Olympus PEN E-P3 vs Panasonic Lumix G3!
ePhotozine compared the two newest m43 cameras, the G3 versus the E-P3: “Overall the Olympus PEN E-P3 gives warmer results, while the Panasonic Lumix G3 gives cooler, but also more neutral images. The G3 shows less noise, but also seems to show less detail than the E-P3, which is surprising considering the higher resolution 16 megapixel sensor in the Panasonic, you would expect to see more noise, but ideally more detail as well. The Olympus PEN E-P3 shows more detail in highlights and in shadow areas which means you should get better dynamic range in your photos.”
On their website you can see many image comparisons. Now the big question is:
Loading ...The G3 is now slowly beeing delivered to worldwide stores. Check those direct search links to see the status at Amazon, Adorama, B&H, J&R, eBay. And those are the E-P3 preorder search links at Amazon, Adorama, B&H, J&R, eBay.
Share
Recent comments
Comment from alvaro: I tried and did not work at all...
Comment from EyeAmLegend: Thanks to Pablo I now know to never look...
Comment from Jeff Wolfram: Hi Andy, thank you very much for that i...
Comment from Zaph: Peaking is necessary on NEX because the ...
NiKo
11 months ago |DigitalCameraInfo has a slightly different opinion… matter of taste, probably http://www.digitalcamerainfo.com/content/Olympus-E-P3-Digital-Camera-Review/Panasonic-G3-Comparison.htm
cbr09
11 months ago |Well they agree on some things – notably that EP-3 gives (much) better resolution and that G-3 is better for noise.
frosti7
11 months ago |The EP-3 gives much better resolution if i am a flamingo.
Reza
11 months ago |Oh wow, I didn’t know you’re a flamingo! (Just kidding!
cbr09
11 months ago |I don’t know if it does or not – I haven’t used the cameras – but I was simply reporting the findings on:
http://www.digitalcamerainfo.com/content/Olympus-E-P3-Digital-Camera-Review/Resolution.htm
this may be partly due to the (much maligned) kit lens – but can’t be totally as the EPL2 should then be the same.
frosti7
11 months ago |+1
DigitalCameraInfo shows much more consistent results to what i’ve seen on the web,
My personal conclusion if you buy e-p3 you get IBIS, worse sensor at high ISO’s, same DR (if not worse, in ephotozine sky sample u could see more detail in g3, even thou it’s more exposed) you loose swivel screen and loose EVF, and for all of thatyou pay extra 200$,
E-P3 is a joke (in my view)
x
11 months ago |But smaller size, which I prefer very much against the VF. However it’s overpriced, I agree
Steve Tsiopanos
11 months ago |I guess Olympus is doing something right with their sensor.
frosti7
11 months ago |According to what i see, it has less DR, worse high ISO performance, and same Resolution (some photos its better resolution, others are worse then G3, so resolution wise they on par)
Frederick Hew
11 months ago |+1
regarding IQ, i would say G3 beats the E-P3 in just about any aspect. would like to see a raw file comparison, though.
MrKal_EL
11 months ago |Come on…the Olympus is just beautiful looking…
Olympius
11 months ago |Well, not all is well in E-P3 land:
“We were left fairly unimpressed by the Olympus E-P3’s dynamic range performance, as it wasn’t able to pull in more than 5.19 stops of dynamic range (calculated using Imatest’s f-stop noise evaluation) at its lowest standard ISO of 200. This also quickly fell off, with the camera falling to less than four stops as soon as ISO 800. While the E-P3 can shoot as fast as 12800 (and 25600, even, if ISO extension is turned on), we don’t recommend it, as dynamic range is practically nil and overwhelmed with noise. This is especially apparent in real-life photos, as nearly every highlight and deep shadow is clipped, leaving very little detail to be rescued in post. RAW shooting provides some relief, but not nearly enough.”
That does not sound promising, but it gets even worse. Read the DigitalCameraInfo.com comparison, and basically, despite the E-P3′s better handling, the G3 wins on IQ overall.
http://www.digitalcamerainfo.com/content/Olympus-E-P3-Digital-Camera-Review/Panasonic-G3-Comparison.htm
(Sorry if any annoying ads pop up on your screen from that link…I hate it when web sites do that sort of trickery….)
Anyway, one thing I found very surprising is that the E-P3 beat out everyone for image stabilization, including Panasonic and Sony’s kit lenses. And beat them by a wide margin. So Olympus cannot only boast of fastest focusing, but also of the best image stabilization. Very nice.
Other than IQ (and who really cares about that anyway…) the E-P3 sounds like a very nice camera.
Olympius
Anonymous
11 months ago |Well you don’t have image stabilizaton during video with olympus.
I think in camrera stabilizatiois far better for evryday usage. I’ve tested both ep2 and g2 and thee is a huge difference. Particularly in video of course
fta
11 months ago |I’m not sure I would believe DigitalCameraInfo’s claim on the DR. DXO’s DR for E-P2 is 10.4, these guys are saying 5.19 for E-P3??? hmmm… I dunno… so a %50 drop on the newer sensor? Something is not right…
Just checked the NEX5 and the numbers are all over the map on DigitalCameraInfo and way off from DXOs.. I’ll skip DigitalCameraInfo opinion on this for now.
Ahem
11 months ago |They both could be right, but they are using different definitions of DR – there are numerous ways to define and calculate it.
