M8 vs 4/3

[jonoslack]

HI There
this is just a silly little game - something for a Sunday afternoon.

Here are a couple of 100% crops. One is from an Olympus E3 shot with the 50mm macro, the other from the M8 with the 75 'cron. Both are at f5.6 with the focus on the writing on the canvas bag. The lenses have the same equivalent focal length of course
Both are at base ISO (100 for E3, 160 for M8)

So, the puzzle - which was taken with which . . . off you go

 

[Digital Dude]

My eyes feel the second one is from the M8/75.

 

[carstenw]

First of all, they both look very good, and I expect that the E-3 is a great camera. I also think that the second photo is the M8, but for 3 technical reasons:

1) Macro lenses are typically quite contrasty, and the first photo has higher contrast.
2) The second photo seems to have a bit more dynamic range, and I suspect that this is the M8. This is also tied to 1), of course, but still...
3) The second shot has less depth of field, which I think is correct for the larger sensor and the longer focal length (the lens doesn't know what camera it is on).

 

[jonoslack]

Hi There - thanks for replying Daniel
Too easy with respect to DOf

here is another comparison, this time equalising the exposure a bit more carefully, and using an f8 shot from the 'cron so that the DOF was equivalent:

 

[carstenw]

Hmm, I think this is too easy given the first shot. The sequence is the same. The bag has a highlight in the first shot, and in the second one it has a slight reddish tinge, just like in the first shot.

Unless... is there a time difference in these shots? It seems that the light is moving between shots, so if you did all the E-3 shots first, and then all the M8 shots, that would explain the difference in the colour.

 

[jonoslack]

First of all, they both look very good, and I expect that the E-3 is a great camera. I also think that the second photo is the M8, but for 3 technical reasons:

1) Macro lenses are typically quite contrasty, and the first photo has higher contrast.
2) The second photo seems to have a bit more dynamic range, and I suspect that this is the M8. This is also tied to 1), of course, but still...
3) The second shot has less depth of field, which I think is correct for the larger sensor and the longer focal length (the lens doesn't know what camera it is on).

Hi Carsten
Of course, you're right - interesting to see whether the second comparison is quite as simple.

As I said, it was only really a game for a Sunday afternoon, but I hope it might just surprise a few people who have 4/3 cameras down as a 'small sensor' option of not much interest.

To be honest, I was surprised - I think the M8 image is better, but it's a very close call.

 

[Jan Brittenson]

The higher contrast of the Oly is a dead giveaway. I don't think the difference is in lens as much as camera. My guess is the M8 has much better dynamic range. The Oly shots look sharpened as well, with a broad radius - it shows as a halo in some areas. Are the Oly shots in-camera JPEGs? That could also explain the higher contrast since cameras often like to do some auto-levels like adjustment to provide clean blacks and whites when producing JPEGs.

 

[irakly]

i did not really pay attention to dof and still concurred with everybody. it is just in both instances the second image looks somewhat cleaner (i don't know if this is a right word to use)

 

[Paratom]

i did not really pay attention to dof and still concurred with everybody. it is just in both instances the second image looks somewhat cleaner (i don't know if this is a right word to use)

I felt exactly the same way..specially if you look into the plants

 

[jonoslack]

Hi there
Thanks everyone for chipping in.
I think that everyone agrees about the difference, a certain clarity, and definitely improved bokeh.

On the other hand, the combination of the E3 and 50mm cost less than the leica lens, by some margin. The difference between the two shots is there, but it doesn't exactly leap out at you.

If I did have a point here it was that many are dismissive of 4/3 as a 'small sensor' camera, having made assumptions on that basis. I think this shows that it's a simplistic view - the second shot shows that the DOF difference relates to approximately 1 stop.

If, like me, your m8 is your main camera, there are still times when it's good to have an SLR about the place - an E3 and a couple of lenses makes an attractive, robust and flexible outfit, without having to sacrifice very much with respect to image quality, and without breaking the bank (or your shoulder!)

 

[johnastovall]

I'm amazed at the quality of the image. I had heard so much about the noise issues with the 4/3 I had written them off even though Eli Reed at UT-Austin loves his.

But this does put it in a different light, at least the E3 implementation of it.

