OMD versus G5, IQ

Roberto de La Tour · Jan 15, 2013

Hello

I already saw comparisons and debates concerning Panasonic and Olympus "larger" m4/3, but I ended up getting confused.

Concerning specifications, i can read or find out.

But I am not sure about Image Quality. I understand OMD IQ is better than G5. But WHY? (apart from lenses, where I read that the zoom usually put in a kit with the OMD is not very good... true?). But with the same lens? What makes OMD have a better IQ than G5? (or G3)

Thank-you in advance

Anders W · Jan 15, 2013

Roberto de La Tour said:
Roberto de La Tour wrote:

Hello

I already saw comparisons and debates concerning Panasonic and Olympus "larger" m4/3, but I ended up getting confused.

Concerning specifications, i can read or find out.

But I am not sure about Image Quality. I understand OMD IQ is better than G5. But WHY? (apart from lenses, where I read that the zoom usually put in a kit with the OMD is not very good... true?). But with the same lens? What makes OMD have a better IQ than G5? (or G3)

Thank-you in advance

Better sensor. According to DxOMark, the E-M5 has about 2/3 EV better DR than the G5 at base ISO as well as higher ISOs. Compared to the G3, the difference is close to 2 EV at base ISO and about 0.5 EV at higher ISOs. Whether and how much you personally care about that is something only you can decide.

In addition, people who shoot out-of-camera jpegs rather than RAW often claim that the Oly jpeg engine is preferable to Pany's. This is a matter of taste and I personally don't care since I shoot RAW.

bowportes · Jan 15, 2013

I don't own the OMD, but from everything I've read the OMD has:

1. Less noise at higher ISOs... meaning cleaner, more detailed low-light shots (at ISO 1600 and above).

2. Better dynamic range -- easier to pull details from shadows and to avoid blown highlights in contrasty situations, like at the beach in full sun.

3. Image stabilization with all lenses, making it possible to get sharp shots at slower shutter speeds while hand-holding the camera.

But this does NOT necessarily mean:

1. Your pictures will be better from an OMD than a G5. (You are the one making the picture, not the camera. No camera is a guarantee of good pictures.)

2. Olympus image stabilization is preferable if you already own (or plan to purchase) Panny stabilized lenses.

3. JPEGS from the OMD are better. (This is a matter of personal preference; colors with the G5 are quite good.)

Finally, chromatic aberration is corrected in camera for Panny lenses on the G5, while you have to do this in post-processing for the OMD. You will always have your flash available for fill on the G5 (because it's built in, unlike on the OMD). And video is probably better from the G5 than the OMD. (At least the video specs are better.) Many comment that the G5 has better ergonomics (handles better) than the OMD. Some disagree. And others point out that if you buy the optional OMD grip, then it handles as well as the G5. (Of course the nice grip is standard on the G5.)

Although the G5 does a nice job with low light photography, if you plan to do a lot of VERY low light work without flash, then the OMD is the better camera. It will stabilize the images from low light prime lenses (such as the Panny 20 and 25 and the Oly 45, 60, and 75), giving you sharper pictures at very slow shutter speeds.

That's my synopsis of what I've read.

Anders W · Jan 15, 2013

bowportes said:
bowportes wrote:

I don't own the OMD, but from everything I've read the OMD has:

1. Less noise at higher ISOs... meaning cleaner, more detailed low-light shots (at ISO 1600 and above).

2. Better dynamic range -- easier to pull details from shadows and to avoid blown highlights in contrasty situations, like at the beach in full sun.

3. Image stabilization with all lenses, making it possible to get sharp shots at slower shutter speeds while hand-holding the camera.

But this does NOT necessarily mean:

1. Your pictures will be better from an OMD than a G5. (You are the one making the picture, not the camera. No camera is a guarantee of good pictures.)

2. Olympus image stabilization is preferable if you already own (or plan to purchase) Panny stabilized lenses.

3. JPEGS from the OMD are better. (This is a matter of personal preference; colors with the G5 are quite good.)

Finally, chromatic aberration is corrected in camera for Panny lenses on the G5, while you have to do this in post-processing for the OMD. You will always have your flash available for fill on the G5 (because it's built in, unlike on the OMD). And video is probably better from the G5 than the OMD. (At least the video specs are better.)

Whether video is better on the G5 than the E-M5 is debatable. Depends on what you look at. A summary of the pros and cons (as far as I am aware) can be found here:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/50426049

bowportes said:
Many comment that the G5 has better ergonomics (handles better) than the OMD. Some disagree. And others point out that if you buy the optional OMD grip, then it handles as well as the G5. (Of course the nice grip is standard on the G5.)

