The GetDPI Photography Forum
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
OMD vs NEX7 - resolution - discuss
- Thread starter jonoslack
- Start date
kit laughlin
Subscriber Member
Fine by me, Uwe and Terry; and this thread is completely relevant to me too, of course, owning two of them.
Last edited:
Ario Arioldi
Member
Yes Kit, LR4 takes care of the lens distortion correction data from the lens-camera combo.
jonoslack
Active member
HI Uwe
all the best
I'm sure you'll do a better job than me - keeping consistent in these matters is always tough - and I'm very lazy! (n.b. I even called the Sony a Nikon :face smack
Have you tried the Olympus 14-150? it's quite a bit smaller than either the panasonic or the Sony. I had one in the autumn with the EP3 and liked it, dithering about buying a replacement - I didn't much like the 14-140 - of course it was important with panny because of the stabilisation, but the Olympus body really does seem to take care of that!
IBIS really is good - frighteningly good sometimes!For the OMD
- Lenses like the PanLeica 25mm and 45mm
- UWA like 7-14mm (have to see how the CA removal works on the OMD though)
- Handling is fine
- IBIS is very nice I think
PS: Who compared GH2 to OMD by the way. The GH2 I have
all the best
jonoslack
Active member
HI Kit
Never thought for a second that you were trying to hijack the thread. . . .
I was a bit confused as to where to put this thread as well. Of course, it would have generated a different discussion in the Sony forum
Still, maybe Uwe and Terry are right - a new thread would be excellent; adding another camera to this thread sounds a little confusing.
I would have thought that this forum might be the best place to host it though.
all the best
ptomsu
Workshop Member
I have to agree very much to this!Thank you for taking the time to do this comparison, Jono. As I expected, there aren't really any differences in actual image quality that would be significant to my photography. The figures are large, but the increase from 16 to 24MP isn't more than from 4 to 6 or 8 to 12MP. The world didn't turn into apple crumble with custard when those improvements arrived either.
Another side of this is that the 24MP sensor from Sony isn't a very impressive effort. I said that when the NEX 7 was introduced, and I see the same lack of Nirvana (or apple crumble) when I study the samples from the Nikon D3200. No wonder Nikon is late with the D400.
Olympus have really hit a home run with this camera. I can't see many (or any?) cameras under $3,000 that improve significantly on either image quality or ergonomics compared to the OM-D, and we're looking at a $1,000, 400 gram camera with a rather complete lens line-up except for the rather annoying lack of premium quality long ones.
In many ways, we're back to OM-1 vs. Nikon F again, except there is no Nikon F any longer. This is soooo good
I bought the OMD with a little bad feeling in my stomach, as I have gone rid of all my Olympus gear (E System and m43) some 9 months ago, because neither did fulfill my requirements - E system is a dead system and m43 did not have any camera which really made me stay as a happy photographer, mainly because of no built in EVF at these times.
So I took another bet with the OMD and kit lens and this time I am really happy. The camera has finally the resolution I was looking for plus the micro contrast and details from the E5, but an even much improved high ISO performance, is fast, compact light weight, has perfect ergonomics (at least for me) and produces stunning results. And the built in EVF makes even my critical eyes forget I am no longer looking through an OVF
.No other camera manufacturer has anything in their lineup which only comes close!
Only thing I finally wish for m43 are some pro grade lenses - like the long discussed 2.8/14-35 and 2.8/35-100 or also a personal wish would be a m43 2.8-3.5/50-250 - not sure if that will happen, but there is hope that at least some will arrive.
Meanwhile I think I will stay pretty happy with the 75-300 which in combination with the advanced IBIS of the OMD should just be a perfect lens long reach tele-zoom.
V
Vivek
Guest
Hi Kit, A pity that you sold your 5N. Perhaps you can look at the new NEX-F3? The 16MP sensor in C3, 5N (and presumably the F3) is so superb to use manual focus wides (LTM mount and others with short back focal lengths). The NEX-7 simply sucks ( magenta corners, etc) when it comes to this. Lack of AA isn't a big deal.
Robert, The C-V 12/5.6, C-V 15/4.5, W-Nikkor-C 2.5cm f/4 complete a nice set (tiny/compact lenses). I am sure the equivalents exist in the 7-14 Pana zoom and others in the m4/3rds lineup but, the NEX files are much more malleable compared to GH-2 (both 16MP).
jonoslack
Active member
HI Vivek
I think there's little doubt that NEX has considerable advantages with respect to use of 3rd party lenses:
focus peaking
smaller crop factor
better wide angle support
Personally I'm looking for a travel and casual carryabout camera with AF, as such I'll be using mostly zooms or small AF primes.
