Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] Better late? [was DX 14-54 on MFT]

Subject: [OM] Better late? [was DX 14-54 on MFT]
From: Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 17 May 2014 02:14:55 -0700
Looking for something else, I came across this post:

On 3/19/2014 5:02 AM, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
Does this statement mean that you consider that the GX-7 produces images
superior to the E-M5 at any ISO setting?

Yes, it does.

I'm being quite pixel peeper nitpicky. I did some careful tests from ISO 200 to 3200. The difference between mine and the otherwise excellent ones on DPR is that I looked into how they clean up with NeatImage.

All digital cameras I've used have little pixel level artifacts I call worms. Hardly ever noticeable in contemporary bodies at base ISO, they increase in number/size/intensity as the ISO goes up. It's easy to miss them in noisy files, then they show up after NR. It's also easy to think they are artifacts of the NR. However, when flipping the NR layer off and on, it becomes apparent that they were there all along, simply masked by the noise.

The GX7 has considerably less of this problem at any given ISO than the E-M5. 
Otherwise, the image IQ seems the same to me.

Tardy Moose

On 3/12/2014 11:37 PM, Moose wrote:
The latest Panny 16mp is still cleaner at pixel level and any given ISO.

Tardy Moose

--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz