Olympus E-620 Has Arrived: Testing Commences Sony Announces New Alpha DSLRs: A230, A330, A380

ISO Comparison: Olympus E-620 vs. Nikon D90 vs. Canon EOS 5D Mark II

32 comments

Posted by Patrick on May 18, 2009 in Cameras, Uncategorized

Interested in cameras, photographers, and tutorials? Then consider subscribing to our RSS feed to stay up to date on the latest in photography related news at Neutralday.com

We’ve been saying for awhile now that at this point, all of the new cameras, regardless of manufacturer, can provide consumers great performance even at the entry-level. To demonstrate, we’ve put together this comparison of ISO samples from a couple of cameras we’re currently testing, and have added the Canon EOS 5D Mark II as well. You’ll note that while the kit lens included with Olympus E-620 isn’t able to fully resolve all the details (Zuiko Digital 14-42mm 1:3.5-5.6 ED) in the setup, the camera is able to provide usable ISO up to, and in my eye including, ISO 1600. The D90 (paired with the new 35mm DX) provides terrific results with even clearer use of ISO 1600, even ISO 3200 possibly. Then you have the 5D2 (50mm f/1.4), whose ISO performance never fails to impress me, maintaing plenty of detail, and providing usable results at ISO 6400!

The point isn’t to start a flame war, but rather to show what to expect from the various class of cameras. For a near $600 camera, the Olympus E-620 provides better ISO results than more expensive cameras a generation ago. That’s no small thing for an entry level camera, and from a smaller sensor than the other contenders. Given the camera’s intended market, the results will likely be more than enough. In the Nikon D90’s case, the camera is intended for more advanced amateurs, or perhaps even as a backup for semi-pro/pro use. It’s hundreds of dollars more than the Olympus E-620, but provides a cleaner stop of ISO and performance well suited for it’s likely consumers. As for the 5D2, it’s substantially more expensive than the others, but provides perhaps 2 more stops of very clean and detailed ISO than the D90, in other words for pro and serious amateur use, it provides high levels of performance.

You can click on the thumbnails for a larger view, or follow the “original” link to see a full size file. All were shot at f/8 at equivalent lengths under the same lighting, with in camera NR turned off, and no processing or noise removal done in post.

Olympus E-620	Nikon D90	Canon EOS 5D Mark II	Comparison
ISO 100 original	ISO 100 original	ISO 100 original	ISO 100 original
ISO 200 original	ISO 200 original	ISO 200 original	ISO 200 original
ISO 400 original	ISO 400 original	ISO 400 original	ISO 400 original
ISO 800 original	ISO 800 original	ISO 800 original	ISO 800 original
ISO 1600 original	ISO 1600 original	ISO 1600 original	ISO 1600 original
ISO 3200 original	ISO 3200 original	ISO 3200 original	ISO 3200 original
	ISO 6400 original	ISO 6400 original	ISO 6400 original
		ISO 12800 original	ISO 12800 original
		ISO 25600 original	ISO 25600 original

Continue the Discussion

Join us on Facebook! Become a fan of Neutralday today!

Become a fan of Neutralday on Facebook. Interact with us and stay updated on what's coming next at Neutralday, photography news, and other fans' insights.

Follow us on Twitter! Grab our tweets right here.

Follow Neutralday on Twitter. Insights on the cameras we're reviewing, and frequent photography related news, thoughts, and links.

Support Neutralday by shopping at our preferred retailer, B&H Photo

Explore Similar Posts

32 Responses to “ISO Comparison: Olympus E-620 vs. Nikon D90 vs. Canon EOS 5D Mark II”

Nigel Jones says:
May 18, 2009 at 5:43 pm

Interesting. I actually find the E620 nicer than the D90 up to/including 1600. There seems to be slightly more detail/less smoothing the highlights. Perhaps it’s the lens or default jpeg settings.

At 3200 the E620 looses out with too much noise

The 5D is definately a class above, with details even at ISO 100 just streaming out of the screen. The strawberry texture is so alive.