It might be interesting to do a similar base ISO comparison between the 16mp NEX sensor and the 24mp - I wonder if the conclusion would be the same?
I think there's little doubt that NEX has considerable advantages with respect to use of 3rd party lenses:
focus peaking
smaller crop factor
better wide angle support
Personally I'm looking for a travel and casual carryabout camera with AF, as such I'll be using mostly zooms or small AF primes.
It might be interesting to do a similar base ISO comparison between the 16mp NEX sensor and the 24mp - I wonder if the conclusion would be the same?
Terry
New member
Peter shooting side by side this weekend, the Fuji still pulls away from the OMD as the ISO rises. With the best m4/3 lenses on the OMD at lower ISO the results start to get closer. The best lenses being the Panny 25mm f1.4 and either 45mm the Panny 45mm f2.8 macro and the Oly 45mm f1.8. Of course right now the Fuji is still handicapped in the testing because only using jpegs.I have to agree very much to this!
So I took another bet with the OMD and kit lens and this time I am really happy. The camera has finally the resolution I was looking for plus the micro contrast and details from the E5, but an even much improved high ISO performance, is fast, compact light weight, has perfect ergonomics (at least for me) and produces stunning results. And the built in EVF makes even my critical eyes forget I am no longer looking through an OVF
No other camera manufacturer has anything in their lineup which only comes close!
This is not true at all! There are several options out there that are complete competent systems. Moreover, this is about the third time I hear a similar description from you. E5, Nikon 1 and now OMD.I have to agree very much to this!
So I took another bet with the OMD and kit lens and this time I am really happy. The camera has finally the resolution I was looking for plus the micro contrast and details from the E5, but an even much improved high ISO performance, is fast, compact light weight, has perfect ergonomics (at least for me) and produces stunning results. And the built in EVF makes even my critical eyes forget I am no longer looking through an OVF
No other camera manufacturer has anything in their lineup which only comes close!
I am glad the OMD seems to be a match at the time being for your current needs and current wants, but to say that this is *the photographic silver bullet* (yes, saying that no other camera manufacturer has anything in their lineup which only comes close is a bit like saying this), is a bit of a far reaching fantasy statement, don't you think?
The photographer matters far more anyway, by several miles.
- Raist
ptomsu
Workshop Member
Terry,
the question is, how much better the results from the Fuji really are.
I think that there are several considerations here in parallel. I actually did not ant to buy the OMD as I already stated, but since I could not get the Fuji (still not even available here in Austria) I started looking around for a travel cam, which the D800E will not be (too big). I finally saw a size side by side comparison of the Fuji and the OMD and having also read all the phantasmic reviews of both, I drove to my dealer and could try the OMD and it clicked. Cheaper than the Fuji, much more glass available (I knew already) and an excellent built in EVF and much smaller, but not too small for my hands.
So is the IQ of the Fuji better - sure, but for my taste not so much that I could not survive with the OMD. Same for high ISO .... etc. etc. - I think you are getting my point
So I gave the OMD a try and here I am - pretty happy with it. Sure, no one can say for how long it will stay my favorite camera, but I think there are many others in here, who are doing even worse than me
And it comes pretty close to the ideal travel camera for me!What I really want to see from Pana or Oly are some pro grade zooms and maybe also some pro grade primes. Think we need to wait and see over the next months .....
ptomsu
Workshop Member
Raist,
you see I am not improving in my habits - kind of difficult at my age.
While what you say is very true, there will always be the intriguing factor of "the new" for me. If this was not the case I would be dead, not sure how others feel about that but t least I feel like that
Anyway the OMD is - as I already stated - coming pretty close to a perfect travel cam - for now
Peter
PS: WRT "the photographer matters far more ..." I completely agree, but as soon as a camera goes out of my way almost completely and still offering me a lot of freedom and quick influences of the final image, I would be silly not to choose this tool as the preferred tool. Or why should I make my life unnecessarily hard?
I can only applaud such degree of honesty. Fair enough.Raist,
you see I am not improving in my habits - kind of difficult at my age.
While what you say is very true, there will always be the intriguing factor of "the new" for me. If this was not the case I would be dead, not sure how others feel about that but t least I feel like that
Anyway the OMD is - as I already stated - coming pretty close to a perfect travel cam - for now
[]
PS: WRT "the photographer matters far more ..." I completely agree, but as soon as a camera goes out of my way almost completely and still offering me a lot of freedom and quick influences of the final image, I would be silly not to choose this tool as the preferred tool. Or why should I make my life unnecessarily hard?[/QUOTE]
Me thinks that buying a new system and learning its quirks is harder or making your life harder, photographically speaking.