MP Burke
11 months ago |If you want to study the sensor performance then a more rigorous comparison ought to use the same lens at the same aperture on each camera. Looking at two of their photos at 100%, the E-P3 did seem to be revealing more detail, and I tend to wonder if that is a consequence of the jpeg processing in the Panasonic.
agent00soul
11 months ago |Olympus jpeg processing is second to none, so that’s very likely. But it’s the end results that counts. If it looks good – it IS Good.
Dummy00001
11 months ago |Gotta vote for the G3: EVF, flip LCD and lower price.
E-P3′s list is slightly shorter: IBIS and (probably? by how much?) faster AF.
pbinla
11 months ago |I voted with checkbook (well, actually my credit card). I was waiting for the Olympus to come out, and after it did I decided to buy the G3. In the real world I expect to face lower light situations, and super bright light (where the EVF will be important) more often than “just right” light. That, the movable screen and price points combined to sell me on the G3. Used it this weekend for the first time and am very happy so far.
Raist3d
11 months ago |Jpegs tests are not the way to show real dr of the camera, nor it’s real resolution, though it’s a valid result for testing the out of
Camera jpeg results.
rik
11 months ago |Add to the E-P3:
– full remote multi-flash control
– tiltable EVF
– smaller form factor (especially with the EVF removed)
Pablo
11 months ago |:>
:>
Funny, now objective reviews sound like me a few days ago. Are you gonna call them trolls, too?
Fish
11 months ago |Nope, nothing in these rewiews sounded anything like you Pablo : )
Unless I missed the part of the review where they concluded ‘NEX sensor rules, m4/3 is crappy garbage, and silica glass lenses are better than the plastic toy lenses of today’ (all conclued without the benefit of comparisons).
Olympius
11 months ago |Well there Pablo, you were right. But as long as you don’t ever use any of the other mirrorless cameras that are out there, or DSLR’s for that matter, I’m sure the E-P3 output will look fantastic…compared to itself.
And that’s what happens in the land of Olympus: Olympus users, sadly, are highly allergic to any other camera brands, and don’t want to hear about any IQ or DR improvements that might impede on their fantasy world.
And I speak as one who’s been in the land of Olympus for sometime.
But it doesn’t really matter, people will still flock to the E-P3 and other Pen’s because they look cool, and they are tiny. It’s only nerds like us who care anything about comparisons.
Olympius
rik
11 months ago |Actually, they don’t sound at all like you. You sound like a screeching one-note troll.
Pablo
11 months ago |Coool. I like the word nerd. I take it as a compliment.
It still amazes me, how the once, progressive Oly managed to put out three cameras with the same sensor performance as two years ago, when the technology was lagging in performance allready then !O
And… maybe, the EP3 looks cool, but that’s about it. The NEX is lighter, handles better, shoots faster and I rather don’t want to go into the IQ topic again, do I? :>
Dudes, seriously. Don’t be stupid and don’t shell out such enormous amounts of money for something that gives you pictures like the EP1 from two years ago!
Olympius
11 months ago |There are only two things that prevent me from getting a NEX: 1. no viewfinder 2. It’s made by Sony.
Other than that, it really does have very nice IQ. But I’ll be much more interested in the NEX 7, as well as whatever Samsung is cooking up.
But for now, I’m very happy with the IQ I get from Lumix. No, the colors are not as good as Olympus, but that’s easy enough to fix in post.
Olympius
Nico Foto
11 months ago |Looking forward for the NEX 7 as well, but they also need to do something with their lenses line up. Bring 24mm, 50mm and 90mm equivalent compact fastish primes, and a camera body with some physical controls (and i’m not asking for Canon 1D controls, just a thumbwheel and a couple of buttons and a PASM selector) and it could be a real threat to m43…
x
11 months ago |They already have a (crappy but cheap, available as a kit) 24mm equivalent. But the missing 50mm and 90mm is deal breaker for me.
Moreover, being Sony (see what they did to George Hotz) it’s also a big, huge cons to me (no, I don’t care about the PS, but I wonder if they would remotely brick *my* if they would not like what I’m doing with it, and thus I am *very* reluctant to jump in that boat).
Last, but not least, flange distance is larger, so that would always mean larger lenses without any benefit (larger lenses are also necessary for the larger sensor, but that does have a benefit, right?)
x
11 months ago |I mean:
if they would remotely brick *my* CAMERA
(sorry for forgetting such an important word
)
bonzoo
11 months ago |If only NEX had a better lens lineup…
frosti7
11 months ago |Peaking and MF, thats the way nex
Nico Foto
11 months ago |Yes, peaking looks like a great useful technology they have incorporated in NEX cameras…plus, the APS-C sensor gives them economies of scale, since they use the same sensor for sony nex, alpha, nikon and pentax dslr.
Zaph
11 months ago |Peaking is necessary on NEX because the native lenses suck ass and everyone is using old manual lenses.
Olympius
11 months ago |No kidding about the lack of lenses for NEX….I think soon they’ll have released more NEX cameras then they have lenses. Yet another reason to take a pass on NEX, unless you have a large collection of legacy lenses you are wanting to use with it.
But I must admit, in regards to using legacy glass on a mirrorless camera, the NEX makes for a better platform than micro 4/3, thanks to that nice sensor and more accommodating 1.5 crop factor. At least your wide angles will still be somewhat wide on that camera. Mount an old 24mm film lens on 4/3, and you get a rather mundane 48mm standard lens. But if you are really into legacy telephotos, 4/3 is the way to go….an old 135mm f.2.8 lens, as common as dirt back in the days of 35mm film, can become a neat little 270mm f.2.8 equivalent on 4/3.
