This part focuses on the GX200 and the LC1. I also included the GX100 and the GRD II. The pictures as before are taken at ISO 100 in RAW.
All pictures are taken at 28mm in A-mode at f5.4 (GX100 & GX200), f5.6 (LC1 & GRD II), all cameras were set to Auto WB and ISO 100. I did not include any JPG comparisons here since I have done this before and these cameras are all best when used in RAW mode.
The RAW files are converted using RAW Therapee 2.4 and the ‘Neutral’ profile, no noise reduction or other edits have been performed.
Picture 1 - RAW
Here it's the same story as before, the cameras are all very close when using RAW, the LC1 has the lowest resolution but aside from that there is not much to choose between the GX200 or the other cameras.
Picture 2 - RAW
It is clear that for landscape pictures having a higher resolution really pays off, the GX200 is best when you use RAW and the GRD II will give you more dynamic range without sacrificing resolution.
Picture 3 - RAW
Although the LC1 metered more for the outside is clearly shows where a bigger sensor and lower MP count come in handy, it shows an impressive dynamic range and clearly outperforms all other cameras. No test for fringing this time since the LC1 has no blown areas and the other cameras have been covered before. The GX200 is worst here and seems to have metered the scene wrong.
Picture 4 - RAW
The LC1 wins again due to the better dynamic range but the GX200 is quite close this time. Both the GRD II and GX100 are very close to the GX200 output although the GX100 output is slightly out of focus for some reason.
Looking at the results it is clear that a bigger sensor with less MP wins hands down when it comes to the dynamic range but having a higher resolution is very good for landscapes to extract more details.
Continue on to Part 6...
No comments:
Post a Comment