10-Year-Old DSLR vs New Mirrorless Camera Test
Вставка
- Опубліковано 7 вер 2024
- ** PREMIER EPISODE **
Tap the Subscribe button and then tap the bell to be notified when we post new episodes!
In the premier episode of The Three Techs, the guys try to see if they can tell the difference between photos taken with a 10-year-old Nikon D700 DSLR camera and a modern Olympus OMD-EM1 mark II mirrorless micro four-thirds interchangeable lens camera. They find moose, feed mosquitos and look into the sun in their quest for the answer.
Presented by
Bob Fairbairn - Instagram: @m43bob
/ m43bob
Steven Bramson
Tony Tang - Instagram: @tonytangpro
/ tonytangpro
Follow The Three Techs on Instagram: @thethreetechs
/ thethreetechs
#thethreetechs
thethreetechs....
The set makes me feel like I'm watching a hostage situation. If you're being held against your will, tap the lens with your index finger three times. I'll call for help!
What are you talking about. They look and sound very natural and not staged what so ever
Take a joke my friend😂@@benzhuang1759
Good show but think the 700 would have faired better with a better lens like the M4/3 was shooting with.
There is a major flaw in your test in that you did not test the two lenses for equal sharpness as this quality in the photos was key in some choices by the evaluators. The D 700 is still revered for its color rendition and holds up to contemporary equipment if the right lens is used. For the record I have and still use a D700 as well as 2019 and 2020 professional equipment.
Exactly, they are comparing a pro lens in the case of Olympus with an all-terrain Nikkor zoom that is not comparable. It would have been easier to compare with fixed lenses.
I also thought for a Camera (body) test, they were gonna compare two cameras with the same mount and simply swap the same lens back and forth to rule that out as a variable (which is a big variable).
im more impressed with the LACK of major difference
Really! You shot the legendary Nikon D700 with a super zoom and the Olympus with their professional zoom lens. Do the test over with the Nikkor 70-200mm F/2.8 FL and see what happens.
My D700 is tack sharp with my Sigma 70-200 G2 lens, much sharper that what was shown in this video. Do it again with a good lens and I am quite certain they would have gotten a different result.
I am very new to photography, i do not own any DSLR or Mirrorless cameras, but today through your video I learnt a lot. People who make cameras are also like you and me. What I understood was.. most of the time.. I don't know if the new camera is better or the old one is better. What I understood was, my taste of pictures is more like BOB. I liked most of the pictures that BOB liked.
no matter what the camera is. I should admit its also about using the equipment. These pictures are amazing, I think its about the art of taking a shot, using the control for what you can capture. The technology keeps changing, but with out composition knowledge and experience... you give me the latest 2021 most expensive camera ...I might not be able to do justice to any of these cameras.
Thank you very much team. I wish to learn photography now. slowly.
I must admit, I did not like the process. It should have been the same Brand (DSLR vs Mirrorless like the NIkon D700 vs Nikon Z6 or Z7). Furthermore, Similar Lenses (from the Nikkor Trinity would have been perfect)...Olympus vs Nikon is a wrong sample for obvious reasons, 2 Different Sensors Sizes and 2 Different Lenses...too many variables....Same Lenses and Same Sensor Size would have been a better comparison than what you showcased. Please try again!
They just got bored drinking coffee and talking for football and they decided to do a ridiculous camera test.
You are so correct on all those.. it just shows that the new camera is not worth 4 times the price for such close results. if that was me I would be very upset $1500 of new glass instead all day..
@@user-zv6qu4ks1p 😂😂😂😂
Comparing Full Frame to 4/3???
Most of the colour differences are fixed if you choose the same Kelvin in the White Balance
The Olympus consistently overexposed and had little highlight detail. The Nikon produced flatter images and had more texture. Different colour profiles as well. I prefer the Nikon images.
You can with some techniques get sharper images...that's for sure.
I own both D700 and a m43. I have the Em10ii with 16mp sensor with good lenses. i would say when i compare the d700 with 85mm F1.8G vs olympus 75 1.8 (one of the sharpest lenses in m43 system) the d700 images was slightly better. Do you consider that is better to much the nikon with a better lens ? Em1ii has the lastest and best m43 sensor and you combine this with the 40-150 F2.8 Professional grade lens - and you test this system with a 10 years old camera with a budget zoom lens?
I don't think you will be able to tell a difference with (comparable resolutions) but in all fairness, if you're using a full frame sensor, match it will a full frame sensor.
In as much that both persons are professional photographers, they are probably more familiar to their own equipment and hence gravitate to it. I was correct in all my guesses because what I was looking for are more or less depth of field(or how much is in focus/sharper field). Smaller sensor have a tendency to have more depth of field and is narrower in general because of the crop factor and size of the sensor( the smaller sensor you have the sharper lens it needs to resolve the pixel density in such a small sensor). Not to mention the lens used on the D700 is subpar in general.
