Why does my EA50UH look so terrible compared to my GH2?

T

thedigitalcurrent

Active member
Stock EA50UH with stock lens, compared to my stock GH2 with a 80-200 2.8 nikkor lens, I just can't get over how horrible the difference is. Is this the lens? The compression? They both record at 24mbit....the lens on my GH2 I know is quite good, is that it?

Here are some still shots from the original files. The first 3 pictures are from the Sony. The last 2 are the good ones from the GH2. The GH2 has almost no compression artifacts, the background is nice and soft, just overall way better!

Make sure to look at them in full size, it's hard to see the difference when they are shrunk down.

http://www.thedigitalcurrent.com/comparison/sony1.jpg
http://www.thedigitalcurrent.com/comparison/sony2.jpg
http://www.thedigitalcurrent.com/comparison/sony3.jpg
http://www.thedigitalcurrent.com/comparison/gh2.jpg
http://www.thedigitalcurrent.com/comparison/gh21.jpg
 
I don't see something horribly wrong with the sony shots other than slightly missed focus. (and compression artefacts but hey that's a screenshot) Nail focus, adjust picture profile, and/or add sharpening in post, it can look very good. And of course a long premium 2.8 zoom will get a better out of focus rendition than a 18-somethingmm f5.6
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top