DSLR image quality better than M4/3..maybe not

[Johnbon]

Im not surprised. In any case, the 25 mm leica is an extremely good lens. I am surprised the low light you cannot see a difference. Shoot with olympus body and I think the pictures will be even better in low light with the IBIS.

Now that a bro told me I could adjust the pic control settings the d5100 could in the end have the edge.will test it out. One thing though the pics when view through the gx1 LCD screen looks the same quality when blown up on PC screen
but the d5100 the pics ALWAYS look wAY better in the camera's LCD screen compared to when blown up on PC screen. ON THE BODY LCD SCREEN THE Pics looks like real pro shots but on PC looks ok la. Sometimes quite disheartening. My PC screen resolution should be higher than the d5100 but don't know why like that

 

[zan82]

Now that a bro told me I could adjust the pic control settings the d5100 could in the end have the edge.will test it out. One thing though the pics when view through the gx1 LCD screen looks the same quality when blown up on PC screen
but the d5100 the pics ALWAYS look wAY better in the camera's LCD screen compared to when blown up on PC screen. ON THE BODY LCD SCREEN THE Pics looks like real pro shots but on PC looks ok la. Sometimes quite disheartening. My PC screen resolution should be higher than the d5100 but don't know why like that

Simple, D5100 has 921k dots vs GX1 460k dots. Higher resolution screen makes image looks brighter and clearer, which you may forget to zoom in to check because of the facade you see on screen

 

[NewbieInCS]

The new om-d samples look very good, definitely comparable to aps-c dslr, but price is also comparable.

I have the e-pl2, probably not representative of modern m4/3 sensor, but I find that the jpg processing is very good. Based on pure iq alone(ignoring lens options, form factor, dof, etc), aps-c of similar generation is definitely better, not by much though. Not too significant with good light or viewing at web size.

I did some comparison with a 50d a while back. All out of camera jpg.
Shoe String Budget R/c: Upgraded camera- Canon EOS 5D mark III high ISO sample VS EOS 50D VS Olympus EP-L2
Shoe String Budget R/c: 5D Mark 3 ISO 100% crop and effect of crop on DOF...

Raw on the epl2 is pretty bad though. The ibis is VERY useful.

 

[Johnbon]

Simple, D5100 has 921k dots vs GX1 460k dots. Higher resolution screen makes image looks brighter and clearer, which you may forget to zoom in to check because of the facade you see on screen

I know but I comparing d5100 to laptop monitor. Isn't computer screen better than d5100 monitor and therefore look better but doesnt

 

[noinimod]

I know but I comparing d5100 to laptop monitor. Isn't computer screen better than d5100 monitor and therefore look better but doesnt

i think you just don't like the OOC jpegs from the d5100. It's like how some people like to boost the Sharpness and Saturation in picture control to get more pleasing JPEGs.

 

[zan82]

I know but I comparing d5100 to laptop monitor. Isn't computer screen better than d5100 monitor and therefore look better but doesnt

No. LCD screen on camera these days makes it look better than actual.

 

[Oly5050]

Now that a bro told me I could adjust the pic control settings the d5100 could in the end have the edge.will test it out. One thing though the pics when view through the gx1 LCD screen looks the same quality when blown up on PC screen
but the d5100 the pics ALWAYS look wAY better in the camera's LCD screen compared to when blown up on PC screen. ON THE BODY LCD SCREEN THE Pics looks like real pro shots but on PC looks ok la. Sometimes quite disheartening. My PC screen resolution should be higher than the d5100 but don't know why like that

No surprise again. Never judge based on camera LCD. Also Canikon know that more cameras are sold based on how good the photos look on camera LCD and not how good they really are. So they optimise for camera lcd. I dun blame the manufacturers but they are just responding to how the market is. Many people do judge how good a camera is by simply how good the photos look on camera lcd. In this regard, olympus usually loses whereas canikon wins here. So no surprise.

 

[pinholecam]

http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/pent...g3-iso-comparison-100%-crops-lots-photos.html

m4/3 with good lens can be comparable at low ISO.
But you see that the file is much noisier even at base ISO.
It perfectly acceptable though.
However, once the PP starts to pile in (eg. levels; curves; saturation; sharpening; etc), the noise will also become more obvious.

At 3200 and higher the APS-C cameras pull away.
However, the compared cameras are a K-01 and K5 which are known to have very fine noise grains and very good APS-C high ISO performance.
YMMV with other cameras.

Despite all that, my G3 is smaller/lighter, so thats a consideration too.
All cameras are good enough nowadays.

 

[Oly5050]

http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/pentax/1057049-k-01-vs-k-5-vs-g3-iso-comparison-100%25-crops-lots-photos.html

m4/3 with good lens can be comparable at low ISO.
But you see that the file is much noisier even at base ISO.
It perfectly acceptable though.
However, once the PP starts to pile in (eg. levels; curves; saturation; sharpening; etc), the noise will also become more obvious.

At 3200 and higher the APS-C cameras pull away.
However, the compared cameras are a K-01 and K5 which are known to have very fine noise grains and very good APS-C high ISO performance.
YMMV with other cameras.

Despite all that, my G3 is smaller/lighter, so thats a consideration too.
All cameras are good enough nowadays.

I never hv to shoot 3200 iso. At most 1600 iso.

 

[vainqueur]

I never hv to shoot 3200 iso. At most 1600 iso.

Me too, I am with you. I always feel that high ISO is a bonus. I rather carry a tripod than shoot high iso...

 

[MichaelLee]

I just ran a comparison, ISO3200 JPEG from dpreview as below, OMD vs nikon D7000 vs Canon 7D vs Sony 5N. You may go to dpreview and run more testing.