Another convert to m43

Fri13 wrote:

Well.... In the sales you need to talk in the sense the customer understands from where they are coming.
Like how much they can save and how much they can gain. That is marketing talk. But then you need to explain the truth what really matters and why the marketing talks still mattered.

And your sin was to call m4/3 as format, it is just the bayonet and 4/3 is still the format as sensor is still the same 4/3" and there is nothing micro in it

So if you do not know it was a sin, is it still a sin?

Guy Parsons wrote:

Brian Steele wrote:

How is the E-PL5 inferior to E-PL6?

Yup, "inferior" is a strong word. It's the same camera but with a couple of little changes, like adding a level gauge (which I find irritating on my E-P5 so never use it). Plus intervalometer added, but only for up to 99 shots with interval from 1 second to 24 hours. Has "Short Release Time Lag Mode" to cause a shorter delay from shutter press. Base ISO still 200 but the "ISO 100" has been added, which anyone can do on any camera by over-exposing 200 by one stop and being careful with highlights.

If none of those are important (none are to me) then either E-PL5 or E-PL6 does exactly the same job and looks and handles the same.

For Pens it wasn't until E-PL7 (or E-P5) that the better IBIS was installed and 0 second anti-shock was available. Those two features make a truly significant improvement.

Olympus USA blatantly or foolishy lied in the E-PL6 specs where they said it is "3 axis" IBIS when it is truly the 2 axis IBIS of old. The E-PL6 was a Japan only release in May 2013 but later was also sold outside Japan in some more countries.

As well as my timeline http://homepages.ihug.com.au/~parsog/olyepl1/80-Oly-timeline.html also my messy E-PLx chart may help sort out features http://homepages.ihug.com.au/~parsog/olyepl1/21-epl1-vs-epl2.html

Regards..... Guy

The E-PL7 is a true step forward, however it is priced too close to the EM10. At that price, the EM10 is a much better buy. About the E-PL5/6...with their small size and small buttons I'm always going to wonder how long this camera will last before the shutter or some other button or dial stops working.

Guy Parsons wrote:

Chi Pham wrote:

Thanks for the very informative information.

That's still useful things added IMO.

Useful if they are of use to the individual. Some can live without those features.

BUT I do have one theory for newer body. Even with same sensor, they had more time to work out the bugs and improve sensor efficiency at the backend.

It's really an E-PL5, just released a few months after the E-PL5 for the Japanese market, any updates would have also sneaked into E-PL5 updates.

For example, the EM10 II has the EM1 but seems to have better IQ test results.

E-M10ii has a Sony sensor (like the E-PL5/6) and the E-M1 has a Panasonic sensor, they deliver different results.

Regards...... Guy

Guy the E-PL5 and 6 are basically the same, but I did see reviews that stated that the E-PL5 had more DR and slightly lower noise than the E-M5 even though they share the same sensor, it was because Olympus tweaked the processing according to the review.

Guy Parsons wrote:

jeffharris wrote:

Guy Parsons wrote:

Brian Steele wrote:

How is the E-PL5 inferior to E-PL6?

Yup, "inferior" is a strong word. It's the same camera but with a couple of little changes, like adding a level gauge (which I find irritating on my E-P5 so never use it).

If you ever shoot ultra wide, give it a chance. I tried using it with my GX8 and 7-14mm shooting some interiors and keeping the camera level made the images MUCH better, with fewer exaggerated lines, etc..

Yes, I use the 12-40mm, 9-18mm and Samyang 7.5mm and never use the levels, I use the LCD to get things right by judging what is happening to verticals and horizons, I find that way easier than trying to satisfy the level indicator.

I see the results that I need, and do not concentrate on the levels which seems to actually hinder the framing for me.

Regards........ Guy

I like the Fuji implementation of levels a lot better, much easier to use.  When the camera is level either horizontally or vertically the color of the line changes.

Chi Pham wrote:

Thanks Henry for the reminder.

I did some investigation and it looks like it does not have 0-sec antishock.

However, I think 1/8 sec is OK when needed. The GX7 is 1 sec which is much slower if I remember correctly.

As the the IBIS, that's true that it's only 2-AXIS.

That equates to 1-2 stops which is similar to GX7?

Bottom line, for $319 with body and 2 kit lens, it's a good deal still.

Best

Yes.  Just tell him to use a tripod when needed and then IS does not matter at all.

Guy Parsons wrote:

alexisgreat wrote:

Guy the E-PL5 and 6 are basically the same, but I did see reviews that stated that the E-PL5 had more DR and slightly lower noise than the E-M5 even though they share the same sensor, it was because Olympus tweaked the processing according to the review.

They had from February to September in 2012 to do some tweaks, plus who knows, it could be a slightly later version of the 16MP sensor.

Regards....... Guy

the funny thing is, that the same review stated that the E-PL7 and EM10 were a notch below the E-PL5 in terms of DR and high ISO noise.

They actually had a side by side comparison of the E-PL5 and 7.

Henry Richardson wrote:

alexisgreat wrote:

Yes. Just tell him to use a tripod when needed and then IS does not matter at all.

To further advice in that vein, just tell him to turn off IS and shoot raw at ISO 25,600. If still necessary at ISO 25,600 he can also underexpose by multiple stops and then push in his raw converter. That way almost always the shutter speed will be high enough and then IS does not matter at all.

Hey now, there's an idea  I read somewhere that this sensor becomes ISOless at ISO 1200, so in theory at least you should be able to shoot at ISO 1600 and bump up the exposure in your RAW converter and the result should be identical to actually shooting at a higher ISO.

Guy Parsons wrote:

alexisgreat wrote:

the funny thing is, that the same review stated that the E-PL7 and EM10 were a notch below the E-PL5 in terms of DR and high ISO noise.

