Clarity/sharpness of print from MFT + AIGigapixel vs z6

[bwana]

Looking at the output of oly om-d M1 at base iso I get very good results (still havent upgraded to mark2). But the files are brittle- I cant get the same dynamic range that I can out of a nikon D850. I cant go much above 200 iso where i start to see flaws in the oly raws when blown up. Of course, the sensor is so different and the latitude of the nikon is awesome. But aside from the DR, I find handholding the nikon a chore. Shot discipline is very brittle. Mirror slap another pain. Switching to mirror up and evf makes it slow. OK, on a tripod there is no contest, but that can be impossible when doing street/candid/travel.

So my rather abstract question is this: If I use MFT for its awesome hand-hold-ability to generate awesome shots, will AI gigapixel be able improve the files so I can print 24 x 36 with the same clarity as the files from a z6/z7? Yes I know it's all about the glass too. Assume I am using the panasonic 12-35 pro lens on the oly and the 24-70 f2.8 on the z6/z7. But i cannot imagine the sensor stabilization of the large nikon sensor is nearly as good as the IS that olympus has. It's the issue of shot discipline impacting the image. I cant stand blurry pixels on a print due to my technical incompetence when hand holding. Even the z7 vs z6 makes this issue painful- how impactful is shot discipline between these sensors?

I dont care that AI gigapixel makes up information because that is manipulation at the pixel level-not compositional level. Pixel level manipulations define post processing (sharpening, dust spot removal, etc).

So I am stuck between the choice of upgrading the oly mft to the mark2 or going with the z6?

[jrsforums]

Life is just full of trade-offs, isn’t it?

[bwana]

@jrsforums
Do you have any experience to contribute to this decision using AI gigapixel with MFT files?

[jrsforums]

@jrsforums
Do you have any experience to contribute to this decision using AI gigapixel with MFT files?

Your dilemma seems more to be between FF & MFT. A trade off that many of use have to make, or have made.  Processing is not the choice here. The same options are available for both.

[bwana]

you misunderstood. the choice i am discussing not simply hardware. it is this:
MFT + AI gigapixel        vs            FF                     specifically for print output at 24 x 36"

1)handheld
2) max lens quality for both systems in equivalent focal lengths
3)ibis active in both systems

[TonyVentourisPhotography]

The em1 mk2 will be much closer to the z6 without blowing up. (If not equal in the real world)  Good glass like the 12-40 pro or 12-35 even and good shooting habits will yield excellent results.  I can print to 30 just fine.  Depends on the materials of the print, the image kind, and what forms of detail are present.  Using AI gigapixel to fill in the gap so to speak will give great results and let you go beyond that size with the right image if you will have your nose on the print.  Otherwise you can certainly make huge enlargements... we always have even from 6mp.

you misunderstood. the choice i am discussing not simply hardware. it is this:
MFT + AI gigapixel        vs            FF                     specifically for print output at 24 x 36"

1)handheld
2) max lens quality for both systems in equivalent focal lengths
3)ibis active in both systems

The ai noise program they offer is good to for cleaning up the slight grain of m43.  I leave it in, I like it.  The D850 has more megapixels and a bigger sensor.  Render the file down to equal the size of the m43 file and then print them both to 36 and see how they look.  I dumped full frame for m43.  And it has replaced my medium format for 90% of my projects now too. 

[jrsforums]

you misunderstood. the choice i am discussing not simply hardware. it is this:
MFT + AI gigapixel        vs            FF                     specifically for print output at 24 x 36"

1)handheld
2) max lens quality for both systems in equivalent focal lengths
3)ibis active in both systems

I didn’t misunderstand.  If AI giga works as a “crutch” for MFT, it will also work on FF.  You need to assume equal quality glass.  Many FF lens, where needed, has IS.  Most FF mirrorless will have IBIS.  if not “good enough” stabilization, you have at least 2 add’l stops of shutter speed to play with on most FF sensor vs MFT (obviously depends on sensor).

I left Canon FF systems for many of the same reasons others did.  I understood the trade-offs.  Are there times I miss the easy “crispness”, look, and low light capability, you bet!  But I understood that going in and, generally, I am extremely happy with the results I get as are those I make images and prints for.....however, I will most always be able to see a difference...if I thought it important to look....all of us who are into photography know where to look...which goes back to the trade-offs.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

I didn’t misunderstand.  If AI giga works as a “crutch” for MFT, it will also work on FF.  You need to assume equal quality glass.  Many FF lens, where needed, has IS.  Most FF mirrorless will have IBIS.  if not “good enough” stabilization, you have at least 2 add’l stops of shutter speed to play with on most FF sensor vs MFT (obviously depends on sensor).

Although Gigapixel AI can give a tremendous quality boost for achieving large output sizes, I agree that it will work on whatever input image quality it gets fed. The main choice should therefore be the camera system that gives you the best starting point (or even gets the shot to begin with). Camera features that help can be Image Stabilization or low noise and high DR. Those may present trade-offs that matter.

Small differences in image pixel dimensions are less important because GAI will still make the best it can of that, upto its current size limits. But a lower quality input file can not lead to better quality than from a higher quality input file.

Cheers,
Bart

[mcbroomf]

Looking at the output of oly om-d M1 at base iso I get very good results (still havent upgraded to mark2). But the files are brittle- I cant get the same dynamic range that I can out of a nikon D850. I cant go much above 200 iso where i start to see flaws in the oly raws when blown up. Of course, the sensor is so different and the latitude of the nikon is awesome. But aside from the DR, I find handholding