E-M5 II Hi-Res vs E-M1 II Hi-Res image IQ.. What are the differences?

Hi everyone,

I love printing the images I've taken with my E-5, E-1 and E-P5 and so far, they look great when printed big. Lately, I'm intrigued by the Hi-Res feature of the E-M1 II and the samples I have seen are actually quite good and detailed despite showing some small artifacts which I don't think will show on the print sizes I plan to make -- 16x20 to 24x36". There are some scenes I have taken in the past with my E-5 and E-P5 that I would had wished it were taken with Hi-Res. I'm mainly interested in Hi-Res mode for urban scape and landscape and I'm well aware of the Hi-Res limitation.

So my question is -- how is the E-M1 II any better than the E-M5 II in regards to Hi-Res aside from the 80MP files it generates? Even the 64MP ISO 100 shots taken with the E-M5 II is cleaner than those taken with my E-P5.

Any thoughts and any samples you can share here if possible?

How about prints? What sizes have you printed up big thus far and do you see any artifacts..

The reason I'm interested in the E-M5 II is that, it's getting affordable buying it used or as a demo from a store.

I never used anything else than Em1.2. But from theory it has less artifacts, it is much faster executed (3 times) so there is less problem with movement from that angle. The 20MP sensor in itself is better so the resulting Hires files is better too. Also ISO64 is clearly less noisy than any other m43 sensor is so when you shoot with ISO64 and DR is not too taxing you get another push in IQ.

I have said so many times here; I use it with very little problems for landscapes. Seems Em5II and PenF were more clearly more problematic.

TomFid wrote:

David wrote:

Hi everyone,

I love printing the images I've taken with my E-5, E-1 and E-P5 and so far, they look great when printed big. Lately, I'm intrigued by the Hi-Res feature of the E-M1 II and the samples I have seen are actually quite good and detailed despite showing some small artifacts which I don't think will show on the print sizes I plan to make -- 16x20 to 24x36". There are some scenes I have taken in the past with my E-5 and E-P5 that I would had wished it were taken with Hi-Res. I'm mainly interested in Hi-Res mode for urban scape and landscape and I'm well aware of the Hi-Res limitation.

So my question is -- how is the E-M1 II any better than the E-M5 II in regards to Hi-Res aside from the 80MP files it generates? Even the 64MP ISO 100 shots taken with the E-M5 II is cleaner than those taken with my E-P5.

Any thoughts and any samples you can share here if possible?

How about prints? What sizes have you printed up big thus far and do you see any artifacts..

The reason I'm interested in the E-M5 II is that, it's getting affordable buying it used or as a demo from a store.

My experience with the EM5ii is that HiRes gets you a smaller increase in linear resolution than the 2x you'd expect. For example, with the 12-40, the increase might be 50% over a normal capture. This makes sense, because you're coming up against lens limitations. I'd guess that the EM1ii is not immune to this, so you might get 60% over an EM5ii normal capture. The EM1ii is apparently more graceful in handling subject movement, which seems like a bigger advantage than the move from 64 to 80 mp.

I totally agree with you that it won't be a 2x increase as I expected, but still it looks better than a 16MP capture.  I wish I can see more Hi-Res samples of the E-M5 Mk II online that I can evaluate, but there are few and far in between.  The ones I see for the E-M1 Mk II are quite acceptable compromise (with artifacts with subject movements) for printing.  Am I too optimistic in expecting that the E-M5 II will have artifacts much less worse than the E-M1 Mk II?

Thank you!

Jorginho wrote:

I never used anything else than Em1.2. But from theory it has less artifacts, it is much faster executed (3 times) so there is less problem with movement from that angle. The 20MP sensor in itself is better so the resulting Hires files is better too. Also ISO64 is clearly less noisy than any other m43 sensor is so when you shoot with ISO64 and DR is not too taxing you get another push in IQ.

I have said so many times here; I use it with very little problems for landscapes. Seems Em5II and PenF were more clearly more problematic.

I have looked at a number of files from the E-M1 II that were shot hi-res and at 64ISO and I firmly believe that this mode is usable for certain landscapes and be able to make big prints with better quality than a native 20MP or 16MP capture.

