Olympus E-M1X Image Quality

Above we compare base ISO (200) image quality from the E-M1X to the smaller, more affordable E-M1 II which we are told uses the exact same sensor. As you can see, the E-M1X's crops are a bit sharper with slightly better detail and contrast, however be aware that we have since upgraded our MFT lab lens from an Olympus Zuiko 50mm f/2.0 to a Panasonic Leica DG Nocticron 42.5mm f/1.2, and we have also changed the aperture for this series from f/8 to f/5.6 to reduce diffraction. (The Leica lens has less field curvature than the Olympus, allowing us to use a wider aperture while still keeping most of our Still Life test target in focus.) Despite the changes in lens and aperture, we do see some processing differences as well, including slightly stronger default sharpening and higher contrast, but we also see lower overall saturation levels. Note that the E-M1 II was shot with firmware v1.0 though, and Olympus has since tweaked that camera's image processing in the v2.0 and v3.0 firmware releases to the point where it now pretty much matches the E-M1X's JPEG output.

Above we compare the MFT E-M1X to the APS-C X-T3. You would think the 26-megapixel X-T3 would have a noticeable resolution advantage over the 20-megapixel E-M1X here, but both cameras have fairly similar resolutions on the vertical axis (4160 vs 3888 pixels) which is how this scene is framed, so the resolution difference is pretty minor and mostly boils down to different demosaicing algorithms and processing. Luminance noise appears a little higher from the Fuji, but chrominance noise is higher from the Olympus. The Olympus produces a crisper image with higher contrast, though default sharpening also appears to be stronger with more obvious sharpening halos. The X-T3 resolves more of the printed pattern in our red-leaf swatch with fewer aliasing artifacts, while the E-M1X renders it softer with areas containing what look to be thread patterns, however the Olympus does much better with thread pattern in the pink fabric. Both cameras produce good color, though the Fuji's are more saturated.

The 4:3 aspect Olympus E-M1X image appears larger in scale than the 3:2 APS-C Nikon D500 image despite the Nikon's slightly higher pixel count of about 20.7 megapixels because of the way this shot is framed (vertically). Both cameras however resolve very similar levels of detail here in most areas, as both don't include an optical low-pass filter. And both apply generous amounts of sharpening yielding crisp images with visible sharpening halos around high-contrast elements, though the E-M1X's default sharpening is a little more aggressive. The Nikon however does noticeably better with our red-leaf swatch, but overall colors are a little more accurate from the Olympus. Noise levels appear similar, but the E-M1X is smoothing out the background texture more than the D500.

Above we compare the E-M1X to another 20-megapixel MFT camera without an OLPF, the Panasonic G9. At base ISO, the G9 does a slightly better job at rendering fine detail, however noise levels are a bit higher. The E-M1X image is crisper and more contrasty, but shows more obvious sharpening halos as well. Both produced moiré patterns in our tricky red-leaf swatch, but contrast is a bit better from the G9 there. Color is warmer and overall more pleasing from the E-M1X.

In this comparison we pit the 24-megapixel full-frame Sony A9 against the 20-megapixel MFT Olympus E-M1X. Hardly a fair comparison if you just consider the relative sensor sizes alone, however the E-M1X easily competes with the Sony in terms of performance. Here, the Sony captures a bit more detail with excellent sharpness as its sharpening algorithm does not generate obvious halos along high-contrast edges like the Olympus does. Noise is a bit higher from the Sony in flatter areas, but it does a much better job with our challenging red-leaf swatch. Color is however more pleasing and accurate from the Olympus, though not as vibrant overall.

Here at ISO 1600 we can see significant improvements to sharpness, contrast, detail and even color from the E-M1X, but as mentioned, be aware that: a) different lenses and apertures were used, and b) installing the E-M1 II's latest firmware (v3.0 as of this writing) brings its processing up to par with the E-M1X's. Still, the E-M1X shows the improvements Olympus has made to JPEG processing of late, which are now possible with the older E-M1 II via free firmware updates.

The E-M1X actually holds its own fairly well here against the X-T3 at ISO 1600, with lower noise levels and almost as good detail retention, though is does show more noise reduction and sharpening artifacts. While crispness and contrast are better from the Olympus, the E-M1X's noise reduction starts to distort detail in the mosaic crop and it smears away much of the subtle detail in our tricky red-leaf fabric.

The Nikon D500 shows slightly lower levels of luminance noise in flatter areas and fewer noise reduction artifacts, however the E-M1X image is crisper and more contrasty. The Nikon continues to do quite a bit better at retaining detail in our tricky red-leaf swatch, though.

At ISO 1600, the G9 holds onto slightly more fine detail with fewer noise reduction artifacts than the E-M1X in our mosaic crops, but the Olympus continues to produce a crisper, more contrasty image with better color. Luminance noise appears a little stronger from the G9 in flatter areas, with a coarser "grain" pattern, but chroma noise in the shadows is higher from the E-M1X. The G9 does a little better in our troublesome red-leaf swatch, but both cameras have blurred away a lot of subtle detail.

Unsurprisingly, the full-frame Sony A9 bests the Olympus E-M1X here at ISO 1600, with more detail, lower noise and fewer processing artifacts. As the E-M1X works hard to keep noise under control it distorts, blurs and smudges fine detail much more than the A9, especially in our red-leaf swatch.

Similar to the improvements we saw at ISO 1600, we continue to see better sharpness, contrast, detail and color from the E-M1X here at ISO 3200. But once again, be aware of the differences in lens, aperture and firmware. When using the same lens & aperture and after installing v3.0 firmware on an E-M1 II, we found virtually no difference in image quality from these two siblings.

The E-M1X continues to produce a crisper, contrastier image with lower luminance noise, however it shows more chroma noise and noise reduction artifacts than X-T3 making the Fuji's rendering look perhaps a little more natural. The Fuji's advantage in our tricky red-leaf fabric has almost vanished now, and the Olympus still does better in the pink fabric.

Luminance noise is a bit higher from the E-M1X here at ISO 3200, but the D500 produces a slightly coarser noise "grain" pattern, as well as slightly less detail in some areas (partially due to its aspect-ratio disadvantage in how we frame this shot). But Nikon's default noise reduction does a better job at reducing noise in detailed areas without generating quite as many artifacts as the Olympus, as can be seen in the mosaic crop. Still, the Olympus image looks crisper, though with more obvious sharpening halos. The Nikon continues to do better with the red-leaf fabric.

This is a pretty close race here at ISO 3200, with the G9 cranking up its default noise reduction more than the E-M1X's compared to ISO 1600. The E-M1X image has slightly higher contrast and is a bit sharper with more visible sharpening halos, but both cameras hold onto similar amounts of detail. Luma noise is a little higher from the Olympus, but it's more fine-grained in appearance. Colors are still brighter and more pleasing from the E-M1X.

The Olympus E-M1X does very well for a Micro Four Thirds camera, but it simply can't compete with a good full-frame sensor in terms of noise, which means its noise reduction processing has to work a lot harder to keep noise in check with fine detail suffering more as a consequence. Despite the stronger noise reduction, the Olympus also shows slightly higher luminance and chrominance noise than the Sony, and subtle detail in our red-leaf swatch is all but gone now, replaced by noise and other artifacts.