GX80 + 45mm1.8 vs A230 + 50mm1.8

Ru55 said:

I used to own the Sony and now own the Panasonic. Never had them at the same time so have never been able to make a direct comparison in the same conditions.

when I look at photos from both my favourites are always from the Sony. Can’t quite put my finger on why. I think the Sony has more DR and less DoF. But when I compare them on sites like DXO this shouldn’t be the case.

Im considering investing in the old setup again but that just doesn’t feel right. Surely my current setup should outperform or at least equal the old?

Click to expand...

The A230 has a CCD, which is a completely different kind of sensor than is used in any modern camera, all of which have CMOS sensors. That might prompt the biggest difference in terms of "look."

In reality, the GX80 has dramatically more dynamic range - at least 2 stops at every ISO, and better in both the shadows and highlights. If you feel the Sony has better dynamic range, it may be the result of problems with exposure. Have you looked at RAW files, or just out-of-camera JPEGs?

Due to the lower dynamic range and increased grain, people often feel that CCDs feel more "like film" than CMOS sensors, so that might be part of your preference as well.

However, where you are correct is that the Sony will have shallower depth of field. It also has a wider field of view (75mm equivalent, instead of 90mm equivalent with the Olympus lens). This combined with the 3:2 aspect ratio instead of 4:3 will give the 50/1.8 a more "expansive" frame that you might just prefer.

For the same framing (i.e. with the Sony kit shot closer to the subject) it will have more background blur due to the longer focal length and larger sensor:

https://www.howmuchblur.com/#lens-1.5x-50mm-f1.8-vs-2x-45mm-f1.8-on-3m-subject

If you think it's mostly about pure DoF, then using a lens like Sigma's 56mm/f1.4 on your GX80 will give you shallower DoF than the Sony. However, if you think it's more about the wider field of view that you prefer the look of, you might be more inclined to look at the Sigma 30mm/1.4, though it will have more DoF than even the 45mm/1.8.

If you want more specific help, it would useful to try and show us a photo you like from the Sony and compare to one you feel is letting you down, even if they're not a direct side-by-side comparison. Without specific information, it's difficult to give you a better answer than that.

Thank you Androole. I’ve not used that how much blur website - it was interesting to put in some other lenses. I’ve added the Sony 35mm1.8 which offers similar blur to the 45mOly.

i hadn’t heard of the differences before with CCD/CMOS so that’s interesting as well. On that note, the Sony is only 10mp vs the Panasonic’s 16mp, but yet when you zoom into the image it doesn’t seem to have as much of that digital noise you get in digital images.

im not on the computer at the moment but yes I’ll try and dig out the best two pics that are a similar comparison.

Ru55 said:

I used to own the Sony and now own the Panasonic. Never had them at the same time so have never been able to make a direct comparison in the same conditions.

when I look at photos from both my favourites are always from the Sony. Can’t quite put my finger on why. I think the Sony has more DR

Click to expand...

It doesn't. Even the older 16mp Panasonics have more DR. But that Sony uses low resolution CCD sensor. And I've seen people swearing by their CCD sensors giving the photos this special look/feel that more modern CMOS sensors cannot replicate. I personally have no idea what's that about, but hey...

Also, what are you comparing? Out of camera JPEGs? Raws processed with default settings? Raws processed to taste? There will be a big difference in OOC JPEGs, for example, simply because each camera processed the image differently.

Ru55 said:

and less DoF.

Click to expand...

Meh, the difference isn't that big there. Note that there is also a difference in field of view (90 vs 75 mm equivalent) which might translate to a difference in perspective if it results in you shooting from a different distance.

Ru55 said:

But when I compare them on sites like DXO this shouldn’t be the case.

Click to expand...

That's the problem with sites like DxO. It's just numbers. Even if factually correct, they don't necessarily tell you all that much about actual performance.

Ru55 said:

Im considering investing in the old setup again but that just doesn’t feel right. Surely my current setup should outperform or at least equal the old?

Click to expand...

You know, there are Micro 4/3 users who insist that in the switch to 16mp, something was lost. They prefer the old 12mp sensor cameras, which are technically inferior in every single way. Some people say that the newer 20mp sensors somewhat recapture this bit of the magic of the old 12mp.

So you know, who are we to tell you what is right? You like what you like, right?

Anyway. If you have not played with the raw files, then maybe try that. And while you're at it, try using different software. You put the raw file through Lightroom, DxO, Capture One, Irident, etc. and they will all produce slightly different end results. Maybe you could be able to figure out how to get the look you like from your Panasonic.

Good luck.