Although the G5 does a nice job with low light photography, if you plan to do a lot of VERY low light work without flash, then the OMD is the better camera. It will stabilize the images from low light prime lenses (such as the Panny 20 and 25 and the Oly 45, 60, and 75), giving you sharper pictures at very slow shutter speeds.

That's my synopsis of what I've read.

Roberto de La Tour · Jan 15, 2013

bowportes said:
bowportes wrote:

I don't own the OMD, but from everything I've read the OMD has:

1. Less noise at higher ISOs... meaning cleaner, more detailed low-light shots (at ISO 1600 and above).

2. Better dynamic range -- easier to pull details from shadows and to avoid blown highlights in contrasty situations, like at the beach in full sun.

3. Image stabilization with all lenses, making it possible to get sharp shots at slower shutter speeds while hand-holding the camera.

But this does NOT necessarily mean:

1. Your pictures will be better from an OMD than a G5. (You are the one making the picture, not the camera. No camera is a guarantee of good pictures.)

2. Olympus image stabilization is preferable if you already own (or plan to purchase) Panny stabilized lenses.

3. JPEGS from the OMD are better. (This is a matter of personal preference; colors with the G5 are quite good.)

Finally, chromatic aberration is corrected in camera for Panny lenses on the G5, while you have to do this in post-processing for the OMD. You will always have your flash available for fill on the G5 (because it's built in, unlike on the OMD). And video is probably better from the G5 than the OMD. (At least the video specs are better.) Many comment that the G5 has better ergonomics (handles better) than the OMD. Some disagree. And others point out that if you buy the optional OMD grip, then it handles as well as the G5. (Of course the nice grip is standard on the G5.)

Although the G5 does a nice job with low light photography, if you plan to do a lot of VERY low light work without flash, then the OMD is the better camera. It will stabilize the images from low light prime lenses (such as the Panny 20 and 25 and the Oly 45, 60, and 75), giving you sharper pictures at very slow shutter speeds.

That's my synopsis of what I've read.

Thank-you so much for this detailed analysis!. I own a G1, with a broken internal flash, the kit lens plus a 45-200 also from Pana, and an Oly flash. Your point 2 intrigues me: so in-lens stabilization adds to in-body stabilzation? With slow shutter speeds I should keep both on if I use those lenses on an OMD?

Roberto de La Tour · Jan 15, 2013

Anders W said:
Anders W wrote:
Whether video is better on the G5 than the E-M5 is debatable. Depends on what you look at. A summary of the pros and cons (as far as I am aware) can be found here:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/50426049

Dear Anders,

Thank-you for you first answer on the sensor and this link. In fact, video mode is not a priority for me, I use it sporadically for memories, not for beauty.

Your link is interesting, but it is an example of things that confuse me in forums, because there is a strong argument with even a complain of agressiveness

But as i said, video is not essential for me. Your input on sensor is.

number_6 · Jan 15, 2013

Roberto de La Tour said:
Roberto de La Tour wrote:

Thank-you so much for this detailed analysis!. I own a G1, with a broken internal flash, the kit lens plus a 45-200 also from Pana, and an Oly flash. Your point 2 intrigues me: so in-lens stabilization adds to in-body stabilzation? With slow shutter speeds I should keep both on if I use those lenses on an OMD?

Anders W · Jan 15, 2013

Roberto de La Tour said:
Roberto de La Tour wrote:

Roberto de La Tour said:

bowportes wrote:

I don't own the OMD, but from everything I've read the OMD has:

1. Less noise at higher ISOs... meaning cleaner, more detailed low-light shots (at ISO 1600 and above).

2. Better dynamic range -- easier to pull details from shadows and to avoid blown highlights in contrasty situations, like at the beach in full sun.

3. Image stabilization with all lenses, making it possible to get sharp shots at slower shutter speeds while hand-holding the camera.

But this does NOT necessarily mean:

1. Your pictures will be better from an OMD than a G5. (You are the one making the picture, not the camera. No camera is a guarantee of good pictures.)