- Raist
Jorgen Udvang
Subscriber Member
Fuji vs. OM-D:
After trying the Fuji, for me it became very apparent that it's a camera that works excellently with it's own, native lenses but that I didn't find nearly as nice for manual focusing, but that's me. When it comes to image quality, the Fuji is in a class by itself, particularly at high ISO. The problem for me with that camera is the price and the limited selection of lenses. One 90mm and an ultra-wide would probably solve that. But as it is now, the OM-D represents a lower priced alternative with excellent handling and a very nice selection of lenses.
OM-D vs. the world:
While I don't always subscribe to Peter's view of the world, I have to agree that there aren't many compact solutions that offers the same level of usability and image quality combined. The K-5 would be the only other candidate for me and in the real world, they seem to come very close with regards to image quality as well as ergonomics. The Pentax lens line-up is missing a bit at the wide end however, the same way as m4/3 is lacking at the long end. The WA-lenses are there, but they aren't that spectacular, particularly considering the fact that they are primes and not cheap at all.
As for the Ricoh: It doesn't have a built-in viewfinder, just like the new fancy Pentax cameras. For me, that's a total deal breaker. A K-5 with the Fuji sensor would be nice, but alas... the world isn't created like that.
After trying the Fuji, for me it became very apparent that it's a camera that works excellently with it's own, native lenses but that I didn't find nearly as nice for manual focusing, but that's me. When it comes to image quality, the Fuji is in a class by itself, particularly at high ISO. The problem for me with that camera is the price and the limited selection of lenses. One 90mm and an ultra-wide would probably solve that. But as it is now, the OM-D represents a lower priced alternative with excellent handling and a very nice selection of lenses.
OM-D vs. the world:
While I don't always subscribe to Peter's view of the world, I have to agree that there aren't many compact solutions that offers the same level of usability and image quality combined. The K-5 would be the only other candidate for me and in the real world, they seem to come very close with regards to image quality as well as ergonomics. The Pentax lens line-up is missing a bit at the wide end however, the same way as m4/3 is lacking at the long end. The WA-lenses are there, but they aren't that spectacular, particularly considering the fact that they are primes and not cheap at all.
As for the Ricoh: It doesn't have a built-in viewfinder, just like the new fancy Pentax cameras. For me, that's a total deal breaker. A K-5 with the Fuji sensor would be nice, but alas... the world isn't created like that.
ptomsu
Workshop Member
Jorgen,
for sure nobody has to agree with my view of the world
I am here for fun and photography is my passion but not my profession, alone this may describe some decisions and views of the world from my side ....WRT K5 with Fuji sensor - actually I would like to see an M10 with a FF Fuji sensor, this would really be a BIG set forward IMHO. Even better a S3 with a Fuji sensor ....
But as you said the world isn't created like that
ptomsu
Workshop Member
This is true, but bear in mind that I owned the EP2 and EP3 before and also the E5, so I think I am still pretty much used to the Olympus logics and way Olympus cameras operate. And in that regards the OMD brings a number of advances which I always had wished for the other Olympus cameras I had used.
Biggest thing is definitely the built in EVF, which is completely out of my way when I am shooting, I cannot say anything better than that. Only thing which might be improved in the future is resolution , but already with 1.4MP this is enough to no longer be noticed as electronics in between the photographer and the final composition of the image.
Jorgen Udvang
Subscriber Member
I have an S3 with a Fuji sensor... a Fuji S3Even better a S3 with a Fuji sensor ....
But as you said the world isn't created like that
jonoslack
Active member
HI Jorgen
Terry - I'm faintly surprised that the OMD comes close at low ISO, because I don't think it comes close to the M9 IQ at base ISO. But perhaps your 'close' was a charitable kind of close.
But as I say - it's an apples and oranges type comparison, whereas the NEX7vsOMD is definitely apples vs apples.
This was exactly my feeling about the Fuji - But it seems to me that it exists as a primarily AF competitor for the M9 - not really a member of the mirrorless camera group (well, as much a member as the M9 is).
Terry - I'm faintly surprised that the OMD comes close at low ISO, because I don't think it comes close to the M9 IQ at base ISO. But perhaps your 'close' was a charitable kind of close.
But as I say - it's an apples and oranges type comparison, whereas the NEX7vsOMD is definitely apples vs apples.