Beyond my budget though….

reply
Charles says:
May 19, 2009 at 3:43 am

I agree with nigel. I actually prefer the E-620 to the D90 images too. You said NR was off, right? In that case I would of expected the Oly to look even noiser, but it seems to compare well and hold details very well, especially considering this is the kit lens. 1600 looks good. It would be interesting to see it at low and/or normal NR. Interesting to see it compared to the Canon, but that’s on a whole different level.

reply
Patrick says:
May 19, 2009 at 8:11 am

I agree with the performance of the E-620, but in fairness to the D90, I think at 1600 is has less noise, and more detail (though again the E-620 is limited by lens) Still, the point is, ISO 1600 on the E-620 is quite usable. (part of the reason I’m anxious for a micro 4/3 compact from Oly!)

reply
dSLR Dad says:
June 1, 2009 at 9:52 pm

I have to disagree with you three gentlemen. When I look at the original images, the Olympus seems to be slightly over-saturating and boosting the contrast to compensate for it’s loss of detail compared with the D90 at ISO’s 800 and 1600. The Nikon just seems to be showing more texture, even as the noise levels increase.
The 5D Mk II $how$ that resolution does matter. The thread detail of the red fabric in the ISO1600 comparison crop is eye-opening to say the least.
I would love to see a comparison across equal models. It’s not really a fair fight for the Olympus.

reply
- Patrick says:
  June 1, 2009 at 11:15 pm
  
  dslr dad,
  It isn’t a fair fight, and isn’t intended as such. I agree with you, the D90 is better (gives you an idea how D300 would compare to 5D Mark II).
  
  Still, for 600 camera with a smaller sensor and kit lens, the point is the Olympus provides usable ISO 1600. You can’t ask for much more.
  
  reply
Bart says:
June 2, 2009 at 8:53 pm

Thanks for this interesting comparison. I like that it isn’t fair and shows good$, better$$, best$$$$. Lens quality also plays a part here.

I’m considering Olympus, since I have an OM1 and some nice OM lenses, But also like the Nikon D90. Full frame is out of the question$. Several other comparisons clearly favor the D90 over the 4/3 SLRs. But how does this pixil peeping, blowing up small areas of a print, translate to a real enlargement?

This has pushed me to stay with Olympus.

reply
- Patrick says:
  June 2, 2009 at 10:27 pm
  
  bart, if you click through to the original, I’ve included the entire file from all cameras, 100%. There are good reasons to pick olympus, but enlargements aren’t one of them.
  
  reply
MK @ Photography Blog says:
July 13, 2009 at 12:15 pm

I like the layout of this review and the image matrix… it offers a nice, quick comparison.

reply
- Patrick says:
  July 15, 2009 at 10:17 am
  
  Thanks!
  
  reply
Lynn S says:
October 16, 2009 at 10:36 pm

Patrick, you’re my hero! Thanks for this clear comparison. I was being told the Oly wouldn’t be good enough for me, but based on this I could live with it (I’m no pro); considering the price and SIZE and the fact that I already have Oly OM lenses…it seems to be a no brainer now

reply
- Patrick says:
  October 17, 2009 at 1:47 pm
  
  I’ve always wanted to be a hero…It does a pretty good job, and a fun…take anywhere camera.
  
  reply
Ryan says:
October 30, 2009 at 1:18 pm

A friend of mine over at DeviantArt is constantly telling me that the D90 is better than the 5D Mark-II

He told me that the sensor of the D90 is more expensive than the 5D’s sensor. I honestly call that bluff. The D90 is a crop camera while the 5D Mark-II is a FF camera.

http://biozz.deviantart.com/art/High-ISO-nikon-vs-canon-141854988

I honestly think the 5D Mark-II is better because it preserved the color, contrast, sharpness and the details of the dog.

How about you… what do you think?:D

reply
- Patrick says:
  October 30, 2009 at 6:07 pm
  
  I don’t know, it seems off to me. I know I get better results at ISO 6400 on my 5D2, and how big were these crops from the actual photos. Regardless, there’s no comparison between the two cameras at higher ISO in most comparisons.
  
  reply
Anton says:
January 8, 2010 at 12:27 am

to Patrick: Excellent comparison test!!!!!

Oly e620 performs well in these test (as an underdog in class). I personally own e620 since it is the (personal opinion) most complete entry level dslr I have researched. I rarely shoot at ISO 1600 or above so I don’t really care that much.

However, I found it a D90 performance in this test a disappointment. This is a higher level dslr, but perform in the samilar level of the entry level.

5D truly an excellent camera by this test. (Anyone knows how 7D performs?)

I also agree in the comment of lens limitation also, e620 kit includes standard level lenses (though they are the better ones in its class)

In summary, this test strengthen my decision that e620 is the best camera I can get as a beginner from p&s to dslr. The Super Control Panel does help me a lot. And the budget, sorry to say I can’t afford the higher level.

Learning new things is always fun.

reply
- Patrick says:
  January 9, 2010 at 12:41 am
  
  Anton,
  Oh, the E-620 is such a fun little camera–but surprisingly robust too–as far as setup and controls go–lots of menu items for enthusiasts to explore.
  
  reply
nigel Jones says:
January 9, 2010 at 1:18 pm

Since I added the first comment above I actually ended up going with the Nikon D90, 18-105mm lens & SB600 flash. I couldn’t have been happer — truly excellent kit.

But it’s also clear the important thing is to have a camera you feel good about, feels good in the hand, and one that you know how to use, and it’s how you use it that really counts!

So good luck to everyone with their choice!

reply
- Patrick says:
  January 11, 2010 at 11:38 pm
  
  Nigel,
  Well, you’ve got yourself an excellent camera, one of my favorites from last year–great IQ and perfect size (IMO).
  
  reply
Patrycjusz says:
February 5, 2010 at 5:27 am

Hi all,
I have Nikon D90, soled 18-105, used 50 1.8, now useing with 35 1.8
Very nice paket, but I want to change the system into 4/3.
WHY? Becouse:
better lenses performance (in Nikkor U need to buy very expensive to get such sharpness from the very opened ap)
stabilisation in body (Oly)
Articulated display and not so heavy, AF in LV and normal is in my opinien better then in D90. I mean 1X vs 5X (E-620) and 11X points (E-3/E-30)

What only worries me, the ISO performance.
What do U think about it? from the samles I see that E-620 performed very well vs thos two machines.

Thank U fro any advise.

Regards for all fans of each Mark

PAT

reply
- Patrick says:
  February 6, 2010 at 8:07 pm
  
  Pat,
  Hey the E-620 is a fun little camera, but the overall IQ isn’t quite as good as the D90. I think in the real world, the D90 will give a stop better of ISO, especially after post processing etc. To be precise, you aren’t going to get improved image quality from the E-620, just a big change in camera handling and overall size.
  
  reply
  - PAT says:
    February 9, 2010 at 3:37 pm
    
    hi,
    Patrick thank U 4 your reply.
    Yeah, today I plaied a bit with e-620. Very nice in a hand, but U might be right with iso..
    maybe I will wait till Oly will release net models with CPU V version, like in EP1?
    
    Nevertheles I will ratehr go into 4/3 system, becouse of the lens it has.
    
    if they improve the iso, I will choose something between E-620 and E-30.
    
    Regards from Poland!!
    
    PAT
    
    reply
Björn P says:
March 7, 2010 at 1:54 pm

I also have a 620. When comparing ISO dont forget you win at least two steps with the built in image stabilisation. With the 50mm f2 for example you can hold still at say 1/15 – 1/20. With the D90 and the 5D2 you dont have that opportunity with a fixed lens.

reply
- Patrick says:
  March 8, 2010 at 4:23 pm
  
  Bjorn,
  That’s definitely true, there are real tangible benefits from the in-camera IS, plus it’s quite a bit cheaper than buying it in the lens over and over…
  
  reply
Patrycjusz says:
April 5, 2010 at 3:14 pm

Hi all,
finally I get E-30 with ZD 12-60 SWD, awaiting now for ZD 50 2.0 and lamp FL-36R. I sold nikon D90 with nikkor 35 1.8.

I did the right thing, its fast, razor sharp, gives excelent pictures.

