>>4238009Both photos were taken at ISO 3200 f5.6 1/1250. The panasonic took a darker photo, so they increased the exposure to adjust for ISO cheating. So this is noise performance at adjusted ISO. This is slightly off from what you want, which is noise performance at measured ISO, but ISO invariance should be spot on within a stop or two. They also have jpeg, which is applying the same NR settings to each camera. A camera that starts with NR, and then has a fixed amount of NR applied, will have more smearing than a camera that does not start with any/as much NR in raw. This is VERY helpful, as useless as dpreview is for other things due to lens variance and ACR profiles.
This is the hard reality you will deal with when using the camera. It says ISO 3200 but exposes like it's closer to ISO 1600 with wider apertures or longer exposures. Or you just get a darker image.
Sure is nice to compare photos instead of charts huh tom? Not like you have any photos "k3k", or if you do, you took almost all of them with a sony A7R III and have no dog in this fight (if you did my staffy would rip that poofy pooch to shreds)
P2P is useless data: noise performance at labeled ISO, and needs to be adjusted before even adding the "raw is not raw" disclaimer.
>>4238012It's almost as good, with equivalent settings, which is what equivalence means. If you have full equivalency with the detail/aberration size to pixel size relationship, it's 100% equal, the photos will be EXACTLY the same.
However larger sensors and optics can shoot at non-equivalent settings. Bokeh bad? Just step back, DOF is related to focus distance as well.
I will however fully endorse m43 if you only post on insta and never shoot wider than f4. At those sizes all your problems have been scaled down into nothing. You literally don't need more. And the video for the price cant be beat because a smaller sensor has faster readout. Everything else? Pure memes you wont get many good photos out of.
