[shoplink 23568]
[/shoplink]
The link is here: http://dpreview.com/reviews/olympusep3/ They liked the new features a lot and almost a perfect PEN. Handling and autofocus are superb. The only real “problem” is the aging sensor. It doesn’t bring any real improvement over the [shoplink 18844]Olympus E-PL2[/shoplink]. The camera earns a Silver Award and an overalls core of 74%.
I am just reading the review and will update this post soon 🙂
In Stock status:
The Black E-P3 with 17mm lens is in Stock at BHphoto (Click here).
The Silver E-P3 with 17mm lens is in Stock at BHphoto (Click here) and Amazon (Click here).
The White E-P3 with 14-42mm lens is in Stock at Amazon (Click here).
Not a Micro Four Thirds camera but a camera many hear do like. The Fuji X100 is now in Stock at Amazon (Click here)…with 12 months financing option 🙂 (found via Noisycamera).
81 Responses
The conclusion is mostly in line with other reviews
If the sensor is the same, why would anyone choose the e-p3 over the panasonic G3? Just because they’re allied doesn’t mean they can ignore each other. Competition is supposed to strengthen the m43 brand, not leave olympus in the dust.
“If the sensor is the same, why would anyone choose the e-p3 over the panasonic G3?”
Because a camera is more than its sensor. Much more.
+1
If you like EP3 handling, form factor and IBIS there is no alternative.
But they lost me as a customer with old sensor. Will keep my GF1 for some time more.
I will buy (most probably) E-P3, even when I know it has the same senzor.
I am convinced after I saw leaked presentation (noticed here some time ago) and video with tauch AF.
There is at least 5 improvements which are worth the price.
I sold my EPL-1 and E620 and E-P3 even after knowing that it was same old sensor. I loved the images the EPL-1 produced. The EP-3 improves the image quality, adds more detail and much improved handling.
Somewhere down the line, all cameras were reduced to their HIGH ISO settings. Its like evaluating the performance of a car based solely on the 0-60 time…..
agreed. but it seems like G3 isn’t lacking anywhere else either (swivel screen, EVF, just to name a few), and is $200 cheaper as well.
every commercial ad I see in Asia puts EP3, GF3,& NEXC3 together. and no one’s going to buy EP3 other than fanboys because the rest two are half the price
i have t admit that i’m doing preety fine with my zenit-11,
i have an aperture&shutter control, plus a big viewinder for MF
But i can change the sensor (film) from negative to slide film, the e-p3 cant change its film (sensor)
So i think the sensor, while not the only important factor, should be one of the most important consideration’s in a camera, and sorry, a 2009 sensor doesn’t cut it for me
How true, how very true. (Edit. Reply to sneye)
The EP-3 is overpriced, but it is a superb camera nonetheless. And the IQ/JPEGS, stability control still give it an edge over the Panasonic bodies – for still images. For video, the Panasonic is better.
@sneye
Bingo.
Below ISO1600 (where the vast majority of photos are taken) the E-P3’s IQ is more than good enough. Unlike Panasonic (and I own a Panasonic), the PEN’s are simply fun to use and inspire me to use them often. I’m still waiting for a model with a built-in EVF, but when they do create one I won’t hesitate buying another Olympus body, even if it’s with the same old sensor….well, unless there is an interchangeable lens Fuji X100 on the market by that point 😉
…and it doesn’t crash every 12 minutes, and is slow, and buggy.
Too bad really. The X100 is gorgeous, has great controls, and has fantastic image quality. All that hindered by lousy software.
Honestly, I have been waiting for my X100 to crash on me. It hasn’t yet after about 1000 photos. It has its quirks, and at first they were really annoying, but once you learn to use the camera they fall into the background. Basically, I think the learning curve of the camera is higher than my E-p2’s was, but once learned, the gratification is greater, and the picture quality better. I think one big problem is that most reviewers didn’t spend enough time learning the camera, though I do agree that the software issues, especially the ridiculous travel for manual focus, should have been addressed before launch.
Hmmm… as I understand, one of the key features of these cameras – touch AF/Touch shutter – is much better implemented on G3. So I simply cannot see why you consider E-P3 so fun (as opposite to G3).