Phenomenal Zuiko glass, sharp already at full aperture – and has no problems with obtaining shallow depths of focus, as it criticizes the system 4/3. Just look at the pics made ZD 12-60, ZD 50 2.0 or 50-200 SWD. It does not need too close the aperture in Zuiko lenses that have a beautiful crisp picture from side to side of the frame for this beautiful nice fuzzy bokeh (background), well, unless someone like soap in the whole squad, including the neighborhood of center in other systems ..

Till iso 800 there is no problem, iso 1600 still usable!! Additionally it gives nice picture look like old gainy analog film.

As for bashing the noise in Olympus DSLR, especially on the E-30, I refer to the following links:
Can see how can do the trick with noise even at ISO 2000:
http://gmchappell.smugmug.com/Sports/Tickerstock-2010/11231643_BWKAJ # 787642619_3EnJJ

and the grain look:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3169/3287904921_82c2e795e9_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3305/3287828051_fe9cf1f271_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3505/3287827827_51ed68b7da_o.jpg

So for those about noise is a bulshit in media, net etc.

Olympus really gives best value for money, all four technological innovations have so far been scoffed at by competition not only from long, however, they began to enter. LV, cleaning the filter matrix, AF E-3 (terms of speed and precision algorithms, the same also in the E-30), tilting the screen, etc.
Once again, optics, Zuiko Digital optics, including lenses with focus, speed, light and performance (plus every stabilized) hard to find in the competition, if you have something similar, it costs fortune … the rest is plastic soap.

Product highlights:
very good matrix with good dynamics and the ratio S / N;
Iso vg 800 iso 1600 very useful;
Very nice look like analog grains, grain is not degraded on the photos of details of the systems where we have competition, or colored slippers, or blurred photo ..
Incredible value for money, what makes the E-30 in the configuration possibilities and excellent ergonomics, the competition we have only the D300 and 50D;
AF with ZD14-54II super fast, also in LV, beated the Nikon D90 with 16-85VR;
AF with ZD12-60 SWD indeed the world’s fastest AF in this segment;
Incredible body configuration possibilities, very good color rendition, very good auto white balance, better than the D90;
DESIGNS ergonomics and quality performance of glass fibers;

CONS:

As for the disadvantages of E-30, needs a energy with ZD 12-60, so the second battery is a must.
In relation to the D90, there is less convenient when it comes to white balance correction, though hardly ever have to adjust very well because it mimics.
Olympus could already stop using xD cards and move to another, cheaper SD. Thats it.

Best regards from POLAND!! PAT

reply
- Patrick says:
  April 7, 2010 at 8:26 am
  
  PAT,
  Thanks for that user input, I’ve gotten many emails from photographers opting for the Olympus E-30 over the D90, and nearly all mention the fine lenses from Olympus as a main reason.
  
  reply
Scott says:
July 22, 2010 at 10:42 am

I’m an old Nikon film guy looking to make a switch to digital. I konow, don’t say it……….
Seems to me that JPEG compression affects saturation / contrast / definition much more than comparing lenses and CCD sensors……. Opimions ?

reply
- Patrick says:
  July 25, 2010 at 1:11 pm
  
  Scott,
  Not sure about “much more”, but it is certainly a factor, and a factor in analyzing images from reviews, since unfortunately everything gets JPEG’d on its way to the web. The differences between an Olympus E-620 and a 5D Mark II, do have far more to do with sensors and lenses than JPEG compression I’m afraid.
  
  reply
pellevin says:
August 9, 2010 at 5:04 am

Talk about comparing apples and pares. Canon 5D Mark II is a FF camera at twice the price of the D90. If you want to compare 5d with a Nikon the D700 is the only reasonable option. They have similar price and sensors.

The result? The D700 is a clear winner in this ISO battle, and we should not even get started on the AF…

reply
- Patrick says:
  August 16, 2010 at 8:11 am
  
  pellevin,
  this comparison is clearly for entertainment only….that said the D700 is a pinch better at ISO, but printed the two are so close, that I’ll happily take the 5D2’s resolution advantage.
  
  reply