ISO test: Mirrorless interchangable lens cameras


torak

New Member
Sep 4, 2009
678
0
0
#2
ISO6400




Analysis from the website:
Analysis:

* The NEX 5 has the best performance in terms of detail relative to noise. This is apparent even at low ISO, and the gap widens with increasing ISO.
* At very high ISO, the NEX5 has a stop or more advantage over the G2/GF1/E-PL1/E-P2. You can see that by looking at these side-by-side crops (color noise removed):


These observed results correlate well with data measured by DxOmark:


* The Panasonic G2, GF1, E-PL1, and E-P2 show very similar* results. This is consistent with my understanding that all of these cameras use the same sensor (with minor differences in the low pass filter).
* The Samsung NX10 is a little disappointing at very high ISO. Based on sensor size, one would expect the NX10 to achieve much better results than the Micro 4/3 cameras. While it outperformed the G2/GF1/E-P2/E-PL1 in this shootout, the magnitude of difference was less than I expected, and the results at the highest ISOs were disappointing.
* The Panasonic GH1 is, to my eye, second best in terms of signal relative to noise in these comparisons. One issue with the GH1 is that the files are susceptible to banding at high ISO. As a GH1 user, I've found that Nik Dfine 2.0 does a terrific job of addressing banding in GH1 files.
 

limwhow

Senior Member
Jun 9, 2009
7,048
0
0
Life revolves arOnd East Coast
#3
Hello, torak.
Thank you very much for sharing with us this series of comparison.
So it really looks like the Nex5 wins hands down when it comes to ISO performances.
Great news. Great news.
 

kentwong81

Senior Member
Jun 18, 2010
1,791
1
38
Singapore
www.kentwongphoto.com
#4
hey, I'm just curious. If you can shoot very nice photos at ISO400 and below, why you need to use ISO1600, 3200, 6400 or even 12800? How often do you use these high ISOs in your photography?
 

enzeru21

New Member
Apr 7, 2010
1,494
0
0
upper thomson
#5
hey, I'm just curious. If you can shoot very nice photos at ISO400 and below, why you need to use ISO1600, 3200, 6400 or even 12800? How often do you use these high ISOs in your photography?
people who dont want to use flash or cannot use flash cos they are in a concert or sth like that, then maybe will try to push the iso really high..

but ya, i guess its really unnecessary to go until 6400 la.. OTT~!!
 

#6
hey, I'm just curious. If you can shoot very nice photos at ISO400 and below, why you need to use ISO1600, 3200, 6400 or even 12800? How often do you use these high ISOs in your photography?
Sometimes wen u are indoors and u cant use flash to shoot. E.g. A symphonic band concert.
Other times can be that u are trying to shoot fast objects but the maximum aperture of the lens is not wide enough for efficient light. So increasing the ISO will make the photos look better in details. so being able to shoot with high ISO and producing very little noise has a lot of advantage:)

(Im quite new too so correct me if im wrong=X )
 

woeilee

New Member
Aug 26, 2008
910
0
0
CCK
woeilee.zenfolio.com
#7
hey, I'm just curious. If you can shoot very nice photos at ISO400 and below, why you need to use ISO1600, 3200, 6400 or even 12800? How often do you use these high ISOs in your photography?
High ISO is a great tool. It is not everywhere that you can shoot hand held with ISO400. High ISO allow flexibility in every situation. Often than not, high ISO capability allow fast shutter speed to be used on slow lens (e.g. kit lens) without user buying the more expensive big aperature lens. :D
 

Daoyin

Senior Member
Nov 25, 2008
2,805
6
0
West
#8
Thanks very much for the information. I imagine the Nikon mirrorless system would make life very interesting if and when it comes out.
 

Ouverture

Senior Member
Jan 19, 2009
2,195
0
0
#9
hey, I'm just curious. If you can shoot very nice photos at ISO400 and below, why you need to use ISO1600, 3200, 6400 or even 12800? How often do you use these high ISOs in your photography?
I use IS01600 and 3200 very often at home when I am taking pictures of my sons without flash. Even with fast lens like F2.8 or F1.4, I sometimes will still use maybe ISO800 to ensure I have sufficient shutter speed.

Yes, I can use ISO400 but at some dark corners of my house, the shutter speed is not sufficient to capture their movements.

Unless bounced flash, I do not use built in flash as to me, the purpose of using DSLR is to capture nice pictures without the "washout" look.

Of course, if I can shoot at lower ISO the better, but if my camera has good high ISO performance, why NOT?

A slightly noisier photo (ISO1600 vs ISO400) is better than blurred ones right?

A good high ISO is just like Image Stabiliser, they may not help you get better pictures, but they are there as a safety net to prevent you from screwing up your pictures.
 