2. Olympus image stabilization is preferable if you already own (or plan to purchase) Panny stabilized lenses.

3. JPEGS from the OMD are better. (This is a matter of personal preference; colors with the G5 are quite good.)

Finally, chromatic aberration is corrected in camera for Panny lenses on the G5, while you have to do this in post-processing for the OMD. You will always have your flash available for fill on the G5 (because it's built in, unlike on the OMD). And video is probably better from the G5 than the OMD. (At least the video specs are better.) Many comment that the G5 has better ergonomics (handles better) than the OMD. Some disagree. And others point out that if you buy the optional OMD grip, then it handles as well as the G5. (Of course the nice grip is standard on the G5.)

Although the G5 does a nice job with low light photography, if you plan to do a lot of VERY low light work without flash, then the OMD is the better camera. It will stabilize the images from low light prime lenses (such as the Panny 20 and 25 and the Oly 45, 60, and 75), giving you sharper pictures at very slow shutter speeds.

That's my synopsis of what I've read.

Click to expand...

Thank-you so much for this detailed analysis!. I own a G1, with a broken internal flash, the kit lens plus a 45-200 also from Pana, and an Oly flash. Your point 2 intrigues me: so in-lens stabilization adds to in-body stabilzation? With slow shutter speeds I should keep both on if I use those lenses on an OMD?

No. What bowportes tries to say is that he thinks it is better to use the stabilization in the E-M5 body (IBIS) than the stabilization in the Panasonic lens (OIS) when both are available. Under no circumstance should you try to use both at the same time. When both are active simultaneously, they will overcompensate for camera shake with blur as a result.

Personally, I disagree with his judgment about which of the two systems to use when both are available, at least for the OIS lenses I have. Two of those are probably the same as yours (my older body is a G1 which I bought used together with a 14-45 and a 45-200). With the 14-45, I use OIS rather than IBIS since the OIS on this particular lens, unlike IBIS, is able to counteract the shutter shock that may cause blur at certain shutter speeds (around 1/100 s). With my other OIS lenses (45-200, 100-300), I don't see much of a difference between OIS and IBIS. In practice, this means that I usually keep IBIS on (since it works with pretty much all my lenses, zooms and primes, Oly and Pany) but turn it off when I mount the 14-45.

bowportes · Jan 15, 2013

Anders W said:
Anders W wrote:

Anders W said:

bowportes wrote:

I don't own the OMD, but from everything I've read the OMD has:

1. Less noise at higher ISOs... meaning cleaner, more detailed low-light shots (at ISO 1600 and above).

2. Better dynamic range -- easier to pull details from shadows and to avoid blown highlights in contrasty situations, like at the beach in full sun.

3. Image stabilization with all lenses, making it possible to get sharp shots at slower shutter speeds while hand-holding the camera.

But this does NOT necessarily mean:

1. Your pictures will be better from an OMD than a G5. (You are the one making the picture, not the camera. No camera is a guarantee of good pictures.)

2. Olympus image stabilization is preferable if you already own (or plan to purchase) Panny stabilized lenses.

3. JPEGS from the OMD are better. (This is a matter of personal preference; colors with the G5 are quite good.)

Finally, chromatic aberration is corrected in camera for Panny lenses on the G5, while you have to do this in post-processing for the OMD. You will always have your flash available for fill on the G5 (because it's built in, unlike on the OMD). And video is probably better from the G5 than the OMD. (At least the video specs are better.)

Click to expand...

Whether video is better on the G5 than the E-M5 is debatable. Depends on what you look at. A summary of the pros and cons (as far as I am aware) can be found here:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/50426049

Anders W said:

Many comment that the G5 has better ergonomics (handles better) than the OMD. Some disagree. And others point out that if you buy the optional OMD grip, then it handles as well as the G5. (Of course the nice grip is standard on the G5.)

Although the G5 does a nice job with low light photography, if you plan to do a lot of VERY low light work without flash, then the OMD is the better camera. It will stabilize the images from low light prime lenses (such as the Panny 20 and 25 and the Oly 45, 60, and 75), giving you sharper pictures at very slow shutter speeds.

That's my synopsis of what I've read.

Click to expand...

A couple of things I didn't see there:

Unlike the OMD, the G5's recording time is not limited to 30 minute clips; you can film continuously for an hour or more with the G5.

The OMD doesn't shoot at 1920x1080 non-interlaced, like the G5 does.

The G5 has a fully articulating screen, which is more useful for video than the OMD's tilt screen.

The OMD does, however, have better manual controls and other video advantages, as your link points out. My comment was focused upon the video specs (full HD, 60p, non-interlaced), where the G5 has an advantage. And since Panasonic has a longer track record in video technology, I tend to trust them more -- I can film an hour and a half presentation or a wedding with the G5, but wouldn't atempt it with the OMD. This is partially subjective, to be sure.