Not speaking about swiveling screen. As yesterday I managed to make great photos from a concert by rising the camera over the mass of heads in front of me, I consider shooting with G3 very-very funny. Just try to do that with an E-P3…
I fully agree. The camera is more than its sensor but obviously Panasonic does´t share their last sensors with Olympus. A possible contractual agreement is keeping Olympus from sensor shopping elsewhere. According to this agreement Olympus can design their own sensors but Panasonic must be the manufacturer of them. Everything is clear, Panasonic is trying to take advantage of this but I guess next Olympus camera will sport a new sensor. I think TruePIC VI is the corner stone of this camera. Can you imagine an E-P3 with a Fuji Fourthirds sensor and a TruePIC VI engine? 🙂 I am counting the days! Bye Panasonic. I am almost sure Fuji will join MicroFourthirds in a near future.
Fuji will never join Four Turds, or Micro Four Turds
OMG, did you see what he did there… thirds… turds… he made a poo pun, that is soooooooo clever…
+2
First I would like to apologize for passable English, because I am Brazilian and my native language is Portuguese.
I have two observations to make about two points of the review …. I do not agree.
12 megapixel sensor is sufficient for the vast majority of users, who makes reproductions day on very large? Above 100×50 cm?
ISO quality …. in the dpreview own photos and especially compare the images of the imaging resource (http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM) olympus performance is excellent and e-p3 ISO 1600 is clearly better than DSLR cameras renowned as the D7000, the photos on dpreview site are not consistent with the conclusion itself.
Well, the lack in sensor improvement means will be keeping my €1.100 in my pocket until they get a new camera out…
And it better have a built in EVF…
What was the rationale again for Olympus not to use the G3 sensor in te EP3?
Maybe Panasonic wouldn’t sell it to them? Just a guess.
Panasonic made a new sensor because they had to. When they used the same sensor, Olympus produced better pictures at every iso. Olympus feels that the maximum usable resolution for this sensor size right now is 12mp. They might be right. If you compare the pictures from the EP3 with the pictures from the G3, the Olympus still stands up to Panasonic, and sometimes beats it.
Dpreview compared it :”Overall the E-P3’s results are very good for a 12MP sensor, but naturally it can’t quite match the resolution offered by the likes of the 16 MP Panasonic G3.”
I know, it’s not all about sharpness
Well, of course it can’t match resolution. After all, if a bigger sensor gives you anything at all is more MPs and more crop room. Even then, you can’t always significantly better sharpness.
Why did anyone buy the Nikon F3, the EM and the FG did have the same “sensor”
Why did anyone buy the first Leica M, it had the smallest “sensor” of all good kameras?
Why does anyone buy the Canon D7? In most tests the E550 makes the better pictures.
Why does anyone buy the i-phone? Many ohter phones has better kameras with better sensors and a card slot and don’t need stupid i-tunes………
Because you have to buy the whole item and you have to like it and you have to see the results.
you can´t even get the name right…. canon 7D… not D7.
and you really have no clue about what you are talking here.
Jajjajajj the names doesn’t matter , the real thing is oly gives me than panasonic , sensor this sensor that, if the real important thing is the sensor my 5D mark II , ( which has a full frame sensor) is better than any panasonic camera , i have my 5DMKII with a 17-85mm ultrasonic lenses, is easy to use but is a monster ,it needs to be use in manual for a 100% features, uses a stabilized optics and it has really beautifull colors, but with mi Epl1 , is all really simple, i have and adaptador and the mythic 12-60mm SWD , and really rocks, i love the colors from my olympus, is so damn easy to use , so light,the stabilization system is great,i can put lenses from my nikon d90 , canon and all and it gets stabilized,insted of. Being a small camara , i have tons on options , and the more important thing, i love the photography ,i cannot relay only in tecnology , the most important thing is the person who shots with the camera not the camera itself , sure i would buy an epl3 , real soon , i tested and is really great , the digital multiplicator is an awesome idea,speedest focus , oled screen, IBIS,customization,tiny,well contruction of the body,35 af points,full hd video,lovely colors , with the dramatic tone i have HDR pics , cross process , and diorama remains me a lomo camera , total kelvin regulation , and etc etc etc etc etc,
I respect and love panasonic , but im a photographer, and olympus gives me what i want not only tecnology , new life to my olders lenses and incredible usability and colors ^^
I really want the E-P3, but will stick with my EPL1 until a new sensor is available. I have the same question as starr – not sure why they didn’t bless the E-P3 with the G3 sensor, given the price point it sells for, and re-use the old sensor in the bottom of range E-PM1? I understand Panny wants exclusivity for their GH2 multiaspect ratio sensor, but the G3 sensor would have been nice.
If you want good results, like the EP-3, but don’t want to pay the price, buy the EPL-2….it is worth every penny – get em while you can. The grip and ergonomics are excellent, the IQ is on par with EP-3. The EP-3 has better dials, controls, a nicer albeit heavier body, better screen and faster autofocus. That said, my EPL-2 rarely has autofocus issues, the screen is good and the pictures come out much like when using an Olympus DSLR.
Agreed. Just bought an EPL2. Great quality, no focus issues at all.
Agreed. If you are more concerned with image quality than style, fast autofocus and improved video, the EPL-2 is a fantastic camera to own. I had one between the E-P1 and my new E-P3. I’m very happy with the E-P3 and to me the improvements justify the price, but the EPL-2 will be a steal once it starts getting sold off :).
Compared to my H-series Hassies, the D-3s or even the 5D mk IIs the thing is a tiny blessing… And the G-12 I carry in my car is brick. The M9 seems absurd for a glorified point and shoot.
As for the sensor (size). Who cares? It truly is the package. No client EVER asks about sensor or file size anymore. And haven’t in maybe 3 or 4 years.
why the dpreview affirms that the sensor is old and the high ISO and IQ is better on G3??? from their tests the high ISO performance of P3 and G3 are almost the same and DR is also very similar???
its seams that for them the Mp count indicates the quality of the sensor?!
It’s the updated dual-processor graphics engine that makes the difference between the EP3 and the EP1/2 and EPL1/2. i think Olympus may just have some better software engineers.
For nearly the same price as the EP3, I’d buy a GH2.
Oh, wait, I already did! 😉
Smart move… should have done that ages ago!
For nearly the same price as the EP3, I’d buy a GH2.
Oh, wait, I already did! 😉
me to 😉
the GH2 is not only better than E-P3, the Oly/Pana system is much more affordable than Nikon Canon , only Pentax can compete with the lens prices and build quality/camera features.
I don’t know what you guys see. When I look at the default competitors (Pana G3, Sony NEX3) on the noise page, I appears to me that the Oympus’ image has more detail retained.
OK there is also more noise but I suppose that this can be removed post-process, if required. Bearing in mind that this is “only the old 12MP sensor” to me the photographic output appeals much mure than the smeared NEX3 or the new 16 MP G3 sensor.
“Bearing in mind that this is “only the old 12MP sensor” to me the photographic output appeals much mure than the smeared NEX3 or the new 16 MP G3 sensor.”
I wouldn’t say that it appeals more, but I do agree that the ‘ageing’ sensor isn’t so much behind the rest at all. Bear in mind that in jpeg the differences up to ISO3200 are pretty small, but in RAW the differences become apparent around ISO1600. Still, that is where most photos should be made anyway, and the difference between the NEX and an E-P3 can be overcome with use of a brighter lens (16mm f/2.8 vs 12mm f/2 is a one EV stop difference).
But there is no denying that the G3 has better RAW performance; I would love to see what Olympus can do with this new sensor. If you combine DPRs enthousiasm for the E-P3 (operations, build, jpeg etc) with their praise for the G3 sensor, you really have a winner.
I had another look in RAW – you are right with the G3 sensor; I somehow got mislead and did not put the different crop into consideration. On a pixel level it still appears that the E-P3 does better.
But even now against the NEX5 the Olympus image retains more detail on the Queen’s head. This must be due to in-camera noise processing of the RAW files.
Must be the worst partner/supplier in history; bastardizes your lens mount to make a product with more mass appeal, and then half cripples you by withholding the better/newer sensors. Hope Olympus manages to find a better vendor. I’ll keep my 800 pounds in my pocket, until they find it.
Why doesn’t Oly just use a Sony APS-C sensor in crop mode (just use the middle portion that corresponds to the 4/3 size)?
Maybe they could even use the extra pixels: multi-aspect, software correction of lens distortion etc.
The situation is similar to CPUs for personal computers: the platform that sells best evolves the fastest. That’s why Apple had to switch to Intel processors. APS-C sized sensor sell best, therefore they evolve the fastest.
But all is not lost: mFT sells better than FT, so mFT is the best thing that could happen to the FT sensor/platform. Now if Oly only could find a nicer/better sensor supplier…
Now I should stop complaining and confess that I use both mFT (GH-2) and FT cameras (E-30) from Pana and Oly and enjoy taking pictures with them very much!
how have they tested autofocus?
the usual testchart shots?
anyway over 800 euros is a bad joke for this camera.
I’m surprised DPReview didn’t say more about the cost in their conclusion. The EP3 is a fantastic camera…for $699. At $899, it’s hard to justify over the EPL2.
@Michael: exactly, you’re spending money to get non-image quality things. The question, especially once the E-PL3 is out, is do those things justify the price bump? Still working on that.
As for all the folk thinking that the G3 sensor would have been a big step forward, I’m not so sure about that. When a company uses the same sensor over and over and keeps tweaking their imaging ASIC, generally you get very fine results out of that process. Nikon had a long run with the Sony 6mp sensor and kept eeking out better JPEGs. And I think we’ve seen Olympus improve at this, too. The problem, of course, is that means nothing to raw shooters.
But the notion some people have that the G3 sensor is something magical that the E-P3 sensor isn’t is over the top thinking. Quantum efficiency is very close between the two and the gross engineering DR numbers I get off them (yes, Panasonic finally shipped my G3 this week, over three months after accepting an order for it) pretty much match DxOMark: less than a half stop between them. I’m still trying to figure out the floor level I’ll tolerate: the G3 sensor does have lower read noise, but what improvement I see in images so far isn’t actually visible at normal print sizes and viewing distances. But I haven’t come up with an optimized raw workflow yet, and won’t for awhile.
The jump in the Sony 12mp to 16mp performance is huge compared to the gains Panasonic has made in about the same time period. The Sony 16mp is about 3 full stops better than the 16mp G3 sensor in gross engineering DR numbers. It’s also over a stop better than the previous Sony sensor.
Thom Hogan: “When a company uses the same sensor over and over and keeps tweaking their imaging ASIC, generally you get very fine results out of that process. Nikon had a long run with the Sony 6mp sensor and kept eeking out better JPEGs. And I think we’ve seen Olympus improve at this, too. The problem, of course, is that means nothing to raw shooters.”
Very possibly a stupid question, but why couldn’t improving processing improve raw files in m43? After all, raw files are software-corrected for distortion on some m43 lenses; couldn’t other improvements be included in the raw files too?
Some companies do that, they deliver “half-cooked” RAW files. See the following article at DxO:
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Insights/Half-cooked-RAW/Noise-reduction
Olympus doesn’t seem to do that. They are a very pragmatic and engineering-oriented company. That’s why I like their products. Unfortunately, reviewers and test sites don’t share that enthusiasm.
+1 Thomas S
Thom,
Good points. You are the first person to really mention this, but after all of the blather about using an old sensor, my eyes really don’t see any difference at all at high ISO’s.
THe fact that I prefer the Olympus JPG output pushed me toward the EP3 ultimately, but people are really underestimating how much the improvement in performance has made a difference in how you view using the camera.
It’s literally like I have a point and shoot sized DLSR.
G3 looks to me like an okay camera, but it is not really geared toward advanced photographers in my opinion. They had a perfect design with the G2(don’t get me started on the GF1) and they just went backward. For apparently no good reason.
Ah well.
The Olympus internal JPEG tests I saw shot with an E-P3 prototype actually showed a bit of backwardsness to high ISO shots: there was a clear destruction of data that I didn’t see in E-P2 JPEGs. I’m still trying to figure out the shipping camera, and my travels mean it will take me awhile to really get to it.
Overall, Olympus tends to prefer a more contrasty, saturated, and slightly non-neutral color result in their JPEGs. That happens to correspond to typical preferred customer tastes, too. My only problem with that is that when you burn that much alteration into the data, it makes it difficult to make changes afterward. I find Olympus JPEGs a little more difficult to post process than Nikon’s, for example. If the target audience is shooting JPEG and not post processing, that’s great.
So far I don’t have the same reaction to the G3 you do. Yes, Panasonic seems to keep backing off of dedicated controls and user-definable buttons, but I really don’t have a big problem with what they did on the G3. It’s a bit odd in shape now, though: thin small body with a large overhanging EVF starts to make the E-P3 external EVF look “okay.” ;~)
“The jump in the Sony 12mp to 16mp performance is huge compared to the gains Panasonic has made in about the same time period. The Sony 16mp is about 3 full stops better than the 16mp G3 sensor in gross engineering DR numbers. It’s also over a stop better than the previous Sony sensor.”
That sure got my attention.
Now, let me get this straight. Olympus does better processing of the output of Panasonic’s sensor than Panasonic does, and the Sony sensor is 3 stops better than Panasonic, when, all things being equal, it should only be about .6 stops better at the same number of pixels. What, exactly, is Panasonic bringing to the party?
Whoa. Slow down. You’re jumping from comments about raw output to comments about processed output.
My comments regarding engineering DR are based upon straight raw data (pre-conversion). Using the same saturation to 1:1 signal-to-noise ratio that DxOMark and most sensor companies use to determine absolute data range, the Panasonic sensors haven’t moved much, maybe a half stop better worst to best. Whether that sensor is in an Olympus or Panasonic body shouldn’t make a difference (it can slightly due to other noise sources, if present, but that doesn’t seem to be a significant issue here).
What you do with the raw data stream in your imaging ASIC is another thing entirely. What I and many others have been saying is that, with the same basic data set, Olympus seems to get more visibly pleasing results. To put that in the crudest way, if one maker were just using basic Unsharp Mask for sharpening and another were using one of the many more sophisticated schemes, such as linear algebra deconvolution, you’d probably see a difference at edges. One could have nasty halos, the other might not.
The imaging ASIC has hardware implementations of quite a few processing bits: demosaic algorithm (which would include spectral application), hot pixel detection, gamma manipulation, contrast curves, saturation/vibrance choices, hue shifting, noise reduction, and sharpening. Every one of those basic things has gone through radical improvement in the last 10 years.
What happened with your friend, who saw a stop of improvement on his E-P3, but then realized everyone else’s camera is equal to the old ones?
Still trying to figure that out. He’s given me a profile of his E-P3 which I’m now looking at. But with my E-P3 I’m not seeing any meaningful difference between it and my E-P2.
Nt
I really don’t care much about the nuances of noise at extreme iso. If I did I’d buy a full frame SLR. I expect the 12MP Olympus sensor to be ‘good enough’. I can already print high quality A2 (at lower iso) from my small sensor XZ-1 and my ageing Canon G7. How many photographers need more capability than that? More important to me in the EP3 is the focussing speed. If it is as good as claimed then its a winner. With fast lenses, stabilisation and quick focussing I would have a capability that exceeds any Leica, film or digital, for the sort of pictures I want to take. By that standard it looks cheap. (I wrote more about my experiences with the XZ-1 and G7 for the Photography is Fun website http://www.mycanong7.com/ )
if i were in the market for a camera, i would hit that.
Be sure to wear a protective filter.
I think all the discussion/argument between the EP3 and G3 is excellent – the whole point (to me anyway) is that Micro Four Thirds offers BOTH 🙂
+1
Yes, the E-P3 is a great but overprized camera.
But early adopters pay every price so it is smart from Olympus to start very high in price. It will drop to realistic 600 Euro for the Body fast I hope.
Price for body-only is already down to 737 Euro in Germany – while the E-Pl3 kit can be preordered for 593 Euro today. So no price-complaints from my side.
The important stuff: look at this photo website featured here some days ago. Most pics were taken with the ancient E-420/450/620 cameras.
You can wait for new sensors, but you cannot wait for photographer skills coming to you at night.
I am not sure I accept DPR’s verdict. T. Hogan’s comments are very illuminating. There is also a KenW user at DPR who argues, that sensors have it a ceiling or at least a phase of diminishing returns, so Oly’s choice might have the right one: improve the processor and don’t push the Mpx count.
I am not into sensor tech, but my feeling is, after reading some technical papers that what you earn at high ISO, say with the 16 Mpx sensor, you lose at base ISO, with more noise.
OK, so you denoise more and get plastic images. That happens even with the 12 Mpx sensor, but it’s easy to correct the NF.
So why kill or half kill a camera because it has an ‘old’ sensor? If the new standard is Sony, please somebody tells me if cropping an APS Sony to 4/3 would get better results, and why.
Panny sensors instead seem to have reached the point of diminishing returns, hence Oly’s decision. Whiners jump to conclusions and say that Panny negated their higher Mpx sensors, but Oly’s motive might have been entirely different.
We don’t see a difference in IQ with the G3, except perhaps at the highest ISO, which is a consumerist issue after all. Do we see photographers shooting toddlers and pets in the living room, lit perhaps by one bulb, after work?
Just to be clear, I don’t agree with the “sensors are at a ceiling” statement, nor do I know anyone working in the sensor creation business who thinks that. On a purely physics-only basis, we’re still grabbing less than half the photons that get to the sensor. There are some clear potential gains to be had that have been demonstrated in labs (so-called quantum dots, for instance).
I also don’t agree with the “lose at base due to noise” statement. The Sony 16mp DX and 24mp FX sensors have tangibly more DR than the Panasonic 12mp. DR and noise are interrelated, after all.
As for “would cropping the Sony to 4/3 size get better results” question, the answer is yes, but you wouldn’t have 12mp ;~).
Sensors are really, really tricky. Like many things in photography you’re balancing one thing against another. The question isn’t “who’s the best” but rather “who’s got the right balance”? That’s actually one of the reasons why I use m4/3 cameras: I can tolerate a larger-than compact camera to get better results from a carry-all-the-time camera. If I’m shooting a paying job for a client, I instead use the best possible tool for that job, which is usually not m4/3. But a surprising amount of work, both stills and video, is coming from smaller cameras now, partly because they can do things and be put in places where you can’t put (or risk) a big piece of equipment. I’m not going to strap my D3x on the front bumper guard of a safari vehicle (at least not without a deep pocket client ;~), but I’m happy to risk a smaller, less expensive, but still fairly capable camera.
@amalric…..Have to agree here. Many here want to vilify Panasonic as withholding new tech from Olympus. All the while ignoring that Oly has steadfastly maintained 12 mgp is enough. These same people are the ones who when it is convenient to them boast about Oly’s better image quality from their new Oly designed 12 mgp sensor. The truth is obvious…. you can’t have it both ways. If this is Oly’s all new designed by them sensor……. then it’s shortcomings are Olympus’s not the evil Panasonic holding them back.
I guess is time to wait for the Pen “pro”… Olympus knows what time it is…
as expected, same old sensor tech from the E-P1, farewell oly
Olympus needs to update its spotlighting of photographers who use their equipment to overcome the perception that is taking hold and show what can be accomplished in the right hands. The invidious comparisons that seem to appear in every review is sowing doubt about the viability of micro 4/3rds. Was Olympus wise to release the new generation of cameras before a new sensor was in place? Since one is buying into a system there is a leap of faith that assumes Olympus and Panasonic will overcome the weakness in their IQ that every review seems to focus on to detriment of the new cameras. Are the high prices in part defiance in the face of this?
E-P3 IS THE BEST MIRRORLESS INTERCHANGEABLE LENS CAMERA – and this from DPR. Read it yourself on page 11 of the review:
“Overall, this means that not only is the E-P3 probably the best-handling PEN yet, it’s also arguably the best of the current crop of mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras for the enthusiast photographer.” (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/OlympusEP3/page11.asp ;bottom line, first paragraph “Handling”)
Other reviews/sites as analytical as DPR gave the E-P3 higher marks, Wasn’t the camera worth a golden award? After all it’s your money, will you spend it?
DPR is getting stingy, so to speak or is Oly getting unduly avid? Personally if I had the money I would probably fork it. As it is I’ll wait a year or so, and see if a better sensor comes around, but I am skeptical. Most of the G3 improvement has been in the higher ISO, but it’s in the lower ones I am interested and IBIS helps me there.