Olympius
mountainwalker
11 months ago |mFT is approx. half the senor size of NEX. Therefore, if we just could scale an existing mFT lens to be suited for NEX, what would be the weight? sqrt(2)^3 = 2.83. In other words, 1 kg of mFT glass in your bag or 2.83 kg of NEX glass, that’s the question — for me. I want to carry around my equipment without the help of sherpas. Actually, I’m still using mirror-FourThirds with quite a lot of great lenses and I’m not going to “upgrade” to mirrorless for a while. Hoping for a new E-xx to appear soon!
mountainwalker
11 months ago |Sorry for the typo! Must read ‘sensor’ size.
Frederick Hew
11 months ago |huh??
lens size depends on so many factors having to do with lens design and sensor design – including (but not only) registration distance, max aperture, the diffraction index of the glass used, the sensor’s ability to correct for light hitting it at oblique angles (by means of offset microlenses or other technology)…
since you are using 4/3 (reflex), you probably do not really need to be reminded of that as the m4/3 lenses are about half the size of their traditional reflex counterparts. if you are not convinced take a look at leica m lenses or, better yet, large format lenses (4*5, 8*10).
agent00soul
11 months ago |Pablo, this is an m4/3 forum. If I wanted to read about nex, I would go to a nex forum. I visit this forum because I have decided AGAINST the nex. And what I do with my money is none of your business.
Anonymous
11 months ago |Pablo, i don’t know if you also take actually photos, but it makes only little difference if you shoot with an older camera or a new one, besides the fixation on mp and iso. You seem rather to concentrate on warning people about the gear they should or shouldn’t buy. In the end it makes totally no difference which gear you use, that is if you are an open minded person who also happens to know how to use a camera
Nick Clark
11 months ago |NEX handles better? Um, right…
Sohl
11 months ago |Dear Olympius and Pablo.
If you realy think of olympus users as being so single minded and unreflecting, then I actually cannot understand, why you feel so compelled to spend so much time and energy in this forum.
You could, as an alternative, let them use this dedicated site, as constructive as it eventualy will turne out, for what ever reasons for choosing m43 , everyone might have.
sohl
Anentropic
11 months ago |So the new-design sensor only improves the AF speed, IQ is still stuck in the past. shame, I was quite excited about these!
EyeAmLegend
11 months ago |Thanks to Pablo I now know to never look at the NEX system. Thanks for saving me time and money Pablo.
David
11 months ago |I’m looking at the images and simply do not agree that the images from the G3 are any better than the E-P3.
Look at the first pair of the pizza stands.
The ceiling in the upper left is far better with the E-P3 than the G3.
The dress pic shot at 1600, the Olympus is just better, on color and sharpness. Both are pretty sucky with noise.
The pair of images below the pizza stand. Just look at the sky, the highlight detail on the Olympus is clearly better. What fringing I see can be easily corrected in post processing. And both cameras have fringing issues.
Now look at the red sculpture images. Even the writer claims better detail on the Olympus despite the higher ISO and lower resolution.
I’ve used Lumix products far more than I have Olympus, but for you guys to say that the G3 is clearly better, you must not be looking at the same images.
I would like to see a more structured test and compare the RAW images taken with better glass than the kit lenses. Hopefully we’ll see that soon
Ben Y
11 months ago |So much for them working to improve DR and noise handling.
cbr09
11 months ago |This is not a simple question of better or worse. As high iso the EP3 does not seem to look as good as the G3. However look at the G3 and EPL3 comparison at ephotozine of the graffiti wall. This is at low iso and the G3 has both blown highlights in the clouds and the black mesh fence retains no detail. The EP3 does better in both areas with good retention of the cloud form and very nice detail on the fence. Now it may be that the G3 has more to offer in raw – but it looks to me that the EP3 is better than I’d get with the EPL2 and than the G3 in this situation – so there may be improvements in DR at the low isos – and if that is where you shoot much of the time it may be a meaningful improvement.
In general both cameras have very good IQ – and personal preference for ergonomics may be as much as a factor since both will give you good pictures. For some the G3 is ideal – for others it may be just to big to go in their jacket pockets and therefore may not be there when the photo is to be taken. I can’t take seriously anyone saying either camera is rubbish or a joke.
Thevoiceoverman
11 months ago |Big +1
Remember when the first Leica 25mm F1.4 shots came out? Some of them gorgeous. First question on everyone’s lips? What camera was used? As I recall it was the venerable GF1.
If any of those photos in the comparison were printed alone, unlabelled, nobody would be able to tell you WHICH camera they came from.
End of.
Joey
11 months ago |Pablo having read many of your comments it’s seems to me that you are deeply concerned with the brands of cameras that people use, does this extend to other areas of your life as well? When people walk past wearing levi jeans do you pull them to one side and explain how skinny khaki’s are what they should be wearing or the driver in a cadillac that he should have really gone with a BMW?
Pablo
11 months ago |Too much amateur psychoanalysis…
I don’t care about the brand. When I picked my E-410 I wanted a small, light DSLR. Then, the EP1 came out, and it was unrivalled. Then I found another successor that matched my needs. As I was deciding between the Samsung NX and NEX, the better sensor and smaller body had won.
