Some shots with E-M1+40-150 & D810+70-200

alatchin wrote:

The wider the size gap between sensors the wider the difference becomes. mFT's natural rival is APS not FF and it would fair better in the comparisons . Here is a final comparison just for fun this is how the EM1 @ 100% compares to the Phase One .

100%

Unfortunately m43rds has to somehow compete with every brand simultaneously. Just for laughs, here is the Nikon D4 vs the Phase on...

And the Sony A7s vs the Phase one

And the sony A7s vs the Olympus EM1...

It is irrelevant taking a higher resolution body and downscaling it to show a formats superiority... Just use a body of the same resolution. I have shot the (EDIT) 6D with 24-70 (mk1) set on a tripod alongside my EM5 and the differences were marginal at best.

The downsizing was mainly to demonstrate the advantages of higher mp counts , my main hope for the next round of mFT . I am looking forward to seeing if the 40mp trick is practical. The higher mp count of the D810 works in two ways firstly it gives excellent detail and DR at low ISO , secondly by downsizing and taking advantage of the extra detail for more flexible RAW processing { NR etc} at high ISO.

I have zero experience of Canon DSLR'S but looking at a straight comparison between the Canon 6D and E-M5 both at 3200 there is a very significant difference.

obvious ?

I could just as easily place the A7s bank note vs a jpeg from the Nokia 41mp Camera Phone... A pointless strawman post. There is a lot more to image quality than sensor size on system cameras, resolution is only one metric... But cherry picking...

Resolution is a vital factor both for low ISO detail shooters { my interest } and for the high ISO guys the more data you have to play with the moire flexible the end results. We have a great selection of lenses at our disposal for mFT , I cannot see why anyone would not want more mp, storage is dirt cheap. The 40mp trick is the single most interesting update of the EM511