Last edited:

Rashkae

Senior Member
Nov 28, 2005
19,105
12
0
#10
Thanks very much for the information. I imagine the Nikon mirrorless system would make life very interesting if and when it comes out.
Why? They use Sony sensors as well, so I'd expect it to be on par with the NEX-5.
 

Ouverture

Senior Member
Jan 19, 2009
2,195
0
0
#11
Thanks very much for the information. I imagine the Nikon mirrorless system would make life very interesting if and when it comes out.
Sensor and noise removal technology is improving as we speak.

By then Nikon comes out, the rest of competition may have moved up the scale again, not forgetting rumours of Canon/Pentax are also joining the fray...

So just enjoy what is available in the market now.
 

LowLights

Senior Member
Nov 14, 2006
2,937
0
0
East of this Sunny Island
#12
hey, I'm just curious. If you can shoot very nice photos at ISO400 and below, why you need to use ISO1600, 3200, 6400 or even 12800? How often do you use these high ISOs in your photography?
With improvement made to clean up high ISO and resultant photos are usable .. the question is Why Not ?

As stated by others .. there are many occasion that higher ISO is call on.

No harm in having such a advantage in your bag of arsenal right ;)

Just my 2 cents

@ TS .. thanks for the effort .. very informative and poisoning :sweat:
 

limwhow

Senior Member
Jun 9, 2009
7,048
0
0
Life revolves arOnd East Coast
#13
With improvement made to clean up high ISO and resultant photos are usable .. the question is Why Not ?

As stated by others .. there are many occasion that higher ISO is call on.

No harm in having such a advantage in your bag of arsenal right ;)

Just my 2 cents

@ TS .. thanks for the effort .. very informative and poisoning :sweat:
Actually, the portability and the lightness of Nex5 is very very attractive.
I kept testing the IQ of the Nex5 and I must say that it is really good with a crop factor of 1.5x.
Even using the kit lens of 18-55mm, we could still achieve decent results in indoor settings.
Usable ISO of 1600 to 3200 is very important.

It would certainly not replace DSLR at this point in times yet, but would be a part of one's arsenal to be used side by side with one's DSLR.

My humble opinion.
 

Ouverture

Senior Member
Jan 19, 2009
2,195
0
0
#14
Actually, the portability and the lightness of Nex5 is very very attractive.
I kept testing the IQ of the Nex5 and I must say that it is really good with a crop factor of 1.5x.
Even using the kit lens of 18-55mm, we could still achieve decent results in indoor settings.
Usable ISO of 1600 to 3200 is very important.

It would certainly not replace DSLR at this point in times yet, but would be a part of one's arsenal to be used side by side with one's DSLR.

My humble opinion.
Yes, I now almost bring out my NEX5 everyday with my kids with 16mm lens, settings fixed at F2.8, ISO AUTO and just shoot to capture all their candid shots without flash and I get to upload many more pictures to facebook to share with friends and family than ever before.

Most of the pictures are actually at ISO1600 (as I normally take indoors) and I dun even notice it until I see the exif...

My DSLR would have capture sharper pictures (with better lenses) abeit heavier and bigger and my PNS might probably passed off for ISO800 at low resolution upload in FB but with more blurred photos...
 

Last edited:

android17

New Member
Sep 27, 2009
945
0
0
#15
I think the mirrorless systems are a great tool to compliment a dslr. This is especially true for prime lens users, or those who walkabout with telezooms (they can keep a nex5 with 16mm in the bag). It will certainly be much more convenient for them not having to change lens, and the nex5 is light enough not to be a burden to bring around.
 

kentwong81

Senior Member
Jun 18, 2010
1,791
1
38
Singapore
www.kentwongphoto.com
#18
I see. I know that high ISO can give you fast shutter speed to avoid blur pictures. The thing is that I can't accept the noises seen in the photos. Are the noises obvious for DSLR cameras and NEX5 at ISO1600 and 3200?
 

Rashkae

Senior Member
Nov 28, 2005
19,105
12
0
#19
I see. I know that high ISO can give you fast shutter speed to avoid blur pictures. The thing is that I can't accept the noises seen in the photos. Are the noises obvious for DSLR cameras and NEX5 at ISO1600 and 3200?
Take a look at the sample pics. Take a look at the dozens of reviews all over the web. Then you decide for yourself if it's "obvious" or not.
 

enzeru21

New Member
Apr 7, 2010
1,494
0
0
upper thomson
#20
I see. I know that high ISO can give you fast shutter speed to avoid blur pictures. The thing is that I can't accept the noises seen in the photos. Are the noises obvious for DSLR cameras and NEX5 at ISO1600 and 3200?
would you rather you have a slightly noisy photo, or you totally miss the shot??

obvious or not is one thing, whether you can take a photo and print one is another.. alot of people pixel peep and think that their photos are not nice..

sometimes even if the color or the noise not very nice, the photo speaks a thousand words and conveys alot of meaning...