And, regarding your brand theory… I am a practical utilitarist and I don’t care about them. I bought myself a Dacia Duster because it’s utility/price performance was the best among new cars with larger wheels and higher suspension. So please, leave that autoprojection based pseudo psychoanalysis be and rather have something to eat…
Wt21
11 months ago |But what kind of loser hangs around the sites of brands they don’t even use?
Ardi GF2
11 months ago |@ WT21: +1 Sir. Touche !
YouDidntDidYou
11 months ago |interesting thread on dpreview about how often people shoot at ISO 3200 and above http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1041&message=38831690&changemode=1
Eric
11 months ago |I wish more reviews would point out the fact how little ISO3200 and above is actually needed after bashing a camera for having poor ISO3200 performance. It’s kind of like a car review site bashing a car for being unstable when traveling over 150mph. That’s a bad thing, but who drives that fast?
If my camera were capable of really clean ISO3200+ would I use that range more? Perhaps. However I am not an indoor sports photographers, I simply rarely ever need ISO3200+. A sharp f/2 lens and clean ISO800 can cover pretty much anything I need.
x
11 months ago |The fact that you don’t use it, doesn’t mean that others don’t. Even with P&S, about 40% of my images are ISO1600. Another 30% is 400 or 800. Sure, noise-wise they look crappy, but that’s the kind of shooting style I have (natural, indoor light, not crappy
)
Sure, many people would complain about everything, even features they never used. But that applies to everything: fps, ISO, DR, number of buttons, color of the body, font used for the name of the camera or the lens, the you name it.
Most complains are just made to waste time (see a couple of forum users in this thread
) but *some* are meaningful, regardless dpreview statistics
Eric
11 months ago |You’re a perfect example of why I wish review sites wouldn’t harp on and on about noise above ISO1600. People that need ISO6400, such as yourself, know they need it. However, I still wager that the vast majority of people rarely miss shots due to lack of clean ISO3200+. So I hate that reviews might possibly turn a beginner off from a camera because it can’t match a Nikon D3s in low light.
As far me, I have plenty of handheld night time street shots that are sharp enough to make very large prints taken at ISO800 & 1600 (amazing what shake reduction + f/2-2.8 can do), so I know that’s all I ever “need”. To me the biggest advantage of having good ISO3200+ is that it will allow cheap f/5.6 glass to perform better in low light. So I understand that for those that don’t like primes (for reasons I’ll never understand
).
ha
11 months ago |> That’s a bad thing, but who drives that fast?
If it goes so fast it has to be stable. Cars like Jaguar E1 killed to many people
Per
11 months ago |This is a jpg comparison and this is an area where Olympus always shines. This is a comparison of jpg-engines rather than the real camera IQ. RAW comparisons are a lot more interesting – at least for me who shot 100% RAW
But I am biased: Just picked up my G3….
Compared to E-P1/GF1 it is a lot better to work with. Housing is small, but ergonomi is great. Feels very natural to wotk with. No unintentional change of settings (as with E-P1). Much more stable to hold. Better control of where sharpness really is. Much more better control over image composition. (lots of this is thanks to the EVF, but also due to a better LCD resolution.
AF is faster than E-P1/GF1 but even more important, more accurate. Ever tried to focus a grass-straw with E-P1? If it is quite dark, focusing is slow and accurate.
Nikon D300 f.i., has an even better ergonomi, but is very heavy to carry around between shootings.
Robbie
11 months ago |Of course you picked up a G3 cuz E-P3 is not yet available. LOL
Per
11 months ago |I decided after reading about what E-P3:: It is overpriced and with poor handling. The E-PL3 being a far better compromize if I had to buy an Olympus
YouDidntDidYou
11 months ago |interesting thread on dpreview about how often people shoot at ISO 3200 and above with micro four thirds http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1041&message=38831690&changemode=1
frosti7
11 months ago |didyoudidntyou, and what if the ISO3200 was the same IQ as ISO 400? how many peeps would shoot high iso’s then?
Milos Janata
11 months ago |How often can You get a good photo at ISO 3200 and 4/3 camera?
quiquelbola
11 months ago |An interesting and no profesional ep3+12.2 (really good at least for me) review.
http://robinwong.blogspot.com/2011/06/olympus-e-p3-review-pudu-wet-market.html
Now with the new set of cams from Olympus and Panasonic, thing are becoming really interesting,. For me is time to spend some money in lenses, keep my beloved ep1 and wait for the semi pro models from both companies. I really hope a L1 stile from pana and a solid RF from OLY.
frosti7
11 months ago |Excellent read, althou thats more of a personal experience, hands-on, then a review,
One thing got me puzzeld, the author claims that DR is improved, yet most of the shots show significant highlight blowouts and nasty roll-off transitions
Pablo
11 months ago |and… noise in the shadows, that just keeps on hiding thanks to the resized images… from what I see, is just EP1 pictures with a new lens…
Olympius
11 months ago |Robin Wong writes a fun, interesting “review” — but he’s an Olympus fanboy at heart, and it shows very obviously in his writing.
However, from what I’ve seen personally, NR and DR have both actually taken a step backward from the old Panasonic 12mp sensor that’s been around since the Olympus E-30, so I too wonder what Robin is talking about in regards to a DR improvement. He might be confusing greater contrast with greater DR…as the E-P3 does seem like it has a different tone curve to bring out contrast. Nothing wrong with that, but hardly an improvement I was looking for.
Anyway, lot of other improvements made to the E-Px series other than IQ, so it might be a worthwhile upgrade for some, I’m sure.
