Peter wrote
>
> The following is unscientific, but probably useful. These pictures were
> shot at the same house, in the same general situation (festive occasions),
> with much the same lighting, some of the same people, and too much food.
> The difference is that the first picture of each pair below was taken with
> a Leica M8 and 35/1.4 Summilux ASPH at ISO 640. The second picture of each
> pair (Christmas Eve this year) was taken with an OM-D E-M5 and a Panasonic
> 20/1.7 at ISO 3200. Each pair was taken at roughly the same place, and so
> has similar lighting unless the bulbs were changed to something different
> in between the pictures.
>
> Both lenses were used somewhere between wide open and closed down one
> stop. Everything was shot RAW and processed with Capture One, using the
> defaults, and making the white balance look reasonably good to my eye, but
> without my trying to go against the basic nature of the camera.
>
>
> <http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/pklein/friends/erevxmas2011/L1008813.jpg
> .html>
> <http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/pklein/xmaseve2012/PC240049-w.jpg.html>
>
> <http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/pklein/friends/NewYear2011-12/L1009035.j
> pg.html>
> <http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/pklein/xmaseve2012/PC240053-w.jpg.html>
>
> <http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/pklein/friends/erevxmas2011/L1008832.jpg
> .html>
> <http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/pklein/xmaseve2012/PC240067-w.jpg.html>
>
> <http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/pklein/friends/ErevXmas09/L1005913.jpg.h
> tml>
> <http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/pklein/xmaseve2012/PC240069-w.jpg.html>
>
> Feel free to browse the rest of the folders if you want to see more.
>
> Here's what I'm seeing so far:
>
> 1. The M8 with 35mm Summilux is clearly sharper when properly focused. But
> the E-M5 with 20/1.7 is quite usable. Note that the difference in
> sharpness is less when both cameras are set at ISO 800, but it is still
> there, and you can see it even in these Web-sized JPGs. 2. Despite the
> E-M5's wonderful image stabilization, I can get sharper shots at ~1/60
> with the M8 than I can with the E-M5. 3. The M8 is biased towards
> pink/magenta, the E-M5 towards yellow. (Yes, I'm using an IR filter on the
> M8). 4. The E-M5 at 3200 is a bit noisier than the M8 at 640. From other
> sessions not shown here, I see that at 800/640 the E-M5 seems a little
> less noisy than the M8 in the shadows. So 1600 may be the "sweet spot" for
> the E-M5. I'm going to shoot New Year's Eve at ISO 1600 rather than 3200,
> and see how that fares.
>
> --Peter
What I get from this is that the OM-D image quality is so close to that from a
Leica that it doesn't matter a damn. Since I'll never be able to get a Leica, I
should aim for an OM-D.
There's an OM-D twin-lens kit on Trademe right now for $NZ 1450.
Bother - can't get that one either. Oh well, they say that patience is a virtue.
I'll just have to be virtuous.
Brian Swale
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|