 

[jonoslack]

Hmm, I think this is too easy given the first shot. The sequence is the same. The bag has a highlight in the first shot, and in the second one it has a slight reddish tinge, just like in the first shot.

Unless... is there a time difference in these shots? It seems that the light is moving between shots, so if you did all the E-3 shots first, and then all the M8 shots, that would explain the difference in the colour.

Hi Carsten
yes - too easy - and there was a time difference, but only long enough to swap the cameras on the tripod - maybe 2 minutes. But it's mid afternoon with a very low sun - it moves fast, and, as you can see, it does make a difference.

The point really is not whether you can tell the difference (you can - another way is the reds, which are characteristically a little pink on the M8 shot), but the fact that it's fairly difficult to say that one is 'better' than the other, despite the obvious advantages that the M8 would appear to have; The E3 is a grand little camera - not to replace an M8 of course, but certainly to do those things where an SLR is a real advantage.

 

[jonoslack]

I'm amazed at the quality of the image. I had heard so much about the noise issues with the 4/3 I had written them off even though Eli Reed at UT-Austin loves his.

But this does put it in a different light, at least the E3 implementation of it.

Hi John
It's impressive isn't it - I think Olympus have really got it right here - I hope it doesn't get lost in the rush - and in the conventional wisdom about noise.

Then I hope that Leica bring out a really small 4/3 body with this image quality

 

[lambert]

Hi John
It's impressive isn't it - I think Olympus have really got it right here - I hope it doesn't get lost in the rush - and in the conventional wisdom about noise.

Then I hope that Leica bring out a really small 4/3 body with this image quality

Terrific comparison Jono. I shoot fast primes most of the time and therefore love my M8, but there are many shots that simply call for an SLR . The E3 seems to stand out from the crowd, especially given the practical & high quality zoom lens line-up. My only reservation is the size of the body. The E3 + 12-60 combo seems to be about as big and heavy as a Canon 5D + 24-105IS. In trying both, there's no doubt in my mind that the Olympus combo imparts a much greater sense of quality and durability. But whenever I'm about to take the plunge, the little demons play on the mind and tell me I should buy the 5D given the sensor is some 3-4 times larger than the 4/3rds sensor. I guess we've all been conditioned to believe that bigger must be better, but the more images I see from the E3 the more I like it.

I would be interested to learn whether you have any experience with the 5D and how it may compare to the E3 from an image quality perspective.

Thanks,
Lambert

 

[jonoslack]

Terrific comparison Jono. I shoot fast primes most of the time and therefore love my M8, but there are many shots that simply call for an SLR . The E3 seems to stand out from the crowd, especially given the practical & high quality zoom lens line-up. My only reservation is the size of the body. The E3 + 12-60 combo seems to be about as big and heavy as a Canon 5D + 24-105IS. In trying both, there's no doubt in my mind that the Olympus combo imparts a much greater sense of quality and durability. But whenever I'm about to take the plunge, the little demons play on the mind and tell me I should buy the 5D given the sensor is some 3-4 times larger than the 4/3rds sensor. I guess we've all been conditioned to believe that bigger must be better, but the more images I see from the E3 the more I like it.

I would be interested to learn whether you have any experience with the 5D and how it may compare to the E3 from an image quality perspective.

Thanks,
Lambert

HI Lambert
Never had a 5D, sorry - previous slr's include D200, D2x, Kodak 14nx. The kodak produced more definition, the D200 less, and the D2x about the same (I'd say). There are quite a lot of 5D users on the Olympus boards who have converted to the E3 and seem very happy with their decision.
As for size, there probably isn't a lot in it, the E3 doesn't feel like a big camera, but it certainly feels (and is) a lot more solid than the 5d.
Currently I have the E3+12-60, 1 M8 body with 4 leica lenses in an standard Billingham Hadley bag - which suits me. If you want to go small, you can always stick on the excellent Olympus 14-42 lens - it's quite slow, but focuses very close and is unfeasably small - and of course you have Image stabilisation with everything.

