Olympus E-P3 Gets DxOMarked

July 19, 2011 | Zoltan Arva-Toth | Compact System Camera | 8 Comments |
News image

DxO Labs have released their detailed findings on the Olympus E-P3’s new 12-megapixel sensor. The overall DxO Mark Sensor score is 51, which is surprisingly low, given that even the older and cheaper Olympus E-PL2 achieved a somewhat higher rating. The site puts raw dynamic range at 10.1 stops (at base sensitivity), which sounds like a lot but is actually among the lowest values they’ve ever published for a digital camera. The E-P3’s low-light ISO score of 536 is also quite low for a recent interchangeable-lens camera, although higher than that of the Panasonic GF2’s rating of 506. (Remember that these numbers measure raw sensor performance only, and tell you nothing about things like the cameras’ handling, focusing and operational speed, image processing, mechanical quality or overall ease of use.)

Website: DxOMark



Tracker Pixel for Entry

Your Comments

8 Comments | Newest Oldest First | Post a Comment

#1 benoxi

Why am i totally not surprised. Since DxO lab once rated Olympus XZ-1 outperforming FF SLRs anyway.

2:09 pm - Tuesday, July 19, 2011

#2 Josh

"The overall DxO Mark Sensor score is 51, which is surprisingly low..."

Or you just go out and shoot.

2:17 pm - Tuesday, July 19, 2011

#3 Bill

First, I really appreciate your site, have learned a lot from your info, and I consider the reviews I read here as among the ones I rely on most to make purchases. Olympus have traditional had among the best, if not the best jpeg processing engines. The E-P3 is no exception. They simply know how to get the most out of their files when saved as jpegs. And, it's probably their target market. I was professional for years (in the sense that I charged for my work), am not anymore, and am simply not going to take the time to process raw files, maybe a lot of their market feel this way. I remember reading a review when the XZ1 first appeared about how great it performed... and yet upon looking at the images on another site that specializes in comparing the images quickly with other cameras, in real shots in the studion setting, it was apparent that over 800 iso (and some would have said over 400 iso) there was a lot of smearing of fine detail to get rid of noise... it's a matter of what we want from the camera for the photography we do. My personal favorite is the Ricoh GRD III, but, it's not everyones. Good shooting - I like the posts above this mine because really, it's what they are both saying to me.

4:43 pm - Tuesday, July 19, 2011

#4 Dana

Wow, the 4/3rds sensor is still a vastly inferior piece of junk compared to ANY APS-C sensor. If you have halfway decent lenses and brand sheep you can gouge whatever you want for a camera body.

7:41 pm - Tuesday, July 19, 2011

#5 Beduin

Dana, you're either troll or a teenager (or both). Because it's not just the size that matters. Do you know how much 4/3 and APS-C sensors differ in size? Much less then both differ from FF or compact cameras. There are many more important factors then the sensor size when it comes to inner electronics and image IQ. Even dpreview said that the lowlight IQ of this camera is better then even that of many semi-pro DSLR.

9:33 am - Wednesday, July 20, 2011

#6 Jim McDermott

If you look at a range of DxO results it's increasingly clear that their lab's having serious amounts of cocaine delivered each morning. Relationship to real-world photography: zero.

10:01 am - Wednesday, July 20, 2011

#7 Edo

V.funny comments here... It is a wonder how the DxO lab actually comes to its conclusions and if there is an actual standard approach they abide by when formulating their results. Nitpicking about results is always a joy, but when the facts are askew you wonder where the relevance of any of this testing lies.

11:09 am - Wednesday, July 20, 2011

#8 Ismail

I don't understand why some people keep insisting the XZ-1 is so great. I have one (a choice which I really regret - I bought it because I could get an underwater housing). I shoot in RAW and use the the Olympus Viewer utility. The images are terrible, especially low light. The lens suffers from terrible distortion. It is a horrible, over-priced camera.

My wife's Samsung ST-550 (half the price) is vastly better. I shoot with a Canon 550D and a 7D as well and was shocked at the images coming out of the XZ-1.

Give the people at DxO a break - they're right

5:11 pm - Wednesday, December 7, 2011