Anders W · Jan 15, 2013

bowportes said:
bowportes wrote:

bowportes said:

Anders W wrote:

bowportes said:

bowportes wrote:

I don't own the OMD, but from everything I've read the OMD has:

1. Less noise at higher ISOs... meaning cleaner, more detailed low-light shots (at ISO 1600 and above).

2. Better dynamic range -- easier to pull details from shadows and to avoid blown highlights in contrasty situations, like at the beach in full sun.

3. Image stabilization with all lenses, making it possible to get sharp shots at slower shutter speeds while hand-holding the camera.

But this does NOT necessarily mean:

1. Your pictures will be better from an OMD than a G5. (You are the one making the picture, not the camera. No camera is a guarantee of good pictures.)

2. Olympus image stabilization is preferable if you already own (or plan to purchase) Panny stabilized lenses.

3. JPEGS from the OMD are better. (This is a matter of personal preference; colors with the G5 are quite good.)

Finally, chromatic aberration is corrected in camera for Panny lenses on the G5, while you have to do this in post-processing for the OMD. You will always have your flash available for fill on the G5 (because it's built in, unlike on the OMD). And video is probably better from the G5 than the OMD. (At least the video specs are better.)

Click to expand...

Whether video is better on the G5 than the E-M5 is debatable. Depends on what you look at. A summary of the pros and cons (as far as I am aware) can be found here:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/50426049

bowportes said:

Many comment that the G5 has better ergonomics (handles better) than the OMD. Some disagree. And others point out that if you buy the optional OMD grip, then it handles as well as the G5. (Of course the nice grip is standard on the G5.)

Although the G5 does a nice job with low light photography, if you plan to do a lot of VERY low light work without flash, then the OMD is the better camera. It will stabilize the images from low light prime lenses (such as the Panny 20 and 25 and the Oly 45, 60, and 75), giving you sharper pictures at very slow shutter speeds.

That's my synopsis of what I've read.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

A couple of things I didn't see there:

Unlike the OMD, the G5's recording time is not limited to 30 minute clips; you can film continuously for an hour or more with the G5.

Do you have a source for this claim of yours? I am not arguing that you are wrong, I just want to know on what basis you are talking.

bowportes said:
The OMD doesn't shoot at 1920x1080 non-interlaced, like the G5 does.

Yes, that was not covered by the summary post I linked to but was mentioned in a prior post in the same thread and accounts for one of the two points I count in favor of the G5 in the 5 versus 2 point summary I came up with.

bowportes said:
The G5 has a fully articulating screen, which is more useful for video than the OMD's tilt screen.

I can see pros and cons with both solutions for stills and video alike. What makes the fully articulating screen preferable specifically for video in your opinion?

bowportes said:
The OMD does, however, have better manual controls and other video advantages, as your link points out. My comment was focused upon the video specs (full HD, 60p, non-interlaced), where the G5 has an advantage. And since Panasonic has a longer track record in video technology, I tend to trust them more -- I can film an hour and a half presentation or a wedding with the G5, but wouldn't atempt it with the OMD. This is partially subjective, to be sure.

bowportes · Jan 15, 2013

Anders W said:
Anders W wrote:

Anders W said:

Roberto de La Tour wrote:

Anders W said:

bowportes wrote:

But this does NOT necessarily mean:

2. Olympus image stabilization is preferable if you already own (or plan to purchase) Panny stabilized lenses.

Click to expand...

Thank-you so much for this detailed analysis!. I own a G1, with a broken internal flash, the kit lens plus a 45-200 also from Pana, and an Oly flash. Your point 2 intrigues me: so in-lens stabilization adds to in-body stabilzation? With slow shutter speeds I should keep both on if I use those lenses on an OMD?

Click to expand...

No. What bowportes tries to say is that he thinks it is better to use the stabilization in the E-M5 body (IBIS) than the stabilization in the Panasonic lens (OIS) when both are available. Under no circumstance should you try to use both at the same time. When both are active simultaneously, they will overcompensate for camera shake with blur as a result.

Personally, I disagree with his judgment about which of the two systems to use when both are available, at least for the OIS lenses I have. Two of those are probably the same as yours (my older body is a G1 which I bought used together with a 14-45 and a 45-200). With the 14-45, I use OIS rather than IBIS since the OIS on this particular lens, unlike IBIS, is able to counteract the shutter shock that may cause blur at certain shutter speeds (around 1/100 s). With my other OIS lenses (45-200, 100-300), I don't see much of a difference between OIS and IBIS. In practice, this means that I usually keep IBIS on (since it works with pretty much all my lenses, zooms and primes, Oly and Pany) but turn it off when I mount the 14-45.

