Sensor Size Does Matter


Hall of Famer
Brisbane, Australia
Real Name
One thing to keep in mind regarding Micro 4/3 is that it is not fair to lump all m4/3 cameras ever built in the same basket; as though there has only ever been one version of the sensor, one version of the processing engine, etc. My E-P1 is a very special camera to me and used for the right application it still is a wonderful camera but I always felt that it's sweet spot was noticably smaller than the Canon DSLRs that I had used up until that point. It was something that I noticed particularly in post-processing where I couldn't "push" the image as far as I could on the Canons.

These days I am using a GH1 and an E-PL1 and while even they are essentially still first generation bodies they use either a different sensor (GH1) or an updated sensor/AA filter (E-PL1) compared to the G1/GF1/E-P1 bodies. For me they improve on theIQ of the E-P1 in two ways by dialling up the sharpness and dialling down the noise. Well, maybe not so much dialling down the noise but producing a more pleasant looking noise that can be turned down more easily if required. While the E-PL1 misses out on some of the E-P1 specs and controls and doesn't look anywhere near as nice, I now choose to use it over the E-P1 for the reasons mentioned above. The later Olympus bodies are further refinements of the E-PL1 and of course the Panasonic GH2 and G3 will be different again with their newer sensors, but I have no practical experience with any of these.

I don't know if a Micro 4/3 camera will ever produce an output identical to another equivalent tech APS-C sensor, but I appreciate that it is different. For the application of a street/urban/documentary style camera I find the size, the system, and IQ to be just about right.

But that's just me...

Latest posts

Latest threads

Top Bottom