Olympus E-PM2: Small Camera, Big Surprise

dpreviewreader wrote:

cgarrard wrote:

dpreviewreader wrote:

cgarrard wrote:

dpreviewreader wrote:

The EPM2 is off by no more than 1/3 stop. DPR's test of EM5's ISO rating showed it was off by 1/3 stop and I don't expect the EPM2 to be any different as it uses the same TruePic VI processor. It is certainly not off by 1 stop.

A good argument to present to DXOMark I'd presume.

Instead of presenting anything to DxOMark I present the link below to you.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/4093368

There have been countless threads on this topic. What DxOmark measures as ISO is not what camera manufacturers measure.

Carl
http://www.photographic-central.blogspot.com (Gear reviews)
http://www.carlgarrard.blogspot.com/ (Best work compilation)
Also formerly AlphaMountWorld.com (Now off the web)

I'm not defending DXOMark, nor applauding them.

Nobody said you are. You seem to have missed the point that what DxOMark calls ISO is not what the camera manufacturers call ISO hence you are comparing apples and oranges and coming to the wrong conclusion. EPM2's ISO rating is really what it claims to be for all practical purposes.

No I'm definitely not missing the point.

Since DXOMark uses similar testing methods for all cameras, the fact that the ISO value scores lower than the stated value, for this particular camera and brand (compared to other cameras and brands), should mean something however.

All I'm concerned with is that DXOMark have consistent testing methods for all cameras, which, they do. It gives me an indication of what is going on under the shell.

Nuff said on this topic though :).
Carl

http://www.photographic-central.blogspot.com (Gear reviews)
http://www.carlgarrard.blogspot.com/ (Best work compilation)
Also formerly AlphaMountWorld.com (Now off the web)