 

[lambert]

HI Lambert
Never had a 5D, sorry - previous slr's include D200, D2x, Kodak 14nx. The kodak produced more definition, the D200 less, and the D2x about the same (I'd say). There are quite a lot of 5D users on the Olympus boards who have converted to the E3 and seem very happy with their decision.
As for size, there probably isn't a lot in it, the E3 doesn't feel like a big camera, but it certainly feels (and is) a lot more solid than the 5d.
Currently I have the E3+12-60, 1 M8 body with 4 leica lenses in an standard Billingham Hadley bag - which suits me. If you want to go small, you can always stick on the excellent Olympus 14-42 lens - it's quite slow, but focuses very close and is unfeasably small - and of course you have Image stabilisation with everything.

Hi Jono,
Thanks for the brief perspective on your various cameras. In looking at your comparo once again, its really sweet to see that the E3 can hold its own against the M8. Cheers, Lambert

 

[woodyspedden]

Hi Jono,
Thanks for the brief perspective on your various cameras. In looking at your comparo once again, its really sweet to see that the E3 can hold its own against the M8. Cheers, Lambert

I don't know how much post processing work Jono had to do to get the two images to be comparable in terms of color balance, sharpness etc. My experience with the 5D is that you have to do a lot of work to get it to look like M8 files. Not that it can't be done but with the M8 you have a fraction of the PP work to do as compared to the 5D. That was one of the considerations that led me to the R9/DMR originally and ultimately the M8. YMMV I tell you though I could certainly live with the E3 based on these images so for the macro and tele work that is so difficult with DRF bodies the E3 and its lenses may be the ticket

Woody

 

[lambert]

I don't know how much post processing work Jono had to do to get the two images to be comparable in terms of color balance, sharpness etc. My experience with the 5D is that you have to do a lot of work to get it to look like M8 files. Not that it can't be done but with the M8 you have a fraction of the PP work to do as compared to the 5D. That was one of the considerations that led me to the R9/DMR originally and ultimately the M8. YMMV I tell you though I could certainly live with the E3 based on these images so for the macro and tele work that is so difficult with DRF bodies the E3 and its lenses may be the ticket

Woody

Is the PP overhead with 5D files still relevant given that Lightroom (and perhaps other RAW tools) allow for presets that will tweak colour to taste fairly rapidly. I must agree with you in relation to the M8 in that it provides great colour straight off the bat. I believe the Olympus E-1, which shared a similar Kodak CCD, was also very good in this regard.

Lambert

 

[jonoslack]

I don't know how much post processing work Jono had to do to get the two images to be comparable in terms of color balance, sharpness etc. My experience with the 5D is that you have to do a lot of work to get it to look like M8 files. Not that it can't be done but with the M8 you have a fraction of the PP work to do as compared to the 5D. That was one of the considerations that led me to the R9/DMR originally and ultimately the M8. YMMV I tell you though I could certainly live with the E3 based on these images so for the macro and tele work that is so difficult with DRF bodies the E3 and its lenses may be the ticket

Woody

Hi Woody
I'll tell all!

1. I processed both in ACR 4.3 (seemed fairest)
2. I used the ACR defaults for both (I normally use aperture)
3. I boosted the default sharpening for the Olympus from 25 to 50 without changing radius or anything. (as a response to it's AA filter, actually, I suspect I overdid it slightly, 35 might have been better)
4. I slightly corrected the exposure - reduced M8 by .75 and E3 by -.5

then I opened the shots in photoshop and took a crop from each - saved it as a jpg and posted.

I'm really very impressed, as you say, it makes a great substitute for those times when an M8 isn't perfect (macro and telephoto primarily). It's better at high ISO then one could reasonably expect - 1600 is fine, 3200 useable with a bit of work.

There!

I promise that's all - really - honest!

 

[Guy Mancuso]

I went to the store today and played with one for about 45 minutes and also 3 brand new D300 came in the door when I was there , so got a chance to play with the E3 and just held the D300. My surprise is there relatively the same size but I loved the finder of the E3 it was better by far than the Leica 4/3rds. It handled very nice except the 12-60 and 50-200 zooms were very stiff in zooming and the lens comes out when zooming. D300 okay flat panel display is what came to mind. Just the ergonomics i may like the Nikon better but i did like the 1st menu display on the E3 you hit any control button a whole menu comes up but just that function is operable.