Even a E-M5 II Hi-Res shot is much cleaner and have better colors than what my E-P5 could do and this really intrigues me.  But during the Olympus event, I didn't have a lot of time to test drive both the E-M5 II and the E-M1 II.

There must be others here who had used the E-M5 II Hi-Res mode and can chime in?

Not long ago, someone was kind enough at the mu-43.com forum to post some sample test shots to compare between the E-M5 II and E-M1 II Hi-res mode side by side.  It never got traction because I guess the poster got discouraged?!?

I have both the E-M1 Mkii and the E-M5 Mkii.  The E-M1 Mkii is noticeably better.  In Hi-Res mode due to the faster sensor readout there is less artifacts.  Also might be better in handling subject movement.  The E-M5 Mkii it has to be absolutely no wind in a landscape photo.  With the E-M1 Mkii wind is not much of an issue.

Dave

David wrote:

Jorginho wrote:

I never used anything else than Em1.2. But from theory it has less artifacts, it is much faster executed (3 times) so there is less problem with movement from that angle. The 20MP sensor in itself is better so the resulting Hires files is better too. Also ISO64 is clearly less noisy than any other m43 sensor is so when you shoot with ISO64 and DR is not too taxing you get another push in IQ.

I have said so many times here; I use it with very little problems for landscapes. Seems Em5II and PenF were more clearly more problematic.

I have looked at a number of files from the E-M1 II that were shot hi-res and at 64ISO and I firmly believe that this mode is usable for certain landscapes and be able to make big prints with better quality than a native 20MP or 16MP capture.\

Eh. The 20 let alone 16MP files don't come close. I know because I always shoot RAW hence I do have the 20 Mp to compare. It is not always so big, to correct myself, bt especially in low light or when there is a lot of detail and/or colour the difference is HUGE. ISO1600 is better than ISO200 on SS mode. It is like comparing mFT to MF (without MF Dynamic range though). Not always MF will be so much better, but in landsapes and portraits etc it can make an enormous difference.

Even a E-M5 II Hi-Res shot is much cleaner and have better colors than what my E-P5 could do and this really intrigues me. But during the Olympus event, I didn't have a lot of time to test drive both the E-M5 II and the E-M1 II.

Yes that is all true for HiRes on Em5II and PenF: much better at everything. While Em1.2 HJiRes may be a little better IQ wise I think by far the biggest difference is in lack of artefacts and dealing better with movement.

There must be others here who had used the E-M5 II Hi-Res mode and can chime in?

Not long ago, someone was kind enough at the mu-43.com forum to post some sample test shots to compare between the E-M5 II and E-M1 II Hi-res mode side by side. It never got traction because I guess the poster got discouraged?!?

Well there was one who shot frozen falls side by side and the biggest difference was a complete lack of artifacts on Em1.2 while Em5.2 had a lot of them. I am unsure but I think that was at least a comparison over here.

Do you have the link for that frozen falls comparison?

Thanks..

David wrote:

Do you have the link for that frozen falls comparison?

Thanks..

No but it was posted over here and I think 4-5 months ago...Sorry! Iam also no 100% sure it was a direct comparison.

TomFid wrote:

David wrote:

I totally agree with you that it won't be a 2x increase as I expected, but still it looks better than a 16MP capture. I wish I can see more Hi-Res samples of the E-M5 Mk II online that I can evaluate, but there are few and far in between. The ones I see for the E-M1 Mk II are quite acceptable compromise (with artifacts with subject movements) for printing. Am I too optimistic in expecting that the E-M5 II will have artifacts much less worse than the E-M1 Mk II?

Thank you!

I'd shoot one for you, but my EM5 is in for service.

I find that I don't use HiRes much, because I shoot landscapes while hiking and I don't carry a tripod. What I do a lot of, though, is stitching of bracketed images. That works well, because you can shoot handheld, and it gets you up to pretty big prints (as long as you don't mind a pano format, or complicated stitching). I generally use LR's photomerge to first stack the brackets to HDR, then assemble.

Hi, yes that would be greatly appreciated if you can...

