I believe there are still many people troubled in deciding between a micro 4/3 (or other mirrorless interchangeable lens) camera, and an advanced compact. I’m lucky enough to be holding on to one of each here, and here are my initial impressions after an evening’s walk with them.
The emphasis of this post is on the low light capabilities of these cameras, specifically the Samsung EX1 and the Olympus EPL1 (with kit lens). Firstly, I’d like to comment that indeed the EPL1 will outdo the EX1 given a better lens, like the 20mm f1.7, or some of the exotic Zuiko lenses. But if you want a flexible, portable and cost-effective kit, the kit zoom is the lens to go. Most first-time owners would be sticking to it for quite some time too.
Sensors play a part, and the EPL1 has a much bigger sensor compared to the EX1. I started out believing that the EX1 will be at most on par with the EPL1. But as it turns out…. you judge for yourself!
First up, a relatively dark, but still sufficiently lit arena. This is the kind of light one will encounter if you are in a typical wedding banquet and when food is served.The EPL1 might appear to have more detail in the 100% crops, but that is because the lens is less wide at 28mm, and the EPL1 has a 12mp sensor compared to the EX1’s 10mp. Notice that the default EPL1 white balance is slightly warm. The EX1 is displaying finer noise grains due to a much lower iso used (200 vs 800).
Next up, a typical handheld night street shot, comparable to Christmas lightings. This is shot with both lenses at their max-telephoto (84mm vs 72mm) The EX1’s image stabilizer isn’t as effective as the EPL1, and a higher shutter speed is chosen for this test. However, the superior lens on the EX1 still allowed a much lower ISO to be used.
Last of the set is a shot of a dark alley, which is already the max you should consider shooting handheld. What is astonishing is that the EX1 completed the task using a mere iso400, compared to iso1600 on the EPL1 (which is the limit of the sensor, unless extra gain is used). The noise difference is pretty significant now..The above examples prove that the EX1 can stand it’s ground in the low light arena against larger, more expensive kits like the PEN series, or even DSLRs with kit lenses like the d3000.
However, there is no free lunch. The macro performance of the EX1 pales in comparison with most kit lenses, and most users will realize that shooting food is not the best job for it. The sample below illustrates how close I could get to my dinner with both lenses.
Below is a more specific list of findings, regarding the EPL1 vs the EX1:
- EPL1’s LCD refreshes at a higher rate than the EX1, resulting in higher noise shown when using Live View in dark scenes.
- EPL1 needs long exposure noise reduction from ~2sec onwards. This is certainly not on par with DSLRs. On the EX1 there is no way to turn it off.
- The EX1’s auto-white balance is much more accurate than the EPL1’s. However, the EPL1 can be configured to custom-wb at the touch of a button.
- The EX1’s LCD is clearly superior.. higher resolution, better colour and multi-angled. I sorely missed it when i’m forced to squat/kneel when composing the EPL1 from odd angles.
- Menu and customization on the EPL1 is miles ahead of the rudimentary one on the EX1.
- RAW files from the EPL1 are more elastic, retaining highlights significantly better than those from the EX1.
- The EX1 feels more solid than the EPL1.
- Focus speed is comparable for both cameras.
For those who are still deciding between the 2, I hope this post has been useful =)
8 comments:
Please refer to my response at DPreview, thanks for the comparison.
That's why I never consider in m4/3.
Are you saying focus speed on the EX1 is as slow as the EPL1 kit lens? That's the slowest AF lens of any I've tried on the pen cameras. Its not a bad lens in other respects but its AF in any light, and particularly in low light, is simply bad. Every other lens I have is faaar better. I was considering the EX1 as a secondary, walk around camera, but if the AF is as slow as the epl1 with the kit lens, I'm gonna go with an LX5 instead.
With regards to AF, I stuck to Macro mode on the EX1 for convenience sake, and hence it is about the same as the EPL1. A re-test showed that the EX1 is slightly faster. But if you are hoping to nab photo-journalistic/sports shots, you have to pre-focus, or bring out your DSLR.
Thanks for pointing out!
The EPL1 shots look better. Especially the floor shot where you can clearly see details on the tiles/steps that are lost on the EX1.
A bigger sensor is always going to have an advantage and that's apparent in most of these shots (more detail, sharper). I think this test shows some bias. Also, NR at 2+sec exposures is not unlike DSLRs. I've had three (D100, D90 and D3100) and they all benefit from long exp NR above 2 sec.
The EX1 is fine for what it is, but it simply does not really compare to an E-PL1 (even with much faster glass), which in turn obviously does not compare to a midrange or higher DSLR.
Also, your lack of EXIF makes me wonder about what settings you had - whether you had IBIS correctly set on the EPL1 (you only mention it in passing but in reality it should give the Oly at least 1 stop advantage for handheld shooting).
Your shots aren't exactly alike, focal points and metering seem different each time. Was the Olympus on spot metering? Matrix? NR? Gradation settings? Color? How about the Samsung?
It appears that you set out to prove a point rather than conduct a true comparison, if you get my drift. I hope folks looking at either an EX1 or EPL1 take this with a pretty significant grain of salt.
Where were these taken?
I live in Taiwan and some of them look familiar :O
Awesome comparison by the way, thanks a lot.
Ok... I can't decide between this two cameras The ex1 seems great but maybe I'll discover I need something more serious and e.pl1 is great too but lens and accessories are too expensive so I will be stuck in the 14-42mm kit (no viewfinder, no different lenses. Can someone help me? I will use it for landscapes...
Post a Comment