If you parse the structure of my post, I prefaced the entire second list with "this does NOT necessarily mean." What I intended to say was, "This does NOT mean ... that Olympus image stabilization (IBIS) is preferable if you already own Panny stabilized lenses." In other words, "the stabilization you already have with Panny OIS may be about as good as what you would get on the EM5 through IBIS." I was trying to leave it open, and noting that the extent to which IBIS is an EM5 advantage depends upon the lenses. For someone who owns the Panny 12-35mm and 35-100mm and doesn't plan to use any other lenses, the EM5's IBIS isn't really an advantage over the G5. I wasn't very clear. Maybe this is clearer.

Aleo Veuliah · Jan 15, 2013

Roberto de La Tour said:
Roberto de La Tour wrote:

Hello

I already saw comparisons and debates concerning Panasonic and Olympus "larger" m4/3, but I ended up getting confused.

Concerning specifications, i can read or find out.

But I am not sure about Image Quality. I understand OMD IQ is better than G5. But WHY? (apart from lenses, where I read that the zoom usually put in a kit with the OMD is not very good... true?). But with the same lens? What makes OMD have a better IQ than G5? (or G3)

Thank-you in advance

bowportes · Jan 15, 2013

Anders W said:
Anders W wrote:

Anders W said:

bowportes wrote:

Anders W said:

Anders W wrote:

Anders W said:

bowportes wrote:

I don't own the OMD, but from everything I've read the OMD has:

1. Less noise at higher ISOs... meaning cleaner, more detailed low-light shots (at ISO 1600 and above).

2. Better dynamic range -- easier to pull details from shadows and to avoid blown highlights in contrasty situations, like at the beach in full sun.

3. Image stabilization with all lenses, making it possible to get sharp shots at slower shutter speeds while hand-holding the camera.

But this does NOT necessarily mean:

1. Your pictures will be better from an OMD than a G5. (You are the one making the picture, not the camera. No camera is a guarantee of good pictures.)

2. Olympus image stabilization is preferable if you already own (or plan to purchase) Panny stabilized lenses.

3. JPEGS from the OMD are better. (This is a matter of personal preference; colors with the G5 are quite good.)

Finally, chromatic aberration is corrected in camera for Panny lenses on the G5, while you have to do this in post-processing for the OMD. You will always have your flash available for fill on the G5 (because it's built in, unlike on the OMD). And video is probably better from the G5 than the OMD. (At least the video specs are better.)

Click to expand...

Whether video is better on the G5 than the E-M5 is debatable. Depends on what you look at. A summary of the pros and cons (as far as I am aware) can be found here:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/50426049

Anders W said:

Many comment that the G5 has better ergonomics (handles better) than the OMD. Some disagree. And others point out that if you buy the optional OMD grip, then it handles as well as the G5. (Of course the nice grip is standard on the G5.)

Although the G5 does a nice job with low light photography, if you plan to do a lot of VERY low light work without flash, then the OMD is the better camera. It will stabilize the images from low light prime lenses (such as the Panny 20 and 25 and the Oly 45, 60, and 75), giving you sharper pictures at very slow shutter speeds.

That's my synopsis of what I've read.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

A couple of things I didn't see there:

Unlike the OMD, the G5's recording time is not limited to 30 minute clips; you can film continuously for an hour or more with the G5.

Click to expand...

Do you have a source for this claim of yours? I am not arguing that you are wrong, I just want to know on what basis you are talking.

Well, the manual specifies that there is a 30 minute limit for clips taken in AVCHD PSH mode and in all MP4 modes. Since it links the limit to only these modes as a footnote to a table that presents other AVCHD modes as well, one can logically conclude that AVCHD FSH, FPH, and SH modes are not similarly limited (in the USA). This would be easy for me to test (with my G5), but the manual seems to precisely restrict the time limit to certain modes and not others. Download the advanced manual and turn to page 28.

Anders W said:
Anders W said:

The OMD doesn't shoot at 1920x1080 non-interlaced, like the G5 does.

Click to expand...

Yes, that was not covered by the summary post I linked to but was mentioned in a prior post in the same thread and accounts for one of the two points I count in favor of the G5 in the 5 versus 2 point summary I came up with.

