Nex 5n vs. OMD with CV 40/1.4

wt21

Hall of Famer
I sold my OMD recently for a number of reasons. This was after acquiring a NEX 5n. When I had both, I ran some tests, and I noticed two things: the 5n tended to have less pf and also sharper edges and corners than the OMD with the CV40/1.4. Since I was thinking of selling the OMD anyway, based on these tests, I sold it so I could concentrate on the 5n.

Below is a screen shot of one of the many snaps I took using the two cameras, with the same lens at f/4.0. I have others, but they all show the same thing.

Any ideas on this? I heard Sony had put some money into the new 16MP sensor to address legacy glass at the corners. New micro lens designs, etc. Could that be what's going on? I also noticed that my OMD generally added more pf in a lot more of my shots than my previous m43 cameras, but as I did not have any other m43 cameras to test against the OMD, I couldn't confirm on direct comparisons.

Screen Shot 2012-10-01 at 2.07.36 PM.jpg


If you are wondering about both being in focus, I can do center crops at a later time, but both are in focus on the center, though again the OMD shows a bit more pf in the center. These are both from the left edge. Also interesting is the full stop difference in exposure the two cameras chose (both shot on A mode with the CV40 set at f/4.0)
 
Interesting comparison, WT.

I have read the micro-lenses on the 5N help with corner sharpness and color shifting on wide and adapted lenses. I wonder if the CA/PF you are seeing maybe has more to do with pixel size/density? I remember seeing reviews where the same native lens on the NEX-7 produced more CA than on the 5N.

I don't have any experience on adapted lenses, but I have noticed CA (and PF at larger apertures) on the native E lenses that I have tried on my NEX-7 - Sigma 19, Zeiss 24 and Sony 50/1.8 (latter two both returned). I didn't notice much of any CA on my m4/3 primes on the OM-D, with the exception of the PL 25mm, which tended to PF for me when wide and also a lot of CA in back-lit trees, leaves, etc (probably photographer error).
 
To be honest I haven't once used an adapted lens on my E-M5 since I bought it, nor the NEX-5N (albeit I've only had that for about 2 weeks). As fas as I know the 5N is better optimised for adpated lenses because of the arrangement of the microlenses on the edges of the sensor. The sensor on the E-M5 obviously has a few different behaivours to that of other m4/3 cameras (witness the purple splodging issue with the Panasonic 7-14mm lens). Aside from the I can't say that I have found it any more susceptible to purple fringing than the others, but the only software that I have used to process the E-M5 files is LR 4.1 so it's possible that if there is more purple fringing I am just not seeing it because my camera presets include a lens colour profile.
 
For legacy lenses Sony is deffinately a better choice, specially if you are not depending on Oly IBIS and more used to of Sony MF focus peaking. However the CA stuff you mentioned in this thread probably has nothing to do with the camera body (I may be completely wrong), but no doesn't look like Sony is supporting all those legacy lenses in one single camera.

Having said that, would you like to provide bit more details to your test, what other params you were using other than f4 aperture, specially ISO, shutter speed and any exposure compensation you might have applied.

To me sky behind oly shot is clearly brighter than the sony one, and CA appears more in contrasty scenes. I am not sure but it looks these shots were taken in different times too as Oly shot got loads of motion blur (windy) and it also looks noisy (higher ISO).
 
For legacy lenses Sony is deffinately a better choice, specially if you are not depending on Oly IBIS and more used to of Sony MF focus peaking. However the CA stuff you mentioned in this thread probably has nothing to do with the camera body (I may be completely wrong), but no doesn't look like Sony is supporting all those legacy lenses in one single camera.

Having said that, would you like to provide bit more details to your test, what other params you were using other than f4 aperture, specially ISO, shutter speed and any exposure compensation you might have applied.

To me sky behind oly shot is clearly brighter than the sony one, and CA appears more in contrasty scenes. I am not sure but it looks these shots were taken in different times too as Oly shot got loads of motion blur (windy) and it also looks noisy (higher ISO).

If you look at the pictures, ISO and ss are clearly marked. No EV dialed in. It's possible, though, that I was using different metering types. I didn't think of that, and will have to check the detailed EXIF.
 
Thanks .. I also noticed they were taken on the same day .. i like your file naming structure, i mean the way you are importing in LR :)

So if they were taken right after each other? Why is there so much motion blur in Oly photo? that was the reason i was suspecting difference in shutter speed @ 1/2500 its real wierd.

Otherwise since mostly lenses are sharper in the center and 4/3 sensor is cropping the lens more, I could only think it could be only sharper. But then this brings another question in mind, if these are the extreme edges of the two photos, shouldn't it be more view for NEX? In past I used MF Nikon lenses on Pen E-P1 without any such concern, but then i must admit, I never compared its results with a Nikon body in such a way.
 
I could send you a dropbox link for download. I suppose I could put them on smugmug, too. Let me look at that.
 
Back
Top