An unfair comparison - 5D IV vs Pen F

Jim Salvas · Aug 29, 2016

DPR added the latest Canon 5D offering to its studio comparison tool, so I couldn't resist adding the Pen F to the comparison. Given the big difference in sensor size and the almost 3:1 price ratio, I think the little Olympus did pretty well, at least at base ISO. With pixel shift, the Pen F is outstanding, besting the Canon 5D IV and at least matching the Sony A7R II.

Yeah, I know the comparison is totally unfair and both of the other cameras would blow away the Pen F in many real world situations, but this little camera punches above its weight. This is just an ipad screen grab, but check out the comparison tool for yourself to see.

460007670a884d39b548fce9c92c4398.jpg.png

--
Jim Salvas
"You miss 100% of the shots you never take." - Wayne Gretzky

Great Bustard · Aug 30, 2016

Jim Salvas said:
DPR added the latest Canon 5D offering to its studio comparison tool, so I couldn't resist adding the Pen F to the comparison. Given the big difference in sensor size and the almost 3:1 price ratio, I think the little Olympus did pretty well, at least at base ISO. With pixel shift, the Pen F is outstanding, besting the Canon 5D IV and at least matching the Sony A7R II.

Yeah, I know the comparison is totally unfair and both of the other cameras would blow away the Pen F in many real world situations, but this little camera punches above its weight. This is just an ipad screen grab, but check out the comparison tool for yourself to see.

If you are shooting scenes where neither motion blur nor camera shake are an issue, pixel shift is a fantastic feature. However, when you say above, "Given the big difference in sensor size", well, Olympus' pixel shift combines 8 exposures, which effectively creates a photo from a sensor that is double the size of a single exposure from a FF sensor. And that's why you see what you see below!

Jim Salvas said:

Jim Salvas · Aug 30, 2016

Great Bustard, thanks for pointing out the obvious reasons the comparison is unfair. I know it is apples and oranges. I just thought it was interesting. However, I also included the comparison of the Pen F at regular resolution, where it does not come off looking at all bad at base ISO, next to cameras triple uts price.

SpinOne · Aug 30, 2016

Jim Salvas said:
DPR added the latest Canon 5D offering to its studio comparison tool, so I couldn't resist adding the Pen F to the comparison. Given the big difference in sensor size and the almost 3:1 price ratio, I think the little Olympus did pretty well, at least at base ISO. With pixel shift, the Pen F is outstanding, besting the Canon 5D IV and at least matching the Sony A7R II.

Yeah, well.

Larger sensor do much better at higher ISOs and with very large prints (20" x 30" and up). They also still do a better job with C-AF/tracking.

Multi-shot, I have to say I'm not blown away. Any motion mitigates the advantages. I don't bother with it at all.

jimboyvr · Aug 30, 2016

Jim Salvas said:
DPR added the latest Canon 5D offering to its studio comparison tool, so I couldn't resist adding the Pen F to the comparison. Given the big difference in sensor size and the almost 3:1 price ratio, I think the little Olympus did pretty well, at least at base ISO. With pixel shift, the Pen F is outstanding, besting the Canon 5D IV and at least matching the Sony A7R II.

Yeah, I know the comparison is totally unfair and both of the other cameras would blow away the Pen F in many real world situations, but this little camera punches above its weight. This is just an ipad screen grab, but check out the comparison tool for yourself to see.

--
Jim Salvas
"You miss 100% of the shots you never take." - Wayne Gretzky

Yes the m43 is awesome at base iso. Knock yourself out only shooting only at that iso. While you are at it why don't you compare the sony rx100 1" sensor which is SMALLER then m43 and also fairs very well vs m43 lol.

Oh and a corolla compares well to a porsche when its parked too.

Jim Salvas · Aug 30, 2016

SpinOne said:
Jim Salvas said:

DPR added the latest Canon 5D offering to its studio comparison tool, so I couldn't resist adding the Pen F to the comparison. Given the big difference in sensor size and the almost 3:1 price ratio, I think the little Olympus did pretty well, at least at base ISO. With pixel shift, the Pen F is outstanding, besting the Canon 5D IV and at least matching the Sony A7R II.

Click to expand...

Yeah, well.

Larger sensor do much better at higher ISOs and with very large prints (20" x 30" and up). They also still do a better job with C-AF/tracking.

Multi-shot, I have to say I'm not blown away. Any motion mitigates the advantages. I don't bother with it at all.

I believe I made your point in my second paragraph about how large sensor cameras like the 5D IV would blow away the Pen F in many real world uses. On the other hand, I have started to use the Pen F hi-res mode for commercial product shots. The only thing thaat will blow it away in this use is medium format, and even there, the Pen F's color fidelity and lack of moire at hi-res will give a $40,000 camera a run for its money.

So, yeah, well.