Anders W said:

The G5 has a fully articulating screen, which is more useful for video than the OMD's tilt screen.

Click to expand...

I can see pros and cons with both solutions for stills and video alike. What makes the fully articulating screen preferable specifically for video in your opinion?

You can see it from ANY close location when the camera is filming on a tripod. If the spacial constraints of the room mean that I have to sit 3 feet directly to the left of the camera, or 3 feet directly to the right, or even in front and to the side of the camera, I can see the screen without getting up. I don't think the EM5's tilt screen provides this kind of flexibility. I have filmed numerous events where such constraints exist. ... like in a church, where you might have the camera on a tripod in the center aisle while you must remain in the pew to the side. In fact, any presentation where you want to monitor the camera from a distance, but your choice of seating is limited.

Anders W said:
Anders W said:

The OMD does, however, have better manual controls and other video advantages, as your link points out. My comment was focused upon the video specs (full HD, 60p, non-interlaced), where the G5 has an advantage. And since Panasonic has a longer track record in video technology, I tend to trust them more -- I can film an hour and a half presentation or a wedding with the G5, but wouldn't atempt it with the OMD. This is partially subjective, to be sure.

Click to expand...

I tried to be even-handed, and noted that the OMD's manual controls outpaced the G5. To me, that is huge. I used to own a GH2 and really appreciated the manual control. The G5 is much more limited in that respect. But those controls aren't needed for many events.

Chris Noble · Jan 15, 2013

bowportes said:
bowportes wrote:

I tried to be even-handed, and noted that the OMD's manual controls outpaced the G5.

Ephotozine disagrees I think:

http://www.ephotozine.com/article/panasonic-lumix-g5-vs-olympus-om-d-e-m5-review-19716

"The Panasonic Lumix G5 with built in flash and large hand grip gives a great all-in-one package with excellent handling and external controls. Both cameras give excellent control with external buttons and controls that can be customised, however the Panasonic Lumix G5 makes this easier with a clearer and better designed menu and control system. The G5 also makes better use of the touch screen, while the E-M5s menu system is mostly still controlled by the 4-way buttons on the back."

Anders W · Jan 15, 2013

bowportes said:
bowportes wrote:

bowportes said:

Anders W wrote:

bowportes said:

Roberto de La Tour wrote:

bowportes said:

bowportes wrote:

But this does NOT necessarily mean:

2. Olympus image stabilization is preferable if you already own (or plan to purchase) Panny stabilized lenses.

Click to expand...

Thank-you so much for this detailed analysis!. I own a G1, with a broken internal flash, the kit lens plus a 45-200 also from Pana, and an Oly flash. Your point 2 intrigues me: so in-lens stabilization adds to in-body stabilzation? With slow shutter speeds I should keep both on if I use those lenses on an OMD?

Click to expand...

No. What bowportes tries to say is that he thinks it is better to use the stabilization in the E-M5 body (IBIS) than the stabilization in the Panasonic lens (OIS) when both are available. Under no circumstance should you try to use both at the same time. When both are active simultaneously, they will overcompensate for camera shake with blur as a result.

Personally, I disagree with his judgment about which of the two systems to use when both are available, at least for the OIS lenses I have. Two of those are probably the same as yours (my older body is a G1 which I bought used together with a 14-45 and a 45-200). With the 14-45, I use OIS rather than IBIS since the OIS on this particular lens, unlike IBIS, is able to counteract the shutter shock that may cause blur at certain shutter speeds (around 1/100 s). With my other OIS lenses (45-200, 100-300), I don't see much of a difference between OIS and IBIS. In practice, this means that I usually keep IBIS on (since it works with pretty much all my lenses, zooms and primes, Oly and Pany) but turn it off when I mount the 14-45.

Click to expand...

If you parse the structure of my post, I prefaced the entire second list with "this does NOT necessarily mean." What I intended to say was, "This does NOT mean ... that Olympus image stabilization (IBIS) is preferable if you already own Panny stabilized lenses." In other words, "the stabilization you already have with Panny OIS may be about as good as what you would get on the EM5 through IBIS." I was trying to leave it open, and noting that the extent to which IBIS is an EM5 advantage depends upon the lenses. For someone who owns the Panny 12-35mm and 35-100mm and doesn't plan to use any other lenses, the EM5's IBIS isn't really an advantage over the G5. I wasn't very clear. Maybe this is clearer.