Olympius
Eric
11 months ago |I’ve pretty much stopped paying attention to the main stream review sites these days. I much prefer real world reviews from people like Robin or Steve Huff.
As soon as a review breaks out line graphs and charts I know I’m in for trouble. With a site like DPR I look at their product shots, read their conclusion page, then look at their sample gallery and that’s it.
All large sensor cameras have gotten so good all I need to know is there aren’t any serious flaws with a camera when using it out in the real world (not stuck on a tripod in a lab), at this point I know the IQ is going to be good enough. Reviews from people like Robin Wong are perfect for that.
Ulli
11 months ago |Agree, info from real photographers is preferred by me too, instead of the dpreview “labatory”, which is good for specs and product detail shots though. You are also right about all of the large sensors being able to get good results, it shouldn’t matter for most of us which camera to use, unless you have very specific needs, or your client insist of haven the latest stuff of whats possible. Its too bad this page sees some visitors who have nothing to add except for creating some annoying discussions about brand vs brand, but thats something to be expected.
Ahem
11 months ago |Yep, exactly what I’m doing as well. I’d like to add Luminous Landscape as well there.
I do rely on DXOmark for RAW performance, as pretty much everyone tests with non-standardized ways, eyeballs the results, or worse yet, draws conclusions from JPEGs
SteveD
11 months ago |It’s a bit misleading to think this way. Most of us learned photography when 800 was fast and just don’t try to take pictures at high iso. In addition, many “auto-iso” settings won’t go to 3200 by default. Walk around Disneyworld at night with a camera that can extend its auto-iso range to iso 3200 and you’ll get a lot of high iso shots.
Eric
11 months ago |If a person is taking photos on auto everything mode then they have more to worry about than noise in their photos. If they haven’t taken time to learn something as basic as ISO settings chances are they also don’t know the first thing about composition. People of that ilk can get perfectly acceptable 800px wide Facebook photos from just about any camera. Noise doesn’t ruin a photo, but poor composition sure does.
Binky
11 months ago |G3 my choise
dko22
11 months ago |as usual, a meaningless jpeg comparison. Come on, a GH2 RAW file has better DR and even high ISO noise (processed in something decent like LR3 or Silkypix 5) than the D5100 jpgs, to choose a camera often compared to the GH2 or G3, according to my quick tests. Allow the D5100 RAW and it can even do decent ISO6400 if the light’s not too bad. As for resolution –the Panny JPG’s aren’t within a mile of the RAW files (can’t compare here to the 5100 as I only had its crappy kit lens for testing but anyway this is of course about Oly)
I’ve nothing at all against folk who prefer to use JPEG for whatever reason but when you want to evaluate a camera’s IQ, you don’t want to start by crippling it. Is it really relevant who wins the 100m one legged race? Sorry but I’m getting fed up with all this… And if Oly really haven’t even changed their sensor then they could be out of it for quite a while.
Anyway, the GH2 will do me quite happily for another couple of years unless there’s a dramatically improved new sensor generation. I could never go back to a mirror camera –liveview has just too many advantages. And Oly users who love Oly JPGS will continue to be happy as Olympius says and who am I to stop the party
ArKersaint
11 months ago |I think the comparison is somewhat biaised : for example, when they say “EP3 has very good detail in the darker brown shades of rust on the sculpture”, you can find that the focus is in fact on the trees on the EP3 (which logically drives also to less purple fringing)
ArKersaint
11 months ago |Sorry: please read “on the G3″ for the focus on the trees
explorer76
11 months ago |yawn – another one of the boring jpeg comparisons
lets wait for raw support to become available and then have a proper comparison
Low Budget Dave
11 months ago |These are really two different markets. Panasonic is trying to make a really tiny Nikon D5100, and Olympus is trying to make a really huge Canon S95.
SLOtographer
11 months ago |Not that I am defending the EP3, but if they are comparing jpegs, it would have been nice of them to try the different jpeg modes. Otherwise they are also just comparing the standard settings. It appears Oly went for punchy, warm, contrasty setting for their standard (“Natural”) setting.
The more I read, the more I lean towards a GH2 for the successor to my G1. (I also have an E5, which I find is an excellent camera.)
Bob B.
11 months ago |I am a little confused about what I was looking at? On the ePhotozine site….are all the image comparisons jpegs…. I looked and looked but I did not see a specification in the text?
If so…I say FOUL. Show me the Raw files if I have to make a comparison.
I cannot judge the capability of these two cameras by how they render their jpegs???????????
If all of the images are jpegs…the camera comparison is totally meaningless to me.
Mr Hipsta
11 months ago |Now why didn’t they put a built in EVF in the flagship. No viewfinder – no buy!
Olympius
11 months ago |I find it amazing that there are so many who think that the error of the E-P3′s JPEGs are all going to go away once you see the RAW files, as if that’s just going to make everything OK. It’s not.
As an Olympus owner, the JPEG’s out of camera are always better than what you can get from RAW. The RAW files don’t show their stuff until you apply a bit of post-processing to them…just to get them up to JPEG standards, and then you can have it and play with them anyway you want, as long as you keep in mind you only have about one stop of lee-way in highlights and shadows…not that much really.
In other words, looking at the RAW files isn’t going to help….if they can’t get their JPEG’s right out of camera, which seems to be the case in this particular instance, the RAW files aren’t going to help.
Olympius
David
11 months ago |But the Olympus JPGs are clearly better than the G3 JPGs. Take a close look at them side by side or read my earlier post.
