To those with both EM5-II and EM1

AdamT wrote:

Here, by the way, is what you get if you look at directly comparable test shots from the E-M5.2, the E-M10 (presumably more or less the same Sony-designed sensor), and the E-M1 (Panasonic sensor). Comments?

Yeah, I`d say the Chroma noise looks worse from the EM1 by a margin and with more / larger size "noise mess" in some parts of the sample but there`s not much in it . for some reason it`s softer too , as if there`s some hidden NR going on in the RAWs or LR is adding some to EM1 Raws (I`d not put it past it, LR isn`t the truest of converters by a long mark) ..

I noticed the slight downgrade of high ISOs moving from EM10 to EM1 at the time but the trade-off was more than worth it to get the far better functionality of the EM1 body (the extra func buttons and the better dials more than anything)

That's interesting. Your description of your visual impressions can of course be contrasted with objective measurements. The conclusion is that, unlike most people, you see less noisiness the more of it there actually is.

In this case, the SNR in the darkest part of the E-M5.2 crop I linked to is about 1.25 versus 1.35 for the E-M1. Not a big difference to be sure and noone has claimed it would be. But it's there. So let me suggest that you take a serious look at bodies with older sensors and stay away from the current crop. Those with the original 12 MP sensor are likely to be particularly well suited to your pereceptions.

Oh, and no, the explanation is not that LR applies some hidden NR to the E-M1 without granting the E-M5.2 the same favor. This is easily checked by using a RAW converter that is known not to apply any NR at all except that implied by the demosaicing algorithm as such, e.g., DCRAW.