OK. Sorry if I misunderstood what you were trying to say.

bowportes · Jan 15, 2013

Aleo Veuliah said:
Aleo Veuliah wrote:
Differences are not much on IQ, about 2/3 better on the OMD. But I think it is not fair to compare with a G5 that is a much cheaper camera. You should compare OMD to the Panasonic Lumix GH3.

Logically, some who contemplate a camera purchase and like the looks/features of the G5 might ask, "How much will I really lose in image quality by not shelling out more $$$ for the OMD?" It is a logical question that begs an OMD versus G5 comparison. What is "not fair" about that?

I own a G5 and love it, but sometimes wonder whether the EM5 would offer improvements in image quality that would warrant the expense. Increasingly, I am inclined to conclude -- No. My money would be better spent on other things. The camera and lenses I already own are capable of spectacular results. Rather than fetishizing about small improvements in image quality, I should just go out, take pictures, and become more of a master of the equipment I already own.

bowportes · Jan 15, 2013

Chris Noble said:
Chris Noble wrote:

Chris Noble said:

bowportes wrote:

I tried to be even-handed, and noted that the OMD's manual controls outpaced the G5.

Click to expand...

Ephotozine disagrees I think:

http://www.ephotozine.com/article/panasonic-lumix-g5-vs-olympus-om-d-e-m5-review-19716

"The Panasonic Lumix G5 with built in flash and large hand grip gives a great all-in-one package with excellent handling and external controls. Both cameras give excellent control with external buttons and controls that can be customised, however the Panasonic Lumix G5 makes this easier with a clearer and better designed menu and control system. The G5 also makes better use of the touch screen, while the E-M5s menu system is mostly still controlled by the 4-way buttons on the back."

The comment you quote was part of a discussion about the two camera's video capabilities. The EM5 has much better manual control over video settings than the G5. It's got nothing to do with external buttons. Explain to me how you would use those buttons to gain more manual control over the G5's video settings? It's not really debatable, and Ephotozine would not disagree with that point.

Anders W · Jan 15, 2013

bowportes said:
bowportes wrote:

bowportes said:

Anders W wrote:

bowportes said:

bowportes wrote:

bowportes said:

Anders W wrote:

bowportes said:

bowportes wrote:

I don't own the OMD, but from everything I've read the OMD has:

1. Less noise at higher ISOs... meaning cleaner, more detailed low-light shots (at ISO 1600 and above).

2. Better dynamic range -- easier to pull details from shadows and to avoid blown highlights in contrasty situations, like at the beach in full sun.

3. Image stabilization with all lenses, making it possible to get sharp shots at slower shutter speeds while hand-holding the camera.

But this does NOT necessarily mean:

1. Your pictures will be better from an OMD than a G5. (You are the one making the picture, not the camera. No camera is a guarantee of good pictures.)

2. Olympus image stabilization is preferable if you already own (or plan to purchase) Panny stabilized lenses.

3. JPEGS from the OMD are better. (This is a matter of personal preference; colors with the G5 are quite good.)

Finally, chromatic aberration is corrected in camera for Panny lenses on the G5, while you have to do this in post-processing for the OMD. You will always have your flash available for fill on the G5 (because it's built in, unlike on the OMD). And video is probably better from the G5 than the OMD. (At least the video specs are better.)

Click to expand...

Whether video is better on the G5 than the E-M5 is debatable. Depends on what you look at. A summary of the pros and cons (as far as I am aware) can be found here:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/50426049

bowportes said:

Many comment that the G5 has better ergonomics (handles better) than the OMD. Some disagree. And others point out that if you buy the optional OMD grip, then it handles as well as the G5. (Of course the nice grip is standard on the G5.)

Although the G5 does a nice job with low light photography, if you plan to do a lot of VERY low light work without flash, then the OMD is the better camera. It will stabilize the images from low light prime lenses (such as the Panny 20 and 25 and the Oly 45, 60, and 75), giving you sharper pictures at very slow shutter speeds.

That's my synopsis of what I've read.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

A couple of things I didn't see there:

Unlike the OMD, the G5's recording time is not limited to 30 minute clips; you can film continuously for an hour or more with the G5.

Click to expand...

Do you have a source for this claim of yours? I am not arguing that you are wrong, I just want to know on what basis you are talking.

Click to expand...

