E-620 v. E-410 ISO

[silversx80]

I know it's not a fair fight, but I did it anyway. Both bodies mounted in the same position (tripod and head position were not moved), 14-54 mk II and remote shutter release. Aperture priority, EV +1.0, cable release. The following will be each ISO and its respective 100% crop. ACR 5.4 as a neutral RAW converter. WB was done by clicking on the same exact place of the bike in each pic. You can see slight color variations, my guess is that the different sensor renders differently. WB was of different value in the ACR window for the different bodies. All other settings were the same for each photo. <1/3 stop EV change to try to match histograms, Fill +10, Recovery +7, Luminance NR +10, Everything else default.

There appears to be more noise in the E-620 on a per-pixel basis, but both shots, full frame, on a poster might show the E-620 to have less noise.

Gallery here (for EXIF and such): http://silversx80.smugmug.com/gallery/9112267_C7CMb/1/607316699_L4Uvy

The interesting find for me is that it seems ISO 100 gets much better shadow detail than ISO 200 on the E-620. I initially thought I'd get better shadow detail out of ISO 200 from all the reviews, as well as better highlight details. I'll have to try some highlights soon. ISO 100 @ 1/13s and ISO 200 @ 1/25s.

ISO 100
E-620
http://silversx80.smugmug.com/photos/607309373_pSGig-L.jpg

E-410
http://silversx80.smugmug.com/photos/607321020_xezE9-L.jpg

100% respectively
http://silversx80.smugmug.com/photos/607308172_aEMAV-X3.jpg
http://silversx80.smugmug.com/photos/607319949_GxFEP-X3.jpg

ISO 200
E-620
http://silversx80.smugmug.com/photos/607310839_e7FxG-L.jpg

E-410
http://silversx80.smugmug.com/photos/607322232_qwU5d-L.jpg

100% respectively
http://silversx80.smugmug.com/photos/607309442_Gt55a-X3.jpg
http://silversx80.smugmug.com/photos/607321113_QyAu7-X3.jpg

ISO 400
E-620
http://silversx80.smugmug.com/photos/607312444_KFjHE-L.jpg

E-410
http://silversx80.smugmug.com/photos/607323709_FnrvD-L.jpg

100% respectively
http://silversx80.smugmug.com/photos/607310934_e7ndz-X3.jpg
http://silversx80.smugmug.com/photos/607322323_BtCR8-X3.jpg

ISO 800
E-620
http://silversx80.smugmug.com/photos/607314251_v5WZj-L.jpg

E-410
http://silversx80.smugmug.com/photos/607325317_oMoJV-L.jpg

100% respectively
http://silversx80.smugmug.com/photos/607312537_hY6Uu-X3.jpg
http://silversx80.smugmug.com/photos/607323774_iEDdu-X3.jpg

ISO 1600
E-620
http://silversx80.smugmug.com/photos/607316566_DQhTG-L.jpg

E-410
http://silversx80.smugmug.com/photos/607327331_frQ9h-L.jpg

100% respectively
http://silversx80.smugmug.com/photos/607314338_uTF4k-X3.jpg
http://silversx80.smugmug.com/photos/607325410_dmxaR-X3.jpg

ISO 3200
E-620
http://silversx80.smugmug.com/photos/607319884_yM6DT-L.jpg

100%
http://silversx80.smugmug.com/photos/607316699_L4Uvy-X3.jpg

Comments are more then welcome.

[Internaut]

Yes - similar experience E-510 vs E-30. The newer generation Olympus DSLRs have usable ISO of 1600 and 3200 is good for B&W with careful PP IMO. They're catching up with Canon (though Nikon seems to hold a considerable lead when it comes to clean high ISO output at the moment).

Now, if you want ugly, here's an E-510 shot, done at 1600, under exposed by one stop and then pushed, giving an effective ISO 3200....

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2226/1752048155_4a61cd5246_b.jpg

I don't think you need to pixel peep to appreciate what a bad idea that was....