Will M43 get sharper or has it peaked?

[Mat Mayer]

I love my G7 and intended to buy a GH5, but looking at a comparisson of the G7 with the A6300 today, there was a major difference in sharpness. Might of been focusing but more likely the fact that the A6300 shoots 6K and downscales to 4K. So do you think a M43 sensor is big enough to provide that extra sharpness and be comparable with an APSC sensor? Has the system peaked or will the GH5 possibly make a big difference?

The NX1 is reasonably priced used on eBay. Wondering whether to pull the trigger and make the switch now. I don't need filmic and lots of lenses, I need sharp accurate 4K video. The Sony's over heating means they cannot be considered for me as it is to use outdoors, often in hottest sunlight. I really don't have the funds for the 4K Canon beasts otherwise I would go that route.

Has anyone used both the G7 and NX1 and noticed a big difference in sharpness? I recall reading lots of praise about how good and sharp the NX1 is on here. I am in no rush so could wait for the GH5, its just tempting to get started with a new system if going to do it anyway.

Thanks.

[Andrew Reid]

Well since the E-M1 II already oversamples from 5K and is very very close indeed to the A6300's 4K the answer is yes.

GH5 will have a flood of high detail.

I long since stopped caring about the sharpness of 4K though.

More sharpness is the last thing we need.

10bit, dynamic range, colour, less aliasing, less moire, less rolling shutter are all more important when it comes to 4K, which already has too much detail according to most of the cinema audience reaction to it being projected.

[Mat Mayer]

Thanks Andy, I was just about to click Buy on an NX1 kit on eBay and extra lens. I love Panasonic and they have a future, so I am not jumping ship 

[Vesku]

I think GH5 will have quite similar sharpness than Sony A6500. 4k 60P, less RS and 10bit will give even much more value.

[tugela]

Based on what we see from non-oversampled sensors, resolution still has a way to go for many manufacturers.

In modern cameras oversampling in a debeyered sensor is pretty much a must to maximise the information the camera is capable of gathering. Saying "it doesn't matter" is dumb IMO.

The problem with smaller sensors is not resolution so much, but rather light scattering on the sensor surface, which results in "unfortunate" effects such as purple fringing with certain lighting conditions. You can usually see right away when footage has been shot with a small sensor because of highlights blooming when the light comes in from particular directions. So, in general to maximise the quality of your footage you really want a bigger sensor. Personally I would not choose anything smaller than an APS-C sensor for footage that I considered important.

[dbp]

I used to care alot about resolved detail with 1080p cameras because so many of them were barely 720p mush. With 4K, I care way way less and would rather have the other image elements be in place. Dunno what the GH4 actually resolves, but I'm sure it's not a perfect 4K. It's definitely plenty, detail wise, for me. 

[aldolega]

I think it all depends on what your desired end product is. If you want to deliver in 4K, at the maximum resolution a 4K file is possibly capable of, you will need an oversampled sensor to get there because of the resolution loss from debayering.

So at the minimum, an NX1 or A6300/6500... or more realistically, a FS7, C300II, Red, etc, when you consider how many compromises the NX1 or A6300/6500 have (rolling shutter, overheating, limited DR, slomo is FHD at best, etc).

So, still not "affordable" to most people looking to own the camera... even the vast majority of pro shooters, which are not yet (and may never be) at the point of realistically affording a $8-10K camera.

For all those shooters, and of course most enthusiasts and hobbyists, I think aiming to deliver a maxed-out 1080p file is more realistic, which is mostly achievable with the current affordable 4K cams. Even if my GH4 is only resolving maybe 3K because of debayering, that's still plenty to deliver maxed-out 1080p, even with a little bit of cropping or stabilizing. 

[Andrew Reid]

2 hours ago, aldolega said:

I think it all depends on what your desired end product is. If you want to deliver in 4K, at the maximum resolution a 4K file is possibly capable of, you will need an oversampled sensor to get there because of the resolution loss from debayering.

To compensate from the resolution loss from debayering you would need to oversample from 8K to 4K perfectly like the F65.

Anyone got a spare $300,000?

[TheRenaissanceMan]

Only $60K for the new RED Helium.

[tugela]

21 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

To compensate from the resolution loss from debayering you would need to oversample from 8K to 4K perfectly like the F65.

Anyone got a spare $300,000?

6K will get you pretty close. No oversampling will be perfect, but there will be diminishing returns after a certain point. 50% in both dimensions should be sufficient to get pretty close (I would guess something like 95%)

[Andrew Reid]

To prevent the loss from debayering you really need a sensor... with no debayering. A Foveon design sensor.

[Michael Ma]

M43 at ISO 200 in optimum lighting is still very noisy if you look at the raw files at 100% crop.  A lot of micro details are lost due to noise removal.  Lots of room for improvement.