My purpose for the Hi-Res mode was to shoot a number of Hi-Res 64MP RAW images at different focus distance and stack them together to get a wider depth of field using the Helicon Focus software.  I'm doing that with 12MP and 16MP files with Helicon Focus and the results and prints are absolutely stunning.  My understanding is that, the E-M5 II can do Hi-Res with Focus Bracketing.  And then, all I've got to do is feed the 64MP RAW converted TIFF files into Helicon and voila.

I've done some stitching of bracketed images, but that would mean I have to bracket multiple frames and distances which would create even more work for me.  Which is why the Hi-Res mode is quite appealing to me.  I also read somewhere that blending the Hi-Res images together would smooth out the artifacts or take 3-5 Hi-Res and blend them together via Photoshop would do the same.

Not a comparison, but I have a few samples you can look at  in my smugmug site  pick "original" resolution if you dare.  some are "single" highres shots, some are composite panorama's of multiple high res shots.

All taken with EM5.2 using either a 9-18 oly lens, or a canon 50 f/1.4

That gives good detail of course, but it doesn't  get you the much better colour, better tones and really at least 2-3 stops better noise performance of HiRes. And Since HiRes in good light is excecuted in  0,3 s stitching tings take more time where wind can affect the pics in different ways so stitching can become next to impossible.

thinker wrote:

David wrote:

the results and prints are absolutely stunning. My understanding is that, the E-M5 II can do Hi-Res with Focus Bracketing. And then, all I've got to do is feed the 64MP RAW converted TIFF files into Helicon and voila.

This is not my understanding. As far as I know you must focus bracket manually when using HighRes. Applies to both em5.2 and em1.2.

Sorry if this has already been mentioned by someone else in another post (haven't read all). Even more sorry if I am wrong!

No automatic focus, or any other bracketing, when in Hi-Res mode. As mentioned, you can do it all manually. In fact just last night I did some HR shots in a slot, with 5 manually adjusted focus points, by moving focus point with the direction pad and then autofocusing. Just let the tripod settle down a few seconds, then shoot. Worked like a champ.

banest wrote:

thinker wrote:

David wrote:

the results and prints are absolutely stunning. My understanding is that, the E-M5 II can do Hi-Res with Focus Bracketing. And then, all I've got to do is feed the 64MP RAW converted TIFF files into Helicon and voila.

This is not my understanding. As far as I know you must focus bracket manually when using HighRes. Applies to both em5.2 and em1.2.

Sorry if this has already been mentioned by someone else in another post (haven't read all). Even more sorry if I am wrong!

No automatic focus, or any other bracketing, when in Hi-Res mode. As mentioned, you can do it all manually. In fact just last night I did some HR shots in a slot, with 5 manually adjusted focus points, by moving focus point with the direction pad and then autofocusing. Just let the tripod settle down a few seconds, then shoot. Worked like a champ.

I should clarify the above - no automatic focus bracketing; autofocus still works! Sorry for my poor wording.

Donald B wrote:

banest wrote:

banest wrote:

thinker wrote:

David wrote:

the results and prints are absolutely stunning. My understanding is that, the E-M5 II can do Hi-Res with Focus Bracketing. And then, all I've got to do is feed the 64MP RAW converted TIFF files into Helicon and voila.

This is not my understanding. As far as I know you must focus bracket manually when using HighRes. Applies to both em5.2 and em1.2.

Sorry if this has already been mentioned by someone else in another post (haven't read all). Even more sorry if I am wrong!

No automatic focus, or any other bracketing, when in Hi-Res mode. As mentioned, you can do it all manually. In fact just last night I did some HR shots in a slot, with 5 manually adjusted focus points, by moving focus point with the direction pad and then autofocusing. Just let the tripod settle down a few seconds, then shoot. Worked like a champ.

I should clarify the above - no automatic focus bracketing; autofocus still works! Sorry for my poor wording.

hi res on the em52 is automatic incamera, and the em52 has auto focus bracket as well ,but you have to stack them on the computer.

Don

But, the question is, will it do Hi Res AND focus bracketing at same time? I believe the answer is no, for any of the Olympus cameras that have both Hi Res and focus bracketing.