I still want to see the RAW comparison.
Bob B.
11 months ago |The Jpegs are simply the Olympus and Panasonic “INTERPRETATIONS” of the Raw Files. What the hell is the matter with everyone here.
The only way to compare the two cameras is to compare the raw data.
Bob B.
11 months ago |BTW….I own a GF1…AND I agree that the Olympus jpegs look better than the G3′s…but…that doesn’t give me a real comparison of the two cameras.
Olympius
11 months ago |David & Bob,
There are three things you determine looking at a RAW file: noise, dynamic range, and resolution. To a certain extent, color, but that’s very maleable in a RAW file, and not that significant, expect in regards to who gets better white balance. But let’s add white balance, because it’s nice to have the right in camera.
Here’s what you are going to find in a RAW file comparison between the two cameras, assuming both cameras use the exact same lens, at the exact same settings, to take a photo of the exact same subject, with the exact same lighting:
1. The E-P3 RAW file will be much noisier at all ISO compared to G3.
2. The E-P3 RAW file will have better white balance accuracy compared to the G3.
3. The G3 RAW file will have much better detail resolution than the E-P3 at all ISO’s.
4. The G3 RAW file will have slightly more headroom in regards to DR than the E-P3. But neither will exceed more than one and half stops. Nikon will not have to worry about the D700 being surpassed.
There you have it. I haven’t seen RAW files from either camera, but that’s pretty much how things have been in the Lumix / Olympus world for sometime.
As for the increased resolution that the reviewer is seeing with the E-P3, that’s mostly, if not entirely do to the a very nice Oly 14-42 lens, as compared to the garbage 14-42 that Panasonic uses on the G3. Use the same lens on both cameras, and most likely the G3 will have better resolution. The Lumix cameras have always had better resolution than their Olympus counterparts, it wasn’t until the E-PL1 and E-5 that Oly started closing the gap…but I think you will find that Panny still has the edge here.
Now you can go stare at those RAW files when they come out, and see if my predictions are accurate.
Olympius
Bob B.
11 months ago |Good point Olympius…I completely forgot how bad the Pany 14-42mm lens was….(I own the 14-45mm…how does that stack up to the Olympus kit lens?).
That makes this whole comparison kind of a joke….doesn’t it….jpegs and different lenses?
It would be even better to compare the two cameras in raw with the same prime lens.
Jim
11 months ago |when all is said and done – i have a feeling your right…..
voldenuit
11 months ago |The E-3 and the G3 comparison pics are taken with different ISOs and lenses at different shutter speeds and apertures. A completely useless test. I mean, one of the first comparisons pits a f/2.8 shot against a f/9????
Wt21
11 months ago |Between Pablo and olympius this place us feeling like DPR
Frosti – why all the hatin’?
Can’t you guys let people enjoy their own choices? Sorry you guys are so angry, but life is too short to read such boorish ramblings
Dummy00001
11 months ago |Reminds me of http://xkcd.com/386/
x
11 months ago |+1
ijack
11 months ago |+1
sam
11 months ago |I’ll take GF1 MK II please – with built in EVF, tethered capture with capture one, open SDK, ISO 50 12.5+ stops dynamic range – at expense of high ISO, I don’t need anything more than 1600, if I even need that high – FFS, Hasselblads and Phase Ones don’t go above 800.
Make it a modular sensor if it is a either/or between artists and the high iso/crap light/crap photos gang.
Other things that would be very good – distance scale in firmware, new primes from panasonic – 11/10.5mm (21/22mm equivalent), 45mm f1.2 or faster, a good 28mm and a 24mm equivalent prime, Shift adapter for large diameter glass and uber high res stitches, no logos on the high end cameras and lenses, except discreetness where only the photographer will see them. made of solid metal or the plastic ballistic missiles are made from, with aperture ring and focus stops. Adjustable AA filter, image circle sized sensor with user specified aspect ratios from 1:1 to 2.21:1 (for video too, fuck the HD standards they are clearly not fit for purpose like microsoft web browsers, I don’t and won’t own a flat screen TV – 3D or not the old upsale crap don’t work any more)
Put all this in the right form factor and I’ll buy, put it in the wrong body and you’ll still be scratching heads wondering why upsale to GH series is not working.
/rant.
Thevoiceoverman
11 months ago |Don’t hold your breath…
Steve
11 months ago |There are a lot of upset people here it seems, which is especially stupid cos the tests are about as superficial as they come.
Personally I prefer the Oly shots because of the colours and contrast but I couldn’t say one was better than the other based on these shots.
What I find interesting is that here in HK I can buy a G3, or a 600D or a D5100 with kit lenses all for about the same money, and I expect the E-P3 will be about the same price too. The NEX5/C3 are noticeably cheaper.
http://www.price.com.hk/category.php?c=100002
Thevoiceoverman
11 months ago |And while we bitch about resolution beyond what a hi-def 40 inch screen can show and dynamic range that can’t be printed, some people are just out there taking memorable photos…
http://m.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/jul/06/afghanistan-war-iphone-images?cat=media&type=article
Stopkidding
11 months ago |I think the EP3 has the same fine detail processing as the E5. I rented the E5 recently and its pixel sharpness is breath taking. It resolves much much more detail than its “sibling” 12MP sensor from the E620. Its no wonder that the EP3 has resolution that rivals or betters the 16MP Panasonic sensor!
The news keeps getting better!
