Who understands Olympus prices?

MEDISN wrote:

samtheman2014 wrote:

No as I said they are indeed "labelled as "unique" sensors" it just seems odd that from a RAW perspective other than tiny differences due largely to in-camera processing the results are all but identical on a range of 6 cameras from three different makers. Perhaps you could point me towards some RAW files that show definitive proof that the E-M1II sensor is markedly better than the PEN F

Has any manufacturers IQ improved dramatically over the last 5 years from a RAW perspective?

You people are obsessed with FF I was responding to Gary who wishes his Pen F had as good a sensor as the E-M1II personally I think he has got his wish As for Nikon there was a gain in base ISO DR and image quality thanks to moving to a 64 ISO base which I really wish m43 would do a true 50 base ISO would do a lot to advance image laity with regards to base ISO DR and shadow noise . Instead of this we get ever dafter high ISO options

Lets face it we need a boost in image quality more than the D800 series or A7R series. The shadow noise at base ISO in m43 especially when pushed is for me the single biggest weakness in the system. It does not matter if you shoot with the cheaper 16mp m43 models or the G9 and E-M1II at £1500 you get very poor shadow DR SSDD

While this is of course an extreme example the need to push shadows to balance a composition is often critical be it in a landscape image or a bird against a bright sky. If m43 had a true base ISO of 50 it would pretty much do it all for me . I do not shoot shallow DOF at all by choice at least   and I almost never shoot high ISO so give me a m43 sensor with a lower base ISO and ideally a few more MP and I would get rid of any FF gear