[shoplink 25396]
[/shoplink]
Today let’s check how well (or bad) the new [shoplink 25396]NEX-7[/shoplink] and [shoplink 25767]Nikon V1[/shoplink] are competing against our m43 cameras:
Dpreview added the Nikon V1 comparison shots to the dpreview database. m43 still has a visible advantage over the Nikon sensor but I have to admit that the Nikon processor engine does really a good job in both JPEG and RAW. If they would have used a sensor as large as the m43 sensor than they would have probably beaten the current Oly-Panasonic quality.
There is also a new [shoplink 25396]NEX-7[/shoplink], [shoplink 23568]E-P3[/shoplink] and [shoplink 19929]X100[/shoplink] high ISO examples and crops comparison made by Steve Huff (Click here). The difference is easily visible. The Olympus E-P3 has more noise but also a higher per pixel sharpness.
So, what do you think about these tests? M43 has still a huge advantage when you take into consideration the full overall sensor quality + lens size + lens system quantity factors. But a new improved sensors would really bring us a step forward.
P.S.: The NEX-7 is the only non Canon/Nikon camera in Amazon’s top 20 (Click here to see the ranking). I guess I am not the only one waiting for a m43 camera with built-in viewfinder!
75 Responses
What good would a better sensor be if it’s going to be in a toy m4/3 camera, instead of in a real and capable 4/3 camera?
um… it would sell, unlike 4/3s. which is kinda the point of making a camera.
compared to a phase 1, 4/3 cameras are also toys.
It would make life slightly harder for trolling idiots like yourself. Seems worthwhile to me.
I’m going to point out something that’s not often pointed out for real world high ISO use:
ISO performance varies between different types of shots, noise manifests more in spot metered back lit shots, under exposed shots that are lifted in post (usually it would of been to shot correctly in the first place with the right settings and/or lenses) and also when you needlessly use high ISO in very, very bright conditions.
Noise is controlled well when you you use high ISO to shoot in low light conditions with most recent camera models..
Only 1-2% of photos in the real world are shot at ISO 3200 or higher
“…If they would have used a sensor as large as the m43 sensor than they would have probably beaten the current Oly-Panasonic quality.”…don’t think so…g3 sensor is better than nikon sensor ad it’s 16mp..If u crop it in nikon format u’ll have a 8mp sensor quite close to 10mp nikon sensor.
Have you looked at the RAW comparison?
The nikon is ahead of all m4/3 at 6400ISO!
The quick ISO comparison over at Steve Huff’s website only proves that there is a lot of aggressive noise reduction in the Sony images … at the expense of detail. The E-P3 might be noisy, but you can make the image roughly as clean as the NEX-7 image if you’re willing to do some basic noise reduction in post. I own three m4/3 cameras and several lenses and pre-ordered the NEX-7 but I’m thinking about cancelling that pre-order. That 24-megapixel sensor and 10fps burst speed sounded good compared to m4/3, but it looks like there isn’t much real world advantage to the NEX-7 over the E-P3.
The NEX-5n is the better choice. Why Sony chos a 24MP sensor for the NEX-7 is mystifying. It would have been killer with the sme sensor as the NEX-5n?,
That depends on what you do I suppose. The NEX-7 examples on imaging resource look jaw droppingly good up to ISO3200, and even ISO6400 is perfectly usable. Seeing as how I personally rarely ever go over ISO1600 I’d rather have the 24mp NEX-7 for the extra resolution. However, if you shoot sports then I’d imagine you’d prefer a lower resolution with better ISO. Luckily for me I’m a landscape, cityscape, and portrait photographer.
Plus, we haven’t seen any RAW samples from the NEX-7 yet. Sony’s JPEG processing has always been far behind Olympus’. I’m willing to bet (literally since I’ve already ordered a NEX7) that things will get even better after we see some pics processed in Lightroom.
The bottom line for me is, based on what I’ve seen so far from the NEX7, it appears to be by far the most impressive mirrorless camera to date. It doesn’t appear to AF quite as fast as the new PEN’s, that’s my only real gripe. But that issue aside it looks amazing. That trinavi control scheme looks absolutely perfect; and the build quality and EVF are both on a much higher level than anything else out there currently. I waited 3 years for Panny/Olympis to build something like this, and they never did. Based on the number of pre-orders I wasn’t alone.
I’m in your same boat, been a m4/3 user for 3 years and I’m switching. Went E-P1 to GH2 to E-P3 and the massive noise at high ISO, comparatively lower resolution and weird vertical banding I get in low ISO skies that ruins HDR work pushed me over. I have equivalent lenses all lined up (I’m very comfortable with manual focus).
By the way you can open NEX-7 RAWs in CaptureOne now. You can also open them using UFRaw and Gimp, export it as a TIFF and then apply NR in Lightroom and the results, I can say, are incredible.
True enough where RAW is concerned.
And it does look like it has it all, lenses excluded, of course. 😉
I tried a NEX-5n and was extremely impressed. The NEX-7 appears to leapfrog it by quite a bit.
What’s the file size per shot? A GH2 RAW file is about 20MB, this would be almost 30MB per shot!
yes eric it does depend on what you do. You don’t have a gripe on the size of the lenses? Well I do. I’m not impressed by the 24mp either. Don’t understand why some people still lurking on these boards if they don’t like m4/3, which you have been doing awhile? Cheers Eric,move over to Sony rumors!
I know that was directed at Eric but about the lenses: Yes they’re big but in total the package is still smaller than DSLRs and that’s the point. The only NEX lenses I’m getting are the 18-200mm (replacing my Oly 14-42mm and Panny 45-200mm) and the 50mm f/1.8 because they’re both stabilized, are good for video and cover most situations when I absolutely must have AF. See the Panny 14-140mm on an E-PLx or GFx if you want to complain about lens versus body disparities.
As for everything else a Voigtlander 35mm f/1.4 replaces my Nokton 25mm resulting in the same effective focal length and DOF for $500 less. The Voigt. 15mm replaces my 9-18mm and covers the wide end until Sony comes out with something better than their asstastic 16mm. All of my other lenses are adapted anyway so all I need is a m4/3-NEX adapter to fill the 2mm registration difference at the mount. I’m not considering the Zeiss 24mm, $1k for an unstabilized moderately fast prime is ridiculous.
Speaking for myself the reason I keep paying attention to m4/3 is because I’ve loved the equipment I’ve owned and think Oly and Panny do a commendable job with their designs. And a reason for posting something like this here is if someone is considering going the same route I am they get an idea of how it could work. In all after selling and buying to switch systems I actually GET BACK $250 for moving to a better performing camera. That speaks to some of the price versus performance problems with m4/3.
thanks joe, you made my point for me about the lenses being, shall we say bulky on the sony. nobodys disputing that if you’re making prints 1/2 the size of a wall that the sony’s going to work for you. so you’re posting out of the kindness of your heart? more like trying to justify your purchase
Hi Joe, since You have experiences with E-mount – can you confirm or disprove problems of optical compatibility of various lenses with NEX cameras?
Some sources say that extremely short registration distance of the E-mount makes optical problems when You attach some lenses (including some A-mount lenses).
You do understand that when adapting lenses designed for other mounts (such as Alpha), the adapter serves to attach those lenses at the exact distance from the camera sensor?
The NEX’ registration distance is irrelevant unless using native E mount lenses.
But isn’t the sensor and image processing of NEX cameras optimized for the short registration ditance? (E-m 18mm versus 44.5mm A-m is quite a difference. Light goes to borders of the sensor in very different angle.)
Anyway – practical implication interests me most. What are experiences with third party lenses.
Yeah, some rangefinder wide-angle lenses have weird color shifts like purple or yellow edges and degraded border resolution. It’s the angle that the light hits the sensor. Happened with my Voigtlander 15mm on the Nex-3. Alpha mount lenses should work fine, as all my F-mount lenses do. I think you only need to worry about some rangefinder wide-angles.
@big lenses
Just because some of us have bought the NEX-7 doesn’t mean we don’t also like m4/3’s. In fact, if Olympus leaks something similar before my 7 arrives there is a good chance I will simply cancel my order and wait for the Olympus. Further, there is no law that states once you switch systems you can’t switch back at a future date. Also, for if you use Flipboard on the iPad this site is hard to avoid. Seems like Flipboards “photography” section pulls at least one story per day from this site. So those are my reasons for still reading this site.
Finally, why so sensitive about who reads this site and what camera gear they choose? Cameras are not your kids, no one insulting you as a person by choosing Brand A over Brand B.
actually I have both A77V and NEX5n and the A77V is better at ISO1600 and up if you measure read noise level of each , and the NEX7 should be a bit better than my A77V in terms of noise and SNR because it does not have the annoying Trancelucent mirror.
and if you resample the NEX7 image at 16mp, I am sure it would be much clenaer with more detail and better color rendition.
it does not matter how they perform at pixel level but image level.
honestly, the three cameras produce good enough IQ. though from an UX perspective, nex-7’s size, built-in EVF, configureable knobs & peaking makes it a killer imho. Can’t wait to see Olysonic’s answer to this.
@NiKo
Not really a fan of function buttons as you have to memorise what functions you assigned to them and don’t have the visual clues (which can lead to delay). Olympus and Panasonic’s magnified live view is a far, far better and more pratical solution than peaking.
…………..let go of the viewfinder
what i see here is, even v1 is good enough for regular user.
Not one of Steve’s better tests. The Oly has noise reduction turned OFF. He should have put it on Weak to compare fairly with the other cameras. As it is, I still liked the Oly images. Nex 7 looks like a lovely thing to hold though.
This ‘test’ is rubbish as is the rest of his site. There’s so many problems there, where should I start?
First, the 100% crops should have been of the under exposed mid-tones (just under the kitchen cupboard) instead of the blacks which are contrast-augmented by the image processor. In those areas of the frame the Fuji annihilates the NEX.
Next, were he interested in comparing the sensor output, he should have used RAW files – he never does that. I am sure he doesn’t use JPGs for his professional work.
Third, as you mentioned, the E-P3 is the only camera with noise reduction turned OFF.
Fourth, the E-P3’s poor performance at ISO 6400 has less to the sensor size and more to do with it having a sensor that is 3 generations behind the Sony and 1-2 generations behind the Fuji (which uses an older sensor that has been highly customized for IQ, as opposed to the E-P3 sensor that has been customized for AF speed).
(Fourth continued) To do an honest comparison for noise versus sensor size he should have included the GH2 or G3 or both in this test. I wonder why those cameras are hardly mentioned on his site (if at all), your guess is as good as mine.
Fifth, in order to be able to make a meaningful comparison he should have taken shots in base ISO as well as high and mid ISO as a reference. ISO 6400 crops give very little insight as to what those cameras and lenses are actually capable of resolving in most scenarios.
Either he doesn’t understand what he’s doing, or he’s knowingly presenting information in a way that could mislead his readers. I suspect the latter (or a bit of both -I’ve seen too many half truths and deliberately misleading info on his site).
Agreed. Steve seems to forget Panasonic make cameras that might be worth comparing. I even heard the Panny sensors may be better than Oly….
I seem to recall the title of the post is “Crazy Comparison”.
No, a crazy review is comparing the IQ of a basic security camera vs an X-ray machine vs a NEX. Many of his reviews appear crazy but are really just poorly conceived as others have noted.
Agree 100% with your assessment of the “crazy comparison.” I made a few of the same points as comment on Steve’s site:
“If you want to compare the best of small APS-C cameras to the best of Micro 4/3 in high ISO performance, you shouldn’t be comparing to the E-P3. Many reviews have shown that the Panasonic G-3 and the GH-2 have the best high ISO performance of Micro 4/3. That would have been a good comparison. The sensor on the E-P3 is outdated and for all practical purposes the same as in the original E-P1. It is now three Panasonic sensor generations old. GH-1 even does better than the E-P3 sensor.”
Received no response to this from Steve or anybody else there.
I suspect it’s because Steve owns an Olympus and doesn’t own a Panasonic. In his EP-3 review he explained that he liked it so much that he bought it, whereas I don’t remember his ever getting so much as a er from Panasonic. If you want scientific comparisons, there are plenty of sites for that. I think Steve’s site is good for what it is–one guy’s thoughts and experiences with various cameras and photography.
I recall seeing on another site that they ,ostly review Olympus versus Panasonic as Pansanoic doesn’t provide them with test cameras. I’m guessing same here.
well, if a test is this idiot , noone wants to provide any test camera for him or her site.
and I ‘d say most of internet test sites are not so savvy that you can trust them.
well, this test is not a good test and if you want to how NEX7 or A77V sensor performs in real life , you must process it yourself or measure it yourself , do not trust silly online tests done at a studio.
high ISO test must be done in real low light real life scene.
actually, NEX7 and A77 sensor is quite good , I ‘d say current best of best in APS-C /DX class, I know DXO says other wise but I dont trust DXO test cause it is fooled by silly Pentax RAW NR or Pentax’s foxy shadow grey scale manipulation of its RAW files.
but the V1 is ONLY usable at is0 200-300… according to a lot of sites like cnet.
that not doin to much for me.
Actually I think the V1 is doing quite well considering the sensor size.
The statement and the Amazon link at the end is a bit misleading since the list is clearly of the “Best Sellers in Digital SLR Cameras” and the Nex-7 is not even a SLR.
****Amazon isn’t a big seller of Cameras, they are widely quoted because they published a best seller list but Amazon’s not really representative of the camera market as a whole if most people DO NOT USE AMAZON but other online camera stores and other channels****
Once prices drop to something more reasonable, I’m looking forward to getting a Nikon for my C-mount lenses. A lot of the ones that vignette on M4/3 would probably be fine on the Nikon.
I wonder what the results had been like if he had set the EP3’s noise reduction to low. The other cameras were applying some sort of it. A little more noise doesn’t bother me as much and it’s a small price to pay for the great lenses and form factor. This actually renews my faith in 43rds. All they need is one more generation and we are there!
High ISO is vastly over rated. I only use high ISOs when hand holding my 600mm equivalent lens at f5.6-f11. Sure, high ISO can be useful (eg for internet bragging) but a range of good lenses and system flexibility/options is way more important.
Same here: most shooting is perfectly fine in the 100-1600 ISO range. But for shooting with long telelenses, moving animals or sports, better high ISO is relevant.
The sensor IQ of m4/3 (and 4/3) was always worse than the competition. It probably will stay so, because the competition won’t stop development.
m4/3 shines because of the good choices of native lenses. And because there is at least one vendor (Panasonic), who is brave enough not follow the tiresome route of overminiaturization and retro design, by producing an ergonomic camera body with – due to its dedicated controls – a lot of sense for photographic reality: the GH2. Without this body, m4/3 wouldn’t have a real advantage over the non-m4/3 mirrorless competition. EP-x, NEX-7, NEX-5, NX-200, Nikon V1 are interchangeable body concepts with a clear advantage for the NEX-7.
+1
But… but… but retro design is a crucial feature… 😉
Panasonic actually knows how to discontinue models. Their biggest misstep is with the GF series. Hopefully the GX1 or GF7, or whatever their “pro-ish” model is to be called, will rectify the situation.
Comparing raw images at ISO 3200 I can’t see the advantage in the E-PL3 over the Nikon V1. It has a bit more resolution, but it looks quite noisier. Overall I’d say the V1 does a bit better.
Compared to the G3, though, the Panasonic has an advantage.
The good news about Panasonic’s sensors is the FZ150. At last they’ve made a MOS sensor that performs really good. This is a 1/2.3″ sensor and it’s better than the one in the LX5 or XZ-1, which is 1/1.65″ CCD. The improvement over the old FZ100 (same size’d MOS sensor) is quite amazing. And even compared to their famous 4/3 sensor used in all Oly’s cameras, it’s not that much behind! So there is hope that the next 4/3 sensor is going to be really much better than the old 12MP one. And better than the 16MP one in the G3 too.
Yes the FZ150 BSI 1/2.3″ was a big improvement. I expect Pany boosted the G3 sensor 16mp denser packed specifically so it would work more efficiently with BSI to come in next version. I would like to see Pany put that 1/2.3″ BSI sensor into all their compacts and produce a ZS or TZ with a faster lens with shorter focal length and a swivel screen. I believe that Pany BSI sensor is already a close match to that used in the new Nikon 1 series in IQ.
Looking for more information about the sensor on the FZ150, I saw someone suggested it could be a Sony sensor (based on the performance, effective MP and exact dimensions), and it seems to be true. Even in the announcement they mention that a new sensor has been “incorporated” and a new noise reduction has been “developed”. Why don’t they say that a new sensor has been “developed” too? Probably because they didn’t develop it, just incorporated the one from Sony.
Sad news if true. It seems Panasonic realized they just can’t make better sensors and decided to buy from Sony.
Panasonic Develops New High Picture Quality MOS Image Sensor with Industry’s Highest Sensitivity*1
http://panasonic.co.jp/corp/news/official.data/data.dir/en110512-4/en110512-4.html
Interesting. Though this is about a future sensor that will have 14 MP and will start mass production in December 2011. We’ll see how it performs once it hits the market in some camera next year.
I can’t really say that I feel sad, I think that it would be sad if they didn’t use the best option possible. Tweaking a sensor from Sony is a very nice option – even Nikon uses Sony’s.
And since Panasonic can make it more to their flavor and the whole processing thing also changes the output. Oly has one of the best JPEG output and Panny has one of the best video output. So I don’t really mind if they use sensor from Sony or anyone else.
I think that with a new sensor, even more with the presence of the NEX-7, the next gen of PEN camera can be pretty awesome. Despite the fact that I just bought a NEX-5n, I’m looking forward for a GX1 and GH3 – not so a E-P4 because I want the better video, unless the E-P4 gets better at it, or maybe Oly will also come up with a high-end version with built-in EVF.
I think that now the m4/3 is really maturing, plenty of good glasses, more to come, AF problem solved – NEX-5n and NEX-7 AF is noticeably slower, I mean, it’s not slow, but I can tell the difference – and bit by bit m4/3 is solving the high-ISO performance. I keep thinking what a hacked future GH3 will be able to do. I wished that you could control the variable frame rate and do time-lapse maybe even some slow motion from a 120fps.
according to DxOMark the nikon raw images are already smoothed (above ISO 800). That’s why the EPL3 images may look a bit noisier
Yes, that’s true. Still, taking all into account (noise, detail, color,…) I think that both sensors (from Nikon and Olympus) are in the same ballpark when it comes to high ISO, which is quite a shame for the bigger 4/3 sensor which should have 1 f-stop advantage given the size difference.
oly needs a better sensor.. we all know that. it´s quiet an old sensor.
still with a new sensor m43 will have the bigger size advantage.
MFT….will have it all when a new sensor is designed….My question is ….with the competition being what it is now….what is Panasonic waiting for?
Design doesn’t happen by will power or wishful thinking alone. I’d suspect they’ve been doing a lot of work on the GH2 sensor’s successor and the G3 sensor may be sort of a template for further improvement.
I just hope they don’t abandon low-ISO performance in favor of high-ISO, which appears to be the case. Although high-ISO performance is a way to compensate for all the slow zoom lenses. Given their attempt to lure “upgraders”, who are less likely to spring for $500+ lenses, while trying to please more serious users, is a real balancing act.
Expanding the dynamic range seems like a far more important goal at this point.
If I were Panasonic or Olympus I would announce a camera just after the holiday buying season. There is no need to now, Panasonic based on passed history with the m43 needs about 4 months or so to get stuff in sufficient stock to sell. I think announcing would only kill sells of their current models.
Clearly, their is a need for a NEX-7 form factor or similar in the m43 line, for the enthusiast photographer. I do think most people for some reason look down on the viewfinder though, for no good reason IMO.
Panasonic does have a built in viewer on some of their models.
Admin says “I guess I am not the only one waiting for an M43 camera with built-in viewfinder.”
Er… Doesn’t Panasonic already make some of those?
Maybe you mean “built-in EVF stuck on one end, rather than on top”…?
Obviously, the style of a built-in EVF simply MUST also compliment the pork pie hat, bow tie and suspenders. 😉
after seeing the NEX 7 with Zeiss24, 1.8 ,I really tempted to get one, and after my long waiting
agony with GF1 model and hoping for panny to make their own legacy 43 model L1 into M43 had never come true,..I feel being abandon,..with gf2 n gf3 model. now I really hate panny.
If the new Sony E lens will be backing up with Zeiss,..I will definitely to change the boat with the NEX system,..especially that 35mm {24,1.8] my favorite FL is far more better than oly 17,2.8,..
,..hoping ,.that is not too late for Panny to make radical move,..don’t wait until next year Panny,..canon,leica ,fuji will get in the ring of mirror less soon,..and you still abandon us,…we will abandon you
From the comparison photos, the V1 has better detail at ISO 100 than either the E-5, 5N, or the GH2, both in JPEG and RAW. Wondering how strong of an AA filter the V1 has.
On the dp review comparison please compare any place where there is text writen and you will notice the m43 cameras are much much better.
Try the top right set of colour balls to see the great sharpness of the Oly. Its not only the sensor the m43 has better glass than both Nikon and Sony!!!
Compare the colour chips over the watch and you will see noise in the Nikon even at 200 ISO. There is just no comparison between the v1 and the m43.
One area that ‘says it all’ is the top left checkker. Oly beats all the others inclusing Sony hands down …… that is the ‘quality’ of the glass!!!!!
Not with m4/3. The Panasonic lenses, which directly compete with Olympus’ usually have the edge in IQ.
+1
Only recently has Oly begun releasing comparable lenses in terms of IQ. The 9-18mm, 12mm and 45mm come to mind and arguably the 40-150. Of the 12 M4/3 lenses Olympus have released so far, there are THREE 14-42mm and two 40-150mm.
Panasonic has released 14 lenses, with the 12-35mm and 35-100mm pre-announced, with only ONE duplicate lens, 14-42mm standard and X, which are quite different in many ways.
On the camera front, Olympus has essentially released ONE camera with 9 minor feature variations (and fear of discontinuing “old” models), along with some vague hints of a “pro-ish” camera “sometime in 2012”.
Retro design and nostalgia for the glory days of Zuiko and classic PEN cameras takes you only so far. Not a great track record or a way to assemble a versatile system.
It would be nice if you saw the actual comparison and then made the judgement…oly beats the pany in the corner!!!
There is something I really don’t understand, why on Earth does someone who wants to make a comparison of different sensors choose the E-P3 to represent m43 ???
The G3 runs circles around the decrepit 3 year old sensor of the E-P3, the one my GH2 is even better and compares favourably when it comes to detail/resolution to the monster that is the Sony NEX-5N.
You want to bash the m43 sensor? Rant about DR all right, I’ll also concede one EV stop of high ISO noise, but as far as detail is concerned, we’re up there with the best of APS-C, just don’t use the E-P3 because that’s not intellectually honest and you know that.
ATM there is not a single camera from Olympus that is representative of the quality that m43 can achieve, so stop it altready!
+1
I’ve got nothing against Olympus but comparing the latest NEX and Nikon b1under cameras with the EP3 is like comparing a the latest Ferrari against Ford’s model T. Let’s be fair here and at least compare the latest of each or the oldest of each.
Firstly we are comparing m43 with Nikon & Sony so EP3 is only one of the options
To see the brilliance of the EP3 please see the comparison to the other cameras in the link below
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/studiocompare.asp#baseDir=%2Freviews_data&cameraDataSubdir=boxshot&indexFileName=boxshotindex.xml&presetsFileName=boxshotpresets.xml&showDescriptions=false&headerTitle=Studio%20scene&headerSubTitle=Standard%20studio%20scene%20comparison&masterCamera=nikon_v1&masterSample=dsc_0304&slotsCount=4&slot0Camera=nikon_v1&slot0Sample=dsc_0304&slot0DisableCameraSelection=true&slot0DisableSampleSelection=true&slot0LinkWithMaster=true&slot1Camera=sony_nexc3&slot1Sample=dsc00987&slot2Camera=oly_epl3&slot2Sample=p8100509&slot3Camera=panasonic_dmcgh2&slot3Sample=p1010453-gh2-iso160&x=-1.0145867098865477&y=1.7136294027565084
I got NEX-5N along side my M43 stuff, and I still use my E-PM1 much more since I shoot mostly in day time, and with 25mm it is really nice for street candid unlike 5N’s slow and undecided AF focus. I also got 28mm F2.0 for NEX-5N, while the range is good (only 2m to infinity, much easier for shooting lol) but with adapter it is quite long
me too , despite of the good sensor , the NEX5n is a really generation behind crappy camera in real life use because of its silly UIF design and ergonomics.
so, I also prefer the Oly and most of time I just use it for snap/street camera with the new 45f1.8,which is the sharpest lens available today in any mount.
the Oly 45f1.8 and Pana Leica 25f1.4 really rock.
Why didn’t olympus put E-5 image quality into the Ep3?? I don’t understand. All E-5 image quality results/reviews were superior to any APS-c size sensor. Micro 4/3 is already superior or equal to APs-c sensors.
The m4/3 image quality already exists in the E-5. Olympus just choose not to implement this into E-P3 for some reason.
3 IQ solutions for M4/3.
–Use E-5 sensor technology in E-p3, in fact use next generation E-series 4/3 technology in m4/3.
–Improve m4/3 sensor with nikon technology
–call up kodak, build a leica quality sensor to blow away every other sensor out there.
I am not impressed by Sony’s 24MP. It just adds unnecessary size to the files. If I was to buy a NEX-7, I would need a much faster computer to process these huge files, also I would need to invest in more storage and backup devices. And what for? I don’t print door size images.
Also, the Sony format is not convenient. If Sony had much smaller lenses and more lenses, I would think different but as it is (and Sony had enough time to change this), I am sticking with M43 for good. They found a good balance in between size and quality with M43.
Let Panasonic introduce their new GF1 replacement this year and I will buy that next year.
I really dont get this mirrorless cameras and their prices.
for 500-1000$ there is d3100, d5100, 1100d, 550d with just about everything better.
Except body size and weight, lens size and weight, lens quality, live view advantages, EVF advantages, more precise (and in part quicker) AF, larger, brighter, better view finders (GH2), better ergonomics (GH2), cheaper lenses (600mm equiv for under 600 €), multiaspect sensor (GH2), better video integration, more variety on body concepts for the same lens mount, use of legacy lenses.
A plethora of reasons to prefer mirrorless systems over traditional DSLR systems.
Generally, only full frame DSLRs and some of the high end APS-C DSLRs (Canon EOS 7D, Nikon D300, and Sony A77) are the only DSLRs, which are interesting and warrant consideration for purchase. The entry to mid level DSLR is dead in comparison to mirrorless. It currently survives only, because it takes time to convince people of the better (mirrorless) alternatives. System camera buyers are still too much used to think of DSLRs, but this changes gradually.
Why compare the Nikon V1? It is in a different market segment.
1. The crop factor of legacy lenses on the Nikon V1 makes it useless to the enthusiasts market who care about this feature, and that is a large segment of the m4/3 and NEX users.
2. The lack of DOF control imposed by the small sensor adds to this uselessness. It ships with a 10 to 30mm lens.
DOF control without mounting a 150mm lens is not some minor feature that people can do without. The Nikon V1 is DOA with DOF control.
The height of uselessness.
Why are you mentioning SteveHuff and not point the readers to imaging-resource site?
http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM
Nex-7 images look stunningly good