They actually had a side by side comparison of the E-PL5 and 7.

In real life the Sony 16MP sensors are rather good and only the devoted pixel peepers worry about noise, the rest of us just use the results we get and maybe use noise reduction in a few rare cases. If printing big then some noise helps the print look better, noiseless big prints are sometimes disturbingly "digital" to look at. Some pro printing labs confess to adding noise to images when printing to improve the result.

Regards........ Guy

Yep, and the same can be said of sharpening, when an image is too "sharp" it looks very artificial.

The comparison reviews are on Imaging Resource.

Question, speaking of settings, do you have your camera set to: Contrast, Sharpening and Saturation all -2 and Noise Filter to off?

Guy Parsons wrote:

alexisgreat wrote:

Yep, and the same can be said of sharpening, when an image is too "sharp" it looks very artificial.

The comparison reviews are on Imaging Resource.

Question, speaking of settings, do you have your camera set to: Contrast, Sharpening and Saturation all -2 and Noise Filter to off?

I shoot raw+LN jpeg then use the raw with DxO. The jpeg is for in-camera inspection (and quick sharing) as the embedded jpeg within the raw file (if shooting raw only) is not very good. My setting is Natural and all 3 set to -1 with gradation normal. Noise Reduction Auto, Noise Filter Off. Auto WB. Blinkies in live view and review, settings 0,255.

Regards...... Guy

Thanks Guy, from what I've read the camera applies some noise reduction even when the camera is set to NF Off.

alexisgreat wrote:

Guy Parsons wrote:

jeffharris wrote:

Guy Parsons wrote:

Brian Steele wrote:

How is the E-PL5 inferior to E-PL6?

Yup, "inferior" is a strong word. It's the same camera but with a couple of little changes, like adding a level gauge (which I find irritating on my E-P5 so never use it).

If you ever shoot ultra wide, give it a chance. I tried using it with my GX8 and 7-14mm shooting some interiors and keeping the camera level made the images MUCH better, with fewer exaggerated lines, etc..

Yes, I use the 12-40mm, 9-18mm and Samyang 7.5mm and never use the levels, I use the LCD to get things right by judging what is happening to verticals and horizons, I find that way easier than trying to satisfy the level indicator.

I see the results that I need, and do not concentrate on the levels which seems to actually hinder the framing for me.

Regards........ Guy

I like the Fuji implementation of levels a lot better, much easier to use. When the camera is level either horizontally or vertically the color of the line changes.

Same with the GX8.

The GX7 and GX1 have the level thing, too, but I never bothered to try it out.

Guy Parsons wrote:

alexisgreat wrote:

Thanks Guy, from what I've read the camera applies some noise reduction even when the camera is set to NF Off.

Step 1 is that the Exmor sensor does some noise reduction on the sensor before the raw file is made.

Step 2 is that the Oly image chip (or firmware) does some more noise reduction and sharpening to the jpeg file even if all is off or minimised. Oly Viewer 3 does that same noise reduction and sharpening even when none is requested.

Other raw converters do as requested and do not add sharpening and noise reduction when you tell them not to.

Regards..... Guy

Here is the comparison E-PL5 vs E-PL7

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/olympus-e-pl7/olympus-e-pl7-image-quality.htm

Detail comparison. We also like to take a look at high-contrast detail, as results often differ from what we see in the tables above. Here, the E-PL7 continues the Olympus tradition of producing great results with high-contrast detail as ISO rises, as did the E-PL5. As you can see, contrast and detail remains very good at ISO 3200, and even ISO 6400 only shows a slight drop in detail and saturation. Excellent results, though perhaps not quite as good as the E-PL5's.

E-PL5 noise reduction comparison

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/olympus-epl5/olympus-epl5HI_ISO_NR.HTM

E-PL5 Imatest

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/olympus-epl5/olympus-epl5A5.HTM

Compared to the Olympus E-M5 which uses the identical sensor as far as we know, the E-PL5 scored pretty much the same at all quality levels, though total dynamic range is actually a full stop better at 12.4 vs 11.4 f-stops, likely due to tweaked processing. Note though that this measurement has a margin of error of about 1/3 f-stop, so differences of less than 0.33 can be ignored.

Raw. The graph at right is from the same Stouffer 4110 stepchart image captured as a raw (.ORF) file, processed with Adobe Camera Raw using the Auto setting, then manually tweaked from there. As can be seen, the score at the highest quality level increased from 8.81 to 9.44 f-stops, while total dynamic range increased less than 1/3 f-stop from 12.4 to 12.6. Again, these results are much better than average for a Micro Four Thirds sensor, slightly better than the E-M5, and almost as good as the best APS-C sensors.

http://www.photoreview.comau/reviews/advanced-compact-cameras/interchangeable-lens/olympus-pen-lite-e-pl5

E-PL7 Imatest

http://www.optyczne.pl/286.7-Test_aparatu-Olympus_E-PL7_Szumy_i_jako%C5%9B%C4%87_obrazu_w_RAW.html

E-M10 Imatest

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/olympus-e-m10/olympus-e-m10A5.HTM

Here, we compare the Olympus E-M10's dynamic range to similarly priced cameras, the Canon T5i/700D DSLR and the Sony A5000 CSC. (Ideally we should be comparing to the Sony A6000 since it's closer in price, but that camera hasn't been tested as of this writing.) As you can see from the above graph (click for a larger image), the E-M10's dynamic range compares nicely with the Sony A5000 except at base ISO, where the Sony has about a 3/4 stop advantage (13.01 vs 12.29 EV). Compared to the Canon T5i, the Olympus E-M10 enjoys almost a 2 stop advantage (1.87) at base ISO, and continues to outperform the T5i up to about ISO 1,600, above which all three cameras perform essentially the same.