Hi Gdjay. We would definitely try different / better lenses in the future.
Hi guys, I have to agree with the comments below, it's a very unfair comparison. A full frame compare with a half frame. and the lenses you choose will give different quality.
It will have been perfect to compare the old D700 against the new D750 or the Olympus E5 to the OMD EM1. No matter what, good video.
There are way too many variables to make this a valid test. Should be using the same brand of camera, the same lens and choose a much better series of scenes. I have a 2013 Canon T3i and a 2019 Canon 90D. If I put the same lens on both and take a series of general outdoor photos, they would be very similar. But we choose newer cameras for newer technology. Much better and faster autofocus, much better video and faster general operation. I still take the T3i out as a second camera sometimes with a wide angle lens if I’m using a telephoto zoom on my 90D.
We tried the same sort of test using a canon 50D and a Canon 5D mk4 both using the same focal length lens one being the EF for the full frame and one being the EFs for the APSC.
We took 25 shots identical shots and had a professional photographer inspect the shots and decide which was which and which was better.
The results were jaw dropping... it came down to the photographer getting all the shots correct however on the shots deciding that to his liking it was a 50/50 draw between image quality and final result preference .
10 years in camera technology should have advanced by a lot more than it has.
If we look at camera technology used in smartphone today compared to 10 years ago the difference is mind blowing. However the same can’t be said for professional cameras that are used daily for weddings and work etc...
Camera manufactures today need to dedicate more research into the science behind the sensor and its technology and make it more than it is.
Did you shoot in optimal lighting condition? I think most improvements come in IBIS, ISO performance, autofocus, and buffer rate.
@@substygram4357 we shot in golden hour mid day sunset and blue hour. we found that during blue hour we was losing some detail on the 50d however was able to correct this in post.
The camera lens is the most important part of the camera in my opinion.
The nikon d3 from.2007 I just bought it a month ago. It's the best camera I ever used
Those are still great cameras!
This would be a better comparison if you used the same camera settings and focused on your subject
More impressed by the the fact that expensive mirrorless cameras is no better than older DSLR cameras and the fact it's just another technical marketing ploy to people who suffer from causality
The image quality is very similar under perfect circumstances. However, it looks different in low-light situations. Or for animal, portrait or sports shots, where precise and fast AF is important. Or if you want to record a video. In these situations, a newer cam will almost always perform better.
Pretty obvious technology will have improved over 10 years, but are the advancements really that great ?
or some advancement come at a cost , or also , it's a preference between producers , nikon cameras were very good out of the box at that time!
No.. double the cost for the new camera and they are that close and most of it is base on colors which you can just edit in light-room.. wow.. I am sure the 4/3 vs full frame makes a difference but still 2008 is so long ago.. shows the value of used equipment..
No I am using a EOS 1 D MK 4 and all this new technology would not improve My images I have had it from new and never looked at another camera it all just a big marketing ploy
i love this video! was looking for this
Glad you liked it!!
The image quality is very similar under perfect circumstances. However, it looks different in low-light situations. Or for animal, portrait or sports shots, where precise and fast AF is important. Or if you want to record a video. In these situations, a newer cam will almost always perform better. Nevertheless, and as many here have already mentioned, it makes no sense to compare an FF camera with an MFT camera. Optimally, both cameras should have the same sensor size and use the same lens.
Totally agree that it wasn’t set up to be equal in trend of camera and lens specs. Just an illustration of whether one should worry about upgrading to the latest gear or just go out and create with what is accessible. Appreciate the comment!
I wish the specs were compared side by side after
I am still not seeing any reason the upgrade from my 5D mark II, the advances in the photography are not that great. If you are looking for a really good FF dslr for a small budget, look at a second hand 5D markII, they are cheap as chips. It is Funny though if you compare it with how much Smartphones have improved over the past 11 years when comparing this to the advances in Kameras.
Why use different brands to compare?
On the picture of the elk, who on earth could
Choose B… such flat lifeless colours, A is beautiful in comparison
Really should have had the same lens. Different lens clouds the results.
Were the images Jpeg or RAW and if the former were they the same rendering, ie landscape, standard, etc? Were both images shot with the same aperture in all cases? How do the lenses compare?
All great questions. JPEG was the main format. So the general answer is that this was not a super controlled experiment. There were different sets of lenses and two different photographers. I think the main question is should you worry about your equipment more than you worry about just going out and taking pictures?
Thanks for sharing... interesting comments and enjoyed your test...I am a Nikon D500 user & as a hobbyist I couldn't see a lot of difference to make me change systems...I also use a D7100 & happy with the results.. cheers..
Thanks for sharing!
Stupid comparing a full frame camera to a micro 4/3.
They are the marketing guru's that all
But can you tell the difference between e-m10 mark ii and e-m1 mark ii ?
Don’t know! Can you?
i want to know what's a great lense to buy because i don't want to spend all that money on the lens i just want one len no need to have 3 or 4 lens
An interesting comparison, but I suggest these simple landscape-style photos do not show up where the critical difference lies.
