DxO Mark just posted the new tests. Check out the comparison between the E-PL1, E600 and the Panasonic GF1. There is no big difference …in fact they are all equal.
P.S: Focus Numerique posted some Olympus E-PL1 RAW samples.
DxO Mark just posted the new tests. Check out the comparison between the E-PL1, E600 and the Panasonic GF1. There is no big difference …in fact they are all equal.
P.S: Focus Numerique posted some Olympus E-PL1 RAW samples.
*Please also check your spam folder if you don't get the confirmation mail. And mark the mail as "non-spam" to see the future newsletter.
2 Responses
Another meaningless set of numbers from Dxo Labs. All their graphs show the EPl1, EP1, E620, and E30 virtually identical. Then they put a number next to noise performance of the EPL1, 487, like it means something. The 620 gets 536, about 10% better, even though all the test photos show that the EPL1 looks quite a bit better than the 620 at high iso. And the E600, identical to the 620 except for a few art filters, gets a noise score of 541, even better. Meanwhile, the poor EP2 gets only 505 for a score, but still supposedly better than the EPL1 (unless of course you actually look at photos instead of silly numbers that don’t tell you anything).
DxO Labs is measuring RAW image quality. All these (m)4/3 cameras have basically the same sensor, so it’s normal they get about the same score.
The better high ISO performance of the EPL1 is due to better noise reduction algorithm in JPEG engine, nothing more.