maybe Olympus thought that ISO 200 (or app. ISO 125 'measured') was the best compromise.
 
I gone off and read the original news article ( in Japanese, worh a read if you know the language ). The interesting part is not that the sensor proven from Sony. Its how the text is phrased.

He pretty much state that Sony's CMOS ( for still imaging ) is the best around and voice that design and industrial production requirement for such deal ( of supply ) needs to be planned ahead of actual product deployment ( around 1 to 2 year prior ), emphasizing that they are free to design and thus source the best possible component for their need

If you are proficient with Japanese, then you know the underlying meaning is .. plainly

This had nothing to do with their financial situation, and that they are already working with Sony ( and not very happy with their prior supplier , aka Panasonic ) for a while which shouldn't be a surprise.

Kind of trying to defuse the financial implication I guess
--
  • Franka -
 
it doesn't have a base ISO of 100 like the NEX sensors. Since that (and the further improvement in DR) would presumably be good selling points, one wonders why.
 
They're rated particularly highly by DxO because of having low read noise + ISO 100 (= a stand-out score on the DR part of the testing). So why does the E-M5 only use 12-bit RAW and a base ISO of 200? They've thrown out a significant amount of the DR that the sensor is presumably capable of by doing that.
 
The new Sony RX100 has a 20mp 1" sensor and it seems they have probably done a good job with it. The E-M5 Sony sensor is bigger and 16mp.

--
Henry Richardson
http://www.bakubo.com
 
Haris said:
If I was one of them I would never ever appear here knowing that I made fool of myself big time, but knowing the way such people work, they will be back again when they feel the irresistable urge to show us their "superiority' and "knowledge".
Click to expand...
I do see three or four I can think of haven't bothered responding to this post yet, but there's still time....

--
"There's shadows in life, baby.." Jack Horner- Boogie Nights
 
Jogger said:
If true, i seems like its a scaled down NEX7 sensor.. in the same way that the D800 is a scaled up 16mp sensor. This is pretty good news and the NEX7 sensor is very good.
Click to expand...
When I compared my NEX 7 and E-M5, the E-M5 was better at higher ISOs. Even when I up-sized the OMD or downsized the NEX 7 images. I think you can see this when comparing RAW files here at DPR.

To be fair, I sometimes do like the extra pixels. This is why I still have the 24MP A65.
 
This sensor has nothing to do with any post crisis deal by Oly, it will have been designed years ago.

Shame the deal wasn't done years before that - Panny's second rate sensors killed FT.

Why do Panny make second rate sensors? Because they are cheap. The GH2 sensor may look quite ordinary now, but it was superb at launch. Why aren't all Panny sensors like that? Because Panny have got it into their head that any old rubbish will do provided it can manage high ISO.

Hopefully the success of the OM-D will convince them otherwise and they will make better, more expensive sensors.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/acam
http://thegentlemansnapper.blogspot.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top