Verifying the Noise Resistance of the OM-5 Mark II
Do not underestimate Micro Four Thirds!
This time, I would like to take a look at just how good the high-sensitivity noise resistance is on the OM-5 Mark II, the latest model from OM SYSTEM.
Let's start with this image.
This photo was taken of a train late at night, and the speed of the train at the time was likely around 25 km/h. Yes, it is a moving subject!
Usually, when shooting at night, you fix the camera on a tripod and set the shutter speed to something long, like 1 or 5 seconds, but here, since the subject is moving—even if slowly—a slow shutter speed would cause motion blur.
Therefore, I set the shutter speed to 1/200 to prevent motion blur.
And the sensitivity is a staggering 20000!
With a full-frame format camera, noise at around ISO 20000 is decent, but many photography enthusiasts might think that with a Micro Four Thirds camera, the screen would be so full of noise that it wouldn't be worth looking at.
So, let's take a look at how much noise is generated by zooming in on the area enclosed in the yellow square.
What do you think? Can you see any noise?
You can see that the gradation from highlights to shadows is captured so smoothly and beautifully that it looks polished.
Yes, it is no exaggeration to say that there is almost no noise at all. Furthermore, you can see that the depiction of each detail, including the precision and tones, is captured magnificently.
This is the depiction of Micro Four Thirds at ISO 20000!
This was generated from RAW data, and for me, it has turned out to be a work with no complaints whatsoever. (I only adjusted the brightness and contrast slightly; no fine retouching was done at all.)
The biggest reason I shifted from full-frame to Micro Four Thirds (OM SYSTEM) for both my professional and personal equipment is this overwhelming, beautiful rendering power that is second to none, even compared to full-frame cameras, even at high sensitivity.
Until now, it has been repeatedly said in media and on social media that Micro Four Thirds cameras have low rendering power because the sensor is small and cannot withstand large prints, but those are completely things of the past now. (Urban legends?)
Furthermore, it is no exaggeration to say that it possesses performance that even surpasses full-frame rendering. (Maybe I'll compare them sometime.)
Small, lightweight, precise rendering, reasonable price, and beautiful rendering power at high sensitivity! The system that has it all is the Micro Four Thirds, OM SYSTEM camera. (Panasonic is the same.)
For your reference, this image was developed from RAW data using software called Photolab 8 (the version has since been updated to Photolab 9). Please note that the results will look different depending on the development software used (such as OM Workspace or Adobe Lightroom).
Please be aware that JPEG data generated from the camera body will result in images where noise is more noticeable.
Oh, as I wrote last time, there is one disadvantage to Micro Four Thirds: it is harder to get bokeh compared to full-frame.
For those who want to get even a little bit of bokeh, mainly in flower, portrait, or macro photography, it might be better to use a full-frame camera.
However, when we talk about bokeh, it can be changed as much as you like depending on:
• The f-stop of the lens used
• The focal length of the lens used
• The distance to the subject
• The distance between the subject and the background
So, my view is that it is too early to simply say that Micro Four Thirds is hard to get bokeh with.
Finally, I will say it again this time: just to be clear, I am not an employee or affiliated with OM Digital Solutions! (Haha)