String · Aug 30, 2016

jimboyvr said:
Yes the m43 is awesome at base iso. Knock yourself out only shooting only at that iso. While you are at it why don't you compare the sony rx100 1" sensor which is SMALLER then m43 and also fairs very well vs m43 lol.

Thats not what he was saying. And if the RX100 had sensor shift, your point might be better.

jimboyvr said:
Oh and a corolla compares well to a porsche when its parked too.

No its doesn't however a Fiesta ST or Focus RS does on a tight track which would be a better comparison.

Great Bustard · Aug 30, 2016

Jim Salvas said:
Great Bustard, thanks for pointing out the obvious reasons the comparison is unfair. I know it is apples and oranges. I just thought it was interesting.

Sure. Like I said, pixel shift is a great feature! It will be even better when it is effective for handheld photography.

Jim Salvas said:
However, I also included the comparison of the Pen F at regular resolution, where it does not come off looking at all bad at base ISO, next to cameras triple its price.

It's not unusual at all for there to be circumstances where a camera "does not come off looking at all bad at base ISO, next to cameras triple its price".

Chris R-UK · Aug 30, 2016

SpinOne said:
Jim Salvas said:

DPR added the latest Canon 5D offering to its studio comparison tool, so I couldn't resist adding the Pen F to the comparison. Given the big difference in sensor size and the almost 3:1 price ratio, I think the little Olympus did pretty well, at least at base ISO. With pixel shift, the Pen F is outstanding, besting the Canon 5D IV and at least matching the Sony A7R II.

Click to expand...

Yeah, well.

Larger sensor do much better at higher ISOs and with very large prints (20" x 30" and up). They also still do a better job with C-AF/tracking.

Well of all the mirrorless cameras the ones that have the best C-AF tracking are the Nikon V3 and J5 which have 1" sensors. I don't think that C-AF capability has anything to do with sensor size but it has a lot to do with PDAF systems used in DSLRs, especially pro level DSLRs.

SpinOne said:
Multi-shot, I have to say I'm not blown away. Any motion mitigates the advantages. I don't bother with it at all.

tt321 · Aug 30, 2016

Great Bustard said:
Jim Salvas said:

Great Bustard, thanks for pointing out the obvious reasons the comparison is unfair. I know it is apples and oranges. I just thought it was interesting.

Click to expand...

Sure. Like I said, pixel shift is a great feature! It will be even better when it is effective for handheld photography.

Great Bustard said:

However, I also included the comparison of the Pen F at regular resolution, where it does not come off looking at all bad at base ISO, next to cameras triple its price.

Click to expand...

It's not unusual at all for there to be circumstances where a camera "does not come off looking at all bad at base ISO, next to cameras triple its price".

Indeed. You should be able to, without too much trouble, find an M43 camera that costs less than 1/2 the price of the PenF and say it does not come out too badly compared to the PenF, i.e. something that's more than double its price. The E-M10m2 or even the EM10m1 would do.

Great Bustard · Aug 30, 2016

tt321 said:
Great Bustard said:

Jim Salvas said:

Great Bustard, thanks for pointing out the obvious reasons the comparison is unfair. I know it is apples and oranges. I just thought it was interesting.

Click to expand...

Sure. Like I said, pixel shift is a great feature! It will be even better when it is effective for handheld photography.

tt321 said:

However, I also included the comparison of the Pen F at regular resolution, where it does not come off looking at all bad at base ISO, next to cameras triple its price.

Click to expand...

It's not unusual at all for there to be circumstances where a camera "does not come off looking at all bad at base ISO, next to cameras triple its price".

Click to expand...

Indeed. You should be able to, without too much trouble, find an M43 camera that costs less than 1/2 the price of the PenF and say it does not come out too badly compared to the PenF, i.e. something that's more than double its price. The E-M10m2 or even the EM10m1 would do.

Funny you mention it -- I was going to say exactly that! However, the fact of the matter is that there are simply so many examples of it, that I decided to just say that such a scenario was far from uncommon.

NCV · Aug 30, 2016

I think this technology is just of the starting line and that we will see before long hand holdable versions in all the formats in time.

The Pen F manages to punch well above its weight for some uses and situations at the moment.

The Pen F punching above its weight risks causing an ugly bad tempered thread looking at a couple of replies.

Jim Salvas · Aug 30, 2016

NCV said:
The Pen F punching above its weight risks causing an ugly bad tempered thread looking at a couple of replies.

NCV · Aug 30, 2016

Jim Salvas said:
NCV said:

The Pen F punching above its weight risks causing an ugly bad tempered thread looking at a couple of replies.

Click to expand...

Great Bustard · Aug 30, 2016

NCV said:
Jim Salvas said:

NCV said:

The Pen F punching above its weight risks causing an ugly bad tempered thread looking at a couple of replies.