Well, the manual specifies that there is a 30 minute limit for clips taken in AVCHD PSH mode and in all MP4 modes. Since it links the limit to only these modes as a footnote to a table that presents other AVCHD modes as well, one can logically conclude that AVCHD FSH, FPH, and SH modes are not similarly limited (in the USA). This would be easy for me to test (with my G5), but the manual seems to precisely restrict the time limit to certain modes and not others. Download the advanced manual and turn to page 28.

Thanks for that specification. That indirectly clarifies what's going on here. I checked the E-M5 manual for the corresponding information and found that it works similarly on the E-M5 as well. For MP4 and AVC/H.264 (which can be played back on a TV), it says the limit is 29 minutes. But for motion jpeg (which can be played back on a computer), there is no limit. So it seems that the two cameras work similarly in this regard and that the 30-minute limit has to do with the medium on which the format can be played back.

bowportes said:
bowportes said:

bowportes said:

The OMD doesn't shoot at 1920x1080 non-interlaced, like the G5 does.

Click to expand...

Yes, that was not covered by the summary post I linked to but was mentioned in a prior post in the same thread and accounts for one of the two points I count in favor of the G5 in the 5 versus 2 point summary I came up with.

bowportes said:

The G5 has a fully articulating screen, which is more useful for video than the OMD's tilt screen.

Click to expand...

I can see pros and cons with both solutions for stills and video alike. What makes the fully articulating screen preferable specifically for video in your opinion?

Click to expand...

You can see it from ANY close location when the camera is filming on a tripod. If the spacial constraints of the room mean that I have to sit 3 feet directly to the left of the camera, or 3 feet directly to the right, or even in front and to the side of the camera, I can see the screen without getting up. I don't think the EM5's tilt screen provides this kind of flexibility. I have filmed numerous events where such constraints exist. ... like in a church, where you might have the camera on a tripod in the center aisle while you must remain in the pew to the side. In fact, any presentation where you want to monitor the camera from a distance, but your choice of seating is limited.

OK. I see the point. In general, the advantage of a fully articulating LCD is simply that it is more flexible/versatile (i.e., works in more situations). This is true for video and stills alike. The advantage of the E-M5 tilting LCD (with the display behind rather than beside the camera) is that it may be more "stealthy" and/or ergonomic in those cases where both solutions work.

bowportes said:
bowportes said:

bowportes said:

The OMD does, however, have better manual controls and other video advantages, as your link points out. My comment was focused upon the video specs (full HD, 60p, non-interlaced), where the G5 has an advantage. And since Panasonic has a longer track record in video technology, I tend to trust them more -- I can film an hour and a half presentation or a wedding with the G5, but wouldn't atempt it with the OMD. This is partially subjective, to be sure.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I tried to be even-handed, and noted that the OMD's manual controls outpaced the G5. To me, that is huge. I used to own a GH2 and really appreciated the manual control. The G5 is much more limited in that respect. But those controls aren't needed for many events.

The even-handedness is appreciated. I try my best to follow suite.

s_grins · Jan 15, 2013

Roberto de La Tour said:
Roberto de La Tour wrote:

Hello

I already saw comparisons and debates concerning Panasonic and Olympus "larger" m4/3, but I ended up getting confused.

Concerning specifications, i can read or find out.

But I am not sure about Image Quality. I understand OMD IQ is better than G5. But WHY? (apart from lenses, where I read that the zoom usually put in a kit with the OMD is not very good... true?). But with the same lens? What makes OMD have a better IQ than G5? (or G3)

Thank-you in advance

Aleo Veuliah · Jan 15, 2013

bowportes said:
bowportes wrote:

bowportes said:

Aleo Veuliah wrote:
Differences are not much on IQ, about 2/3 better on the OMD. But I think it is not fair to compare with a G5 that is a much cheaper camera. You should compare OMD to the Panasonic Lumix GH3.

Click to expand...

Logically, some who contemplate a camera purchase and like the looks/features of the G5 might ask, "How much will I really lose in image quality by not shelling out more $$$ for the OMD?" It is a logical question that begs an OMD versus G5 comparison. What is "not fair" about that?

I mean not fair to compare only because they are not on the same range, but I understood what you mean.

bowportes said:
I own a G5 and love it, but sometimes wonder whether the EM5 would offer improvements in image quality that would warrant the expense. Increasingly, I am inclined to conclude -- No. My money would be better spent on other things. The camera and lenses I already own are capable of spectacular results. Rather than fetishizing about small improvements in image quality, I should just go out, take pictures, and become more of a master of the equipment I already own.

That is the important, to mastering the gear we have.

OMD versus G5, IQ

Well-known member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Keyboard shortcuts