Robbie
11 months ago |Well, at least I am glad the battle has come down just the Panny guys vs. the Oly fanboys. There’s still hope for m43, just pick whichever you like…
Scott
11 months ago |idc what shows up while pixel peeping. The Olympus images just look a lot better at face value and thats all that matters
Jan Francois
11 months ago |Comment removed
Jan Francois
11 months ago |I was going to buy a Sony A900 and Zeiss lenses, but now I think I may go for the E-P3 and three of the better primes. When their higher spec unit comes out so much the better but for now, the images I have seen look excellent. -J
shanti
11 months ago |Has anyone seen tests of the EP3 for use in nature photos–wildlife,birding,landscapes with alot of detail..very curious if it would work for that and my budget won’t let me get an E5 just now.Ifr the AF is so fast then maybe its a winner for nature fotogs… also any test on the 70-300mm 43 lens on M43?
TR
11 months ago |While it is a valid argument to discuss which is better, the exciting result for me is that they are both good. I am still using the G1 and both cameras are producing significantly better images. A couple of months ago I was usure if I would continue with m4/3 but given improvements in cameras and great new glass, I am more and more convinced that m4/3 is the way for me.
cbr09
11 months ago |+1 yes – each company has made considerable advances & the whole system looks healthy.
Wt21
11 months ago |Agreed
sioque
11 months ago |Did anybody try the G3 + Zuico 14-54 (I)?
I did, but couldn´t get focus working
Kralin
11 months ago |Really interested into this…
Was it reaaly slow or not working at all?
alvaro
5 months ago |I tried and did not work at all
maitani
11 months ago |all this fanboy talk is good andnice, but let’s be objective foonce, it’s really puzzling what olympus was thinking again with this (2007 tech) sensor, all other specs are so refined, interface, speed, lenses, heck even AF is apparently good. but the core of iq, the sensor, is the letdown of the year, i guess i’ll have to stick with my trusty E-P1 a little longer, until fuji joins the race, or panasonic or olympus deliver a ‘pro’ pen with 2011 sensor tech.
all the talk about DR and colour is so senseless, when all realworld pics look same as they did with the E-P1 some years ago
there is some talk about improved low iso over the E-5, all blah blah, low iso (100 – 320 or so…) was always there with oly cameras, but why does hi-iso even getting worse than on an E-PL1?
the only ‘positive’ about all this is that i can order a 12/2 an stick it on the E-P1 and have fun.
AndyOz
11 months ago |There are lots of great features of both products – the G3 and the E-P3. I think I will have to wait to see the final Raw results from review sites like Dpreview and Imaging Resource before making too many final conclusions about IQ.
The one thing that I think that Olympus needs to address is the IQ with any future advanced Pen/Pen Pro model. Even if there has been an increase in dynamic range with the E-P3, there is still a perception problem that Olympus is using an old tech sensor even if it has been ‘tweaked’. I myself dont mind too much and will probably get an E-P3. The IQ looks pretty good for most of my needs. But there is a perception problem and from the initial IQ tests – high ISO noise is not great.
I think for a Pen Pro model they need to use the Panasonic 16MP sensor- at the very least from a marketing point of view to show that hey guys we are using a new sensor for our top the line Pen. Plus from a performance point of view this sensor seems a bit better at higher ISO. I think Olympus could extract better low ISO performance from this sensor and with their JPEG engine get really good results. 12MP may be enough for most of us – but if it helps marketing and IQ to go to 16MP then why not. Any thoughts?
Dan
11 months ago |Could someone explain what happened to dpreview ? They used to have amazing image samples that showed off/demonstrated a camera’s capabilities, now their galleries and horrible at best.
Dan
11 months ago |The G3 is quite sexy in it’s diminutive size.
Ahem
11 months ago |Amazon bought them and they moved from London to Seattle.
Scott
11 months ago |Olympus has proven that 12 is enough. Its better to process those 12 effectively than to just add smaller inefficient pixels just because it looks better on paper
Dana Curtis Kincaid
11 months ago |““Overall the Olympus PEN E-P3 gives warmer results, while the Panasonic Lumix G3 gives cooler, but also more neutral images.” Err… In RAW? JPG portrait? JPG Natural? JPG Vivid?
Gods I HATE simplististic generalizations.
It’s like saying all Republicans are moronic Beckian sheeple. Oh. Wait. Bad analogy.
Dana Curtis Kincaid
11 months ago |In the past few days here I’ve seen the “stock” of Oly go way up here. Seems like, thankfully, that people like the new PEN models. Hooray. I’ve already pre-ordered an EP-3, and I never do that, but the new primes and ability to use my 12-60 make me happy. A fast 90mm equivalent lens is happiness too. Finally! Fast Primes!!!
Now I’m sure the haters in Kansas or Missouri or wherever they post from will keep hating and wishing for CaNikon to be the only camera company in the world, but that’s the price we pay for having an Internet that doesn’t have a built-in IQ filter.
Also; I tried a G3 last night, and was REALLY surprised that I actually liked the EVF. I didn’t think I would EVER like a ‘finder that wasn’t optical. Wow.
“New ideas Mr. Scott. We talked.” – Admiral James T. Kirk
Per
11 months ago |If you shoot jpg you probably do not spend much tim post-processing the image. You probably very seldom print larger than A4 and probably mostly view photos on some kind of computer screen. The probably the Olumpus line is the best for you.
If you shoot RAW and think the exposure is just one step in the middle of a process of creating images of your liking – then you probably see the print as the main target , often A3+ size. The the G3 is the best choice!
We can argue a lot about features and evaluation if test images (have we all got hardware calibrated scrrens when we judge?) and different kind of measures (many of them quite silly like DXO). Be honest it is not that big difference. There are many other more important differentiators like lens quality. It is a lot about an imaging process that brings out the best in all steps – leading to an image I find interesting and like to look at
Evaluations like made at Luminous Landscape are more valuable then all theese tests.
I bought the camera that suited my purposes best, not least in terms of usability. I bought a not that expensive housing and will spend more on quality lenses. A G3
Dana Curtis Kincaid
11 months ago |Olymoius “And that’s what happens in the land of Olympus: Olympus users, sadly, are highly allergic to any other camera brands, and don’t want to hear about any IQ or DR improvements that might impede on their fantasy world.”
Actually, child, I’d used lots of different cameras. However, I like small cameras, not giant-white-phallas Canons with a 200mm F4 lens as long as my forearm. I’m quite willing to give up a stop or two of noise or DR or whatever the frak you call it today for a modern equivalent of my old Contax-G system. Small cameras, despite their disadvantages, allow for more artistic freedom and subtlety. Most people don’t need to carry a German 88mm Panzer canon around their necks. Most models and gang-bangers and axe-murderers and motorcycle-club members and children and small-furry-animals would rather not have a lens as big as a Franchi SPAS-12 shoved up their noses.
Dana Curtis Kincaid
11 months ago |Per “If you shoot RAW and think the exposure is just one step in the middle of a process of creating images of your liking – then you probably see the print as the main target , often A3+ size. The the G3 is the best choice!”
A3 is only 11×16. I have no problem getting that out of my E-520. Actually, the E-520 pix look great played back from Flickr on a 42″ Sony HD TV at, what, 133dpi? So, I don’t see your point, Mister Per. Honestly, I don’t have a McMansion with sufficient wall-space to hang lots of prints larger than 11×14, or even 8×10, and I don’t know of ANY magazines being printed today that need an A3 print. So, unless you have a McMansion or an art gallery, what EXACTLY is your intended audience for your prints?
Per
11 months ago |Actually i make photos for My own pleasure! The joy of creation. The end result is à print. All steps, from seing the subject, over postprocess to putting the photo on the Wall are fun, interesting and achallenge. Does Anyone else like my pictures? Sometimes and that is a plus!
SteveD
11 months ago |Most of this is a matter of taste. Most of the posters here are amateurs, which means we shoot for fun. If the E-P3 IQ is good enough, then the design issues become deciding factors. Even if one sensor is better than the other the real question is if it’s better in ways that users actually care about. If you don’t care, then those other guys are “pixel peepers” and “measurebators”. If you have higher expectations for your images then the other folks are “fashionistas”. What some people just don’t get is that even if some property or features is demonstrably better it is still irrelevant to a buying decision if it’s beyond the needs of the consumer.
SteveD
11 months ago |To be even more clear I should have ended with “a particular consumer”.
Andy
11 months ago |Those ePhotozine people need to get their eyes checked. The low ISO pictures clearly show better resolving power of the G3 look at the writing on the beer cans e.g. The EP-3 images are just over sharpened and have lots of artifacts. We shouldn’t be seeing sharpening artifacts at all at low ISO. High ISO photo’s are just dreadful.
It worse than the EP-2 and EP-1 IMO. Now that’s progress!
Dana Curtis Kincaid
11 months ago |Olympius “Nikon will not have to worry about the D700 being surpassed.”
WTF? That’s like saying that a torque wrench won’t be surpassed by a crescent wrench. Your anology is completely fatuous. These are different tools, from different price points, built for different purposes.
jeff
11 months ago |4/3rds newbie here Have some questions on these two cameras. First would the panasonic G-3 be able to use Olympus’ lenses such as the OLYMPUS: ZUIKO DIGITAL ED 9-18mm F4 or the 12-60mm? Or is it like Canikon with each system having their own different lens mount?
Second question the E-p3 allows manual focus in video are there other video benefits towards either of these models? It sounds like they both display quite a bit of Wobble
Thanks for any insights. jeff
AndyOz
11 months ago |Jeff,
To answer your first question Panasonic G3 can use any Panasonic Micro4/3 lens (obviously) and any Olympus Micro Zuiko lens (micro 4/3 lens) – they are labelled M.Zuiko lenses. There is a 9-18mm M.Zuiko lens which will go straight on the G3 lens mount and works great.
If you want to use any existing Olympus 4/3 lenses like the 12-60mm or 9-18mm which are designed for Olympus dSLRs like the E-620, E-30, E-5 etc then you would need to use an adapter to get them to fit the lens mount. I am not sure how much the adapters cost – whether its in the range of $100-200. There is a Panasonic and an Olympus adapter available. The lenses do work but apparently the Auto focus speed is very slow because these lenses are designed for phase detection dSLRs, not for the contrast detection AF system in the G3. But they work fine optically and some users get very good results. Others also point out that these lenses can be a bit big on a small micro 4/3 body like a Pen or a GF1. Depends on the user.
The thing to remember is that Micro 4/3 lenses have a different flange mounting diameter than regular 4/3 lenses.
Sorry I cant help you with the second question.
Jeff Wolfram
11 months ago |Hi Andy, thank you very much for that informative reply. I had been reading a lot of info now that I am very interested in one of these two cameras and was obviously getting confused, your answer helped greatly clearly that up. Thanks, jeff