Last Update: 4th May 2024
Introduction.
My son said I may try his Sony ZV-E1 while he tried my Fuji XT-5. The Sony ZV-E1 uses the same 12MP FF BSI sensor as the Sony A7S III. A camera like this should be tested. I would have liked to include my Fuji XT-5. The test results are exciting and reveal much about what to expect from various cameras. For example, the Sony ZV-E1 pixel area is 5 times larger than the Olympus E-M1 III and almost 20 times larger than the Olympus XZ-2. How much do these pixel area differences impact the IQ of these cameras? What should we look for, and how will you test these cameras?
Sensor Sensitivity is determined by the Optical and Quantum efficiencies of the pixels. That means larger pixels should capture more light and convert more photons into electrons, right? The secret is to study shadow details because more sensitive sensors capture more info in the shadows. How many shadow detail variances do you expect to find between the Sony ZV-E1 and the older Olympus XZ-2? While I am not testing for noise, what do you expect to find between these 2 cameras? Those studying my articles have enough information and knowledge to evaluate these questions.
I included several Olympus cameras in this test. We can learn much from the different pixel areas of these cameras. For example, the pixel area of the Olympus E-1 is 3 times larger than the EM1 III. It is sometimes easier to simulate sensor differences with the equipment you have...
Why do golfers have a handicap? It lets experienced and weaker golfers play competitively. It's safe to say equivalence is often applied like a golf handicap. That means equivalence sets unnecessary restrictions on M43 photographers. Do we need a handicap to evaluate cameras? Each camera is unique and should get a chance to showcase its capabilities. The only variable that should be the same is the test studio. I applied this basic philosophy to the test images further down.
Preparing the Test Studio
The test image had a 4EV variance between the brightest and darkest parts. Each exposure was set at the brightest point with the camera's spot meter. Each sensor's Saturation and SNR levels were 4 stops lower in the shadows. Study the photons to electrons graph in this article for more about sensor saturation and SNR levels. Every digital photographer should know this graph...
Every sensor is technically different. This knowledge helps us to plan our camera tests correctly. One typically focuses on pixel area and not sensor size when evaluating the technical aspects of image sensors. Sensor size only determines the optical characteristics of the camera. I created the following chart to help you study the different pixel areas of the tested cameras.
The chart shows each sensor's megapixels in red. For example, go to the 12MP FF sensor on the horizontal axis and compare its pixel area to the 12MP (1/1.7") sensor on the vertical axis. We can compare all the sensors in this chart. That means we are focussing on pixel area and not size! For example, how much will the Olympus E1 shadow details differ from the Olympus E-M1 III?
Sensor size is a marketing tool used to entice those with little knowledge. It's meaningless and tells us nothing about image sensors. For example, it's better to focus on the diagonal measurements of the sensor. The reason is the lens image circle has to cover the complete sensor. This explains the more light "effect" confusing many FF enthusiasts or the equivalence factor when comparing the optical differences between M43, APC, and full-frame lens mounts. See the table below for more.
How should we study these controlled image quality tests on different sensor sizes and pixel areas? To prepare yourself, take a few moments, select a few cameras (pixel areas), and write down what you like to learn from these tests. For example, how many more shadow details do you expect from the 12MP full-frame sensor over the smaller 1/1.7" sensor? Also, study the Fuji X-T5 or Medium Format 100MP sensor and explain why their shadow details could technically be similar to the 20MP Olympus M43 sensor. Why is image noise a potential challenge for these two Fuji cameras..?
Olympus C-770UZ (4MP) - ISO64, f3.2, 1/160 - OOC JPEG and not edited...
Let's study the different test images...
All the noise filters were off while taking 4 RAW files with each camera. The Olympus Enhanced RAW Files were converted in Workspace (No NR), and I used the Photoshop 2024 Raw Converter (No NR) for the rest. I brightened the shadows to reveal the captured details of each camera. All the cameras were optimized to deliver better detail and IQ. One typically expects less visible noise from a saturated sensor with higher SNR values. That said, these test images are all about detail...
The test images are best viewed on a large display. Click on the first image...
I cropped the above samples. The goal is to assist readers in studying the details. I upped the shadows and prepped them for the web. I did no NR or color changes. These converted raw files give a good indication of the captured sensor data. Studying the reader's feedback, it's clear that each person sees the results differently. Knowledge and regular practice help photographers get good results from various cameras. I expected more IQ differences between 20 years and 20X pixel areas.
