Olympus E-P3 vs E-P5

Loga wrote:

The jump between the old 12mp sensor to 16mp is pretty big. Almost like a completely new camera system. Improvements across the board. My only slight is I think I prefered the old colors/contrast from theold sensor.

Me too! Actually, what I really prefer is the old sensor's better microcontrast. More lifelike pics, better pop from the subject isolation. Never cartoon-like pictures. (And no noise at base ISO, normal circumstances, while the new ones do produce unfortunalely.)

This I totally agree with and it's one of the reasons I have recently sold my E-PM2 cameras and bought a few E-PM1s to replace them with! I really find that I very much like the microcontrast exhibited by this sensor. It's difficult to explain, but there is a solid look to colours, irrespective of camera settings. I find it quite distinctive.

I also found that although the newer sensor obviously DOES show less high ISO noise, that its ISO ratings, at least on the E-PM2, are about half a stop more exaggerated than those of cameras using the older sensor so that, for example. ISO 400 on my Sony A37 (which itself definitely doesn't give accurate ISO) is about the same as 500 on my E-PM1s and between 640 and 800 on my E-PM2s. I therefore don't quite accept the initially apparent noise differential at face value. I also find I prefer the type of grain given by the old sensor, as I consider it more film-like.

The new sensor certainly usefully increased dynamic range, though, and can provide a smoother look which really suits some subjects. I can see why this and the 1/3 increase in image size might lead it to be most people's choice even if they weren't being told it was massively lower in noise.