43 Rumors

The test shows the expected results: NEX clearly better than the others, but the GH1 is closer to NEX than the rest of cameras (G1 sensor based ones and the NX10).

Hoping that GH2 (GH3?) will find itself even much closer to NEX (if not even better).

GH1 is still the best MFT camera, and yes not all that far from the NEX with the larger sensor. Can’t wait to see what they do with the GH2/3!

Based on these pictures only, I don’t see a clear difference between the GH1 and the NEX5. The NEX pictures look slightly cleaner but at the price of details (see the fur on the forehead, 1600–6400 ISO), whereas the GH-1 noise is greener (which can be more disturbing for the eye, but not for post-processing).
So my ranking would be:
1°) GH1 and NEX5 ex-aequo, depending on personal taste (more details or cleaner)
2°) NX10
3°) EP1, EPL1, GF1, G2 ex-aequo

Whatever the choice between GH1 and NEX5, remember the generation of the sensors: GH1 is spring 2009, NX10 is winter 2010, NEX5 is spring 2010. Even if one can like the NEX5 output better, Panasonic really had a wonder with the GH1 sensor.

To me, the most interesting conclusions are:
– opposite to most of the “experts” sayings, the best m43 sensor clearly outperforms an average APS sensor with a FULL generation difference (GH1 vs NX10).
– even more, the best m43 sensor is not put to shame and might even rival with one of the best APS sensors of the FOLLOWING generation (GH1 vs NEX5). THAT’s completely new and wonderful news!!!

Panasonic made a wonder with the GH1 sensor; too bad it didn’t put this great sensor in other bodies (might be too expensive to produce for the price-tag of GF1 and G2/G10). The next Panasonic sensor will be very interesting for sure, and these results bring the question: is Sony touching its limit in noise management?

What happened to my post that said the NEX files looked like garbage?

Ok great job
but there is a basical Error

when you compare files converted from RAW format you need to use a proprietary conerter.
Oly did not open to all RAW format information there is a big difference between raw converted with olympus viewer 2 and raw converted with Lightroom 3.2 RC. the difference is substantial.

i tink the best work is to analize jpeg directly produced from cameras.

There is also a difference between images taken with EPL1 and EP2 and other cameras (you moved tripod ?)

If as stated in text “color noise reduction were disabled entirely” on than NX5 is the worst camera for photographer ever. There is lot’s of noise reduction done witch can’t be switched off.

This isn’t only a problem for “noise reduction” (as noise Reduction on PC can be better), but the biggest problem is if you whant to correct lens problems like chromatic aberation. (this is imposible to make after noise reduction is done ….)

New York Times has the same conclusion:”The hybrid camera market is still young. Micro Four Thirds is still a baby standard (only two companies), Samsung still has just one camera. Sony’s hybrid is generally superior to both.” See http://nyti.ms/9p6pQs Another basical error? haha Face the fact.

All those tests are biased toward nerd photographers with use patterns significantly different from big majority of users. This test is a bit better – use of kit lens but still: no serious comparison of JPG engine and use of 3rd party expensive RAW converter.

I want REAL WORLD USE comparison: kit lens, JPG and/or producent RAW processor.

No one offers such test: this one use kit but no JPG and RAWs processed in LR. Dpreview tests JPGs but with best lenses available and 3rd party RAW processor.