How does one explain the increased noise levels of the E1, E500, E-620, and EP3? One would typically expect less noise from fewer pixels with less control wiring. Older image sensors have more noise because their quantum and optical efficiencies are lower. That means a lower photon-to-electron conversion rate with older image sensors. This translates into losses and more noise...
How would you explain the increased noise levels of the Panasonic LX-10?
What were my camera configurations? I used the 17mm f1.2 lens on my M43 cameras and the 50mm f2 macro lens on my 4/3rds DSLRs. The Canon 6D II had an EF 35mm f2.0 lens, and the Sony ZV-E1 had a 55mm f1.8 Zeiss lens. That means I used my tripod distance to the image to compensate for lower megapixel sensors and the different focal lengths. I used Manual Exposure with an Aperture of f3.5 or f4 on these cameras. I also used the 2s timer and +1EV ETTR on each camera.
I used the same white balance (marker) to convert the raw files.
Conclusion
You don't need an expert to tell you the Olympus XZ-2 and Sony ZV-E1 image results are very similar. For example, I couldn't find 20 times more image details for the Sony. That means the Olympus XZ-2's image details compared well to the Sony ZV-E1 with its 20 times larger pixel areas. The 20-year age difference between some cameras also didn't make a 20X difference. Finally, less than 100% pixel area differences seem insignificant. That means one can ignore the sensor sensitivity differences between M43 (Live MOS) and APC (Standard CMOS and BSI) sensors. What makes a real difference is knowledge, lens selections, and regularly using Workspace and one's Olympus camera.
I used the Olympus E-M1 II for years and the E-M1 III for +18 months. These are exceptional cameras with excellent IQ, speed, and functionality. The most fascinating part about them is the 20MP Live MOS sensor. I would love to see the specs Olympus used to find this sensor 12 years ago.
What did we learn from this review? We simply can't trust those repeating the same size and capture phrases. The Sony ZV E1 is a top performer and delivers excellent image details and shadow data. We also saw the Image Quality differences between cameras are way less than expected. Is this the reason why photographers are rediscovering older cameras and sensors? For example, the TruePic processors and 16MP sensors in the E-M1, E-PL9, E-M5 II, and E-M10 II/III are excellent. Photographers are better off evaluating costs, functionality, speed, application, and form factor.
The following 4 samples are the final edits with Workspace, Photoshop, and Photolab 6. I did them to help readers get a feel for the various edited versions of the above samples...
Olympus E-1 with 50mm f2.0 lens - ISO100, f4.0, 0.6 seconds (1EV ETTR) - Raw converted and edited in Photoshop.
Olympus E-1 with 50mm f2.0 lens - ISO100, f4.0, 0.6 seconds (1EV ETTR) - Enhanced Raw converted and edited in Workspace.
I used the standard NR filter on the above image. Workspace has an older NR filter for older cameras like the E-1. The E-410 and newer models have a different and more advanced NR filter...
Olympus EM1 III with 17mm f1.2 Pro lens - ISO100, f4.0, 1/2 seconds (1EV ETTR) - Raw converted and edited in Photoshop.
Those photographers who make a habit of improving their Enhanced Raw files and Image Editing skills enjoy an advantage. The benefits of improving one's knowledge plus camera and editing skills are remarkable. I often write about the benefits of converting your Enhanced Raw Files with Workspace. Also, see this
video reviewing the Enhanced Raw Format and Workspace.
Olympus EM1 III with 17mm f1.2 Pro lens - ISO100, f4.0, 1/2 seconds (1EV ETTR) - Raw converted and edited in Photolab 6.
Final observations. Study the "deeper" shadows between the flowers for more on how these cameras extract shadow details. The Canon 6D II revealed more shadow details than the others. The last four edits are interesting. One can spend hours editing these raw files for different results. DxO PL-6 or 7 is a good solution for older Olympus raw files, especially if you prefer basic conversions and editing. I plan to scale down on Workspace with the high-level PC access OM-System wants.
See this
article where I comment on 12MP versus 100MP printed samples.
Also, see my Workspace firmware update page -
link.
Best Siegfried
