I read this article with interest and the comments that followed it.
I was reminded of when the Panasonic G1 was announced and some reviewers were 'shocked' to find that at base ISO the G1 was very close, if not actually better, than the 'full-frame' Nikon D3 and D700.
Some of the criticism of Chris Corradino's article was the fact that his samples weren't very big. So I decided to shoot some samples of my own with a Olympus OM-D E-M10 + m.Zuiko 25mm f/1.8 lens compared to Nikon Df + Sigma 50mm f/1.4 ART lens. Both 16MP cameras, but with different sized sensors. (ISO 200 f/4 for all four images) I have uploaded the raw files to my cloud drive and you can download them via the links below. N.B. No masterpieces here, but they are copyright, so please do not share them without a link.
As per usual I'll let you make your own judgement on what the differences and / or similarities are. I would however make five general points.
- I'm happy using both camera / lens combinations for my stock photography work at low ISO's in good light
- At high(er) ISO's the DF wins hands down
- I have written countless articles on how I feel that differences between sensors, cameras and lenses are often exaggerated
- We can all 'see what we want to see' in any comparison test.
- This isn't the first article of this type and it certainly won't be the last.