Click to expand...

I certainly didn't intend that. It was meant to be a lighthearted comparison, which I tried to indicate by both the title and my caveats. But, some choose to ignore such things in order to make a point.

Click to expand...

You know as I do that humour, satire or irony is not appreciated here by a small minority. Camera gear is a deadly serious business you know to some.

Look where an ironic title got me the other day.

I feel your pain.

Messier Object · Aug 30, 2016

. . . have you done a comparison of the Pen with a camera 1/2 the price of the Pen-F ?Looking at the Nikon D5500 for instance gives you another perspective on IQ vs $

And did you notice that the Canon test image was (strangely) made with a $400 lens from 1992, while the Pen was test image was with a $1,300 lens released in 2014

Peter

Jim Salvas · Aug 30, 2016

Messier Object said:
. . . have you done a comparison of the Pen with a camera 1/2 the price of the Pen-F ?Looking at the Nikon D5500 for instance gives you another perspective on IQ vs $

And did you notice that the Canon test image was (strangely) made with a $400 lens from 1992, while the Pen was test image was with a $1,300 lens released in 2014

Peter

Has Nikon added a pixel shift mode?

truly, I had no intention of being fair. I labeled it as an unfair comparison. Maybe I shoukd have inclused Phase One.

SpinOne · Aug 30, 2016

Jim Salvas said:
SpinOne said:

Jim Salvas said:

DPR added the latest Canon 5D offering to its studio comparison tool, so I couldn't resist adding the Pen F to the comparison. Given the big difference in sensor size and the almost 3:1 price ratio, I think the little Olympus did pretty well, at least at base ISO. With pixel shift, the Pen F is outstanding, besting the Canon 5D IV and at least matching the Sony A7R II.

Click to expand...

Yeah, well.

Larger sensor do much better at higher ISOs and with very large prints (20" x 30" and up). They also still do a better job with C-AF/tracking.

Multi-shot, I have to say I'm not blown away. Any motion mitigates the advantages. I don't bother with it at all.

Click to expand...

I believe I made your point in my second paragraph about how large sensor cameras like the 5D IV would blow away the Pen F in many real world uses. On the other hand, I have started to use the Pen F hi-res mode for commercial product shots. The only thing thaat will blow it away in this use is medium format, and even there, the Pen F's color fidelity and lack of moire at hi-res will give a $40,000 camera a run for its money.

So, yeah, well.

While I'm certainly not going to tell you to change your business practices, I remain unconvinced.

I agree that it does genuinely produce higher resolution, and product shots is one of the few use cases where you may genuinely need every bit of resolution you can wring out of a camera.

I simply don't see it making a difference in my tests or real-world use. I compared captures from standard and hi-res, using the 12-40mm, at the equivalent of prints 30" x 40" in size. I was unpleasantly surprised to find that it made little difference.

Seems to me that in most cases, it's overkill. Especially for enthusiasts.

s_grins · Aug 30, 2016

Jim Salvas said:
DPR added the latest Canon 5D offering to its studio comparison tool, so I couldn't resist adding the Pen F to the comparison. Given the big difference in sensor size and the almost 3:1 price ratio, I think the little Olympus did pretty well, at least at base ISO. With pixel shift, the Pen F is outstanding, besting the Canon 5D IV and at least matching the Sony A7R II.

Yeah, I know the comparison is totally unfair and both of the other cameras would blow away the Pen F in many real world situations, but this little camera punches above its weight. This is just an ipad screen grab, but check out the comparison tool for yourself to see.

--
Jim Salvas
"You miss 100% of the shots you never take." - Wayne Gretzky

Maybe this comparison is unfair, but on other hand it makes me proud of M43

--
Camera in bag tends to stay in bag...

Messier Object · Aug 30, 2016

Jim Salvas said:
Messier Object said:

. . . have you done a comparison of the Pen with a camera 1/2 the price of the Pen-F ?Looking at the Nikon D5500 for instance gives you another perspective on IQ vs $

And did you notice that the Canon test image was (strangely) made with a $400 lens from 1992, while the Pen was test image was with a $1,300 lens released in 2014

Peter

Click to expand...

Has Nikon added a pixel shift mode?

truly, I had no intention of being fair. I labeled it as an unfair comparison. Maybe I shoukd have inclused Phase One.

As I read your post, your intention was to show how good the Pen-F IQ is for the price, why else mention the relatve price of the 5D4. Poking a bit of fun at the latest Canon FF at the same time.

My intention was to point out that for the IQ, in all but limited controlled (static) shooting in good light where pixel shift is useful, the Pen-F like the OMDs is overpriced for its image quality, being bested by medium to low end APS-C.

Peter

An unfair comparison - 5D IV vs Pen F

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

NCV

Guest

Veteran Member

NCV

Guest

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts