BrentC
Been spending a lot of time on here!
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2017
- Messages
- 3,576
- Reaction score
- 2,336
- Location
- Brampton, Ontario
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos NOT OK to edit
BrentC said:Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II vs Sony A7R II vs Nikon D610 | DxOMark
My issue is you saying the sensor has poor overall performance. Low light is not everything. I can count on my hands the time that low light has been an issue for my type of shooting. The Oly has great IQ and colours. Once again, I have said that every system has there pros and cons and you buy into the system that works for you. But is disagree that its an overall bad performer.
Well, maybe I define "poor overall" as something that is way below contemporary leading models. Perhaps you have not noticed that in the link I provided, in the expanded test results section, the Olympus comes in dead last in multiple categories...like Tonal Range, Color Sensitivity, Signal To Noise Ratio Peformance, and Dynamic Range. Weaker color, poorer tone response, worse SNR, and narrower dynamic range. To me that is "poor" performance; and NOT just in "low light", but across multiple, easily measurable performance metrics.
To me, that is poor overall, and the buyer has $2,400 Euro to spend; why not buy a better performing camera at such a high price point?View attachment 145948View attachment 145949 View attachment 145950View attachment 145951
Compare apples to apples. For wildlife/action would you recommend the Nikon D500 to someone? This is one of the top recommended cameras for Wildlife. Price is the same as the EM1 MKII. The EM1 MKII was aimed for wildlife/action. I have not heard anybody saying the D500 is a poor performer. Compare the DxOmark between the two. They are very close except for ISO sensitivity.
I don't think the EM1 has poor performance just the D610 has excellent performance. But then if someone wants to shoot wildlife they would be going for the D500 not the D610.
The OP wanted a light, compact system for travel which M43 or Fuji would have been more than adequate and ARE good to great performers. But you just sold him on a larger, heavier system that he wasn't looking for and probably doesn't need that sensor quality.
To me a good performing sensor sits far below a D610. You as a professional photographer, that makes money from photography, I can see wants the best of the best. But photographers are producing excellent quality photos from sensors that are no where near as good as the D610.
I would never say that a M43 sensor would ever compare to todays best FF sensor's but you can't say, these days, that they are poor performers.
DanOstergren blows us away with his model images. He is using a Canon 5D MKI and that sensor performance comes no where near a D610.
I guess what I am trying to say is the bar for a good performing sensor is below a D610. And when someone is requesting camera recommendations with specific criteria help him find a good camera with those criteria.
When I was looking for a camera, light weight, a smaller was near the top of my list but yet people where still trying to sell me on a DSLR. I would have bought a D500 if I didn't mind big and heavy. Hell I would be one of the firsts to jump on the new D850 if it wasn't an issue. But doesn't fit my requirements and the EM1 sensor performance was more then good enough.