It would have been good to have heard them
1) acknowledging that they were testing camera/lens combinations rather than the cameras, and
2) discuss the scenarios in which it might be best to buy a used camera (allowing more to be spent on the lens), and the scenarios in which the camera itself might be the limiting factor.
For example, I'm guessing the full-frame camera would have won hands-down in a low light situation (subject to the lenses being of equal aperture) and the modern camera would have a big advantage if focussing on a bird in flight.
They just picked the better lens.
Interesting. It seems like the Olympus did a way better job with details and sharpening but overexposed hard compared to the D700
my camera doesn't have video and plus my camera is 14 years old it's a canon 400d 10.1 megapixel camera. i want to get an up to date camera that can do everything plus video. so what you think about the 10-18 wide angle lens. so you said this is a much better lens and it will make my pictures better i don't know i want to spend that kind of money on a camera lens but if it's going to make my pictures solid then i will have to invest in one. i love taking pictures especially wide angle ones but i want to buy 2 more cameras i want your opinion on the canon sl1 and sl2
Unfair comparison. Why not 80-200mm f2.8 for D700 ?
may be cause crop1.5 vs MFT
@@alexandrzatonsky my point was taht they tested those cameras with different tier off lenses. Cheap f5.6 ultrazoom vs f2.8 premium midrange zoom. There fore D700 lost tons of sharpness and details. And Nikon D700 is a fufllframe. So this fact means that all these guys are idiots. And one more edit. Nikon kit ultrazoom has ~30% less quality if compared to nikkor 70-200mm f2.8. If they were using this lens for D700 they wouldn't be able to tell a difference.
Nikon vs Olympus? It should have been the same brand, and the same lens. I'd have tested a D700 vs the latest Nikon mirrorless since Nikon makes an adapter for F to Z mount. Sorry guys, not a very scientific test.
Hi George. Good point. Not meant to be scientific. Just a point about whether or not working about having the latest gear makes sense or not. If someone owns old gear, should that prevent him or her from going out and creating? Appreciate the comment!
Very interesting but would be interesting to compare old dslr with new dslr
If the photos were not side by side would the comparisons be so easy..?? And were the marginal "Improvements" really worth the significant cost difference..?? Nah..!! Just my humble realistic views.😎
Agreed. In the real world, you won’t be looking at pictures taken with different cameras side-by-side and comparing them.
NO WORD STEVEN TALKED ALL THE VID
I have never been a fan of Nikon. They have good technology and offer a lot. But the colours are just so cool. I much prefer the warmer richer colours of canon.
Not comparing cameras but comparing lenses, not a fair context at all.
But that’s a fair comment!
Also think the different lenses contributed to the results rather than the cameras. Just my opinion
Olympus was using a high-grade lens while the Nikon was using a super-zoom, aka low quality lens.....not really a fair test.
This is a deeply flawed test because they use such different lenses. To be a a true test comparing *cameras* they would have found a way to use identical lenses, and frankly these weren't even close.
Nikon 28-300mm ???...are you serious ? 😂😂
this was easy hahaha. cuz i shot on an old camera so i knew 😂😂
V nice video
Great review. The bottom line is there is no major difference at all between the photos if there is only one photo
How was it great? They tested those cameras with different tier off lenses. Cheap f5.6 ultrazoom vs f2.8 premium midrange zoom. There fore D700 lost tons of sharpness and details.
Better if you used a canon.
Y
Not smartphones anyway
Blade guy voice sounds like Donald Trump.
This was terrible. The scientific method went out of the window. You changed so many variables beyond the core question. Why not choose two contemporary cameras from the same manufacturer with similar specifications and the appropriate lenses. Take pictures and see what the in-use differences were. Did the camera viewing systems influence how you photographed and influence the results. The exercise was painful to watch. It really was poorly conceived.
The video is ridiculous.I would never consider it as a camera comparison.
Different lenses, different quality, different size sensors, different light conditions, different shooters, different framing, no EFIX that proves the same adjustments..(probably even different EXIF)
In other words.PURE BUlLSHIT!
A completely irrelevant test, the biggest variable being the person behind the camera and his or her processing skills, experience.
dorks
This is the most biased and bogus video I have ever seen. A 10 years old DSLR, don't know the shutter count but seeing the softness of the images, it seems it had been used (read 'abused') excessively. It might be at the end of its life because 10 years a very long time for a DSLR to survive as the kind of persons who bought a D700 were mainly Pro and the they extract all the juice from a camera. A mirrorless would not survive that long, that's for sure. The comparison should be with a new to new. You cannot expect a Pro athlete of 60 years of age will outrun a Pro of 20 years of age. It will be just nonsense. This video is also like that.... NONSENSE.
lol butthurt
Is that the best set you could afford? That is pathetic.
That was a poor test, only fooling yourself.