Another area of progress is the new lenses, the 12/2 and 25/1.4. Then of course we are getting into the very expensive but OTH the resolution increases in a terrific way.
How does it play with the dumbing down Panny did with its recent bodies? To me it’s apparent that it is worth waiting till Christmas and see what the semipros will offer. I am under no illusion however that they will be v. expensive bodies. We will get Porsches, not VW.
Must the privilege of having smaller cameras be paid so much? That is the main objection. I saw some going back to dSLR because they are relatively cheaper, if you include lenses.
I went from E-P1 + GF1 to G3 and there is a clear difference in booth files and prints:
G3 has better resolution
G3 has more accurate colors. (I have images where you really can feel the crisp air in a way impossible with E-P1)
DR is the same
With the biult in viewfinder composition is much better
Focusing features (adjustable focus area + image-in-image) means you always have focus were you what it to be, clearly not the case with E-P1
High ISO is one step better (or close to)
Comparing with D300 files G3 has better resolution, but here you really see the difference in DR as well as quality in measuring exposure.
The G3 is better or equal than E-P3 in everything but AF speed at a much lower price.
Still there seems to be more buzz around E-P3. Don’t buy it! Buy E-PL3 if you like Olympus flavor of color, and G3 if you have ambitions with your photograpy. Then use the money to by quality lenses!
What is funny nis that if you use the comparometer at DPR there are no advantages in IQ between the G3 16 Mpx sensor and the 12 Mpx one, except in video.
http://forums.dpreview.com/reviews/olympusep3/page24.asp
Same for the GH2.
So much for unwarranted claims.
I trust my own asssessments and eyes a lot more than any reviewers pixelpeeping measurements from studio scenes! My analyse is based real photography.
For instance DPR silly analyse of DR differencens between m4/3cameras when all curves are mor or less above each other. Any difference here is not worth discussing. The only reasonable conclusion is the Sony Nex has better dynamic range compared to the m/3 cameras – and that is in high light areas
Reviewers on the web often has split loyalties as well often are more IT than photo in their competence.
DPR fpr instance are pixelpeepers rather than photographers, but they have a methodology that is open and consistent. They are in that way very good I think. They also mentions that:
a) G3 has better resolution
b) Olympus colors are pleasing (my note: more pleasing tha accurate)
Sorry but even at high ISO there is no advantage in resolution between the 2 m4/3 cameras.
http://forums.dpreview.com/reviews/olympusep3/page22.asp
One wonders what improvement brought the 16 Mpx sensor to Panny.
You’d do well not to brag around before comparing data.
G3 has a resolution advantage by definition. The fact that you don’t see it does not change the reality.
Such comments have been here since the dawn of digital cameras: “No difference between 2 and 3 MP”. Then “No difference between 3 and 5 MP”. Then “No difference between 5 and 8 MP”. And so on. It’s still the same..
It seems like it comes down to handling and which camera suits your shooting style and – as with cars – which design and brand touches you more.
So I hope the rest stops whining about the “old sensor” and “only 12 MP”
Yes that’s exacly my point. Meanwhile I have been playing with the comparometers at DPR.
Up to 1600 the cameraas are the same, resolution transaltes only in a slightly bigger image for the G3. But not sharper.
At 3200 however differences start to show: RAWs are about the same, but the G2 Jpegs are better, less smeared.
At 6400 it is even worse, but I wouldn’t touch it with a bargepole.
My conclusion: G3 is better in very low light.
However I am a ‘fairweather photographer’ soI couldn’t care less. I’d go for all the other Oly advantages: Jpeg colour, FAST AND tocuh technology , Art Filters, more configurable, and last but not least design and build, etc.
The E-P3 is too expensive though, so I’ll have to wait for the price to come down. The G3 is much more reasonable, but it has a worse make.
I’m really loving the theme/design of your web site. Do you ever run into any web browser compatibility issues? A few of my blog visitors have complained about my blog not working correctly in Explorer but looks great in Opera. Do you have any recommendations to help fix this issue?
You’ve made some really good points there. I checked on the internet to learn more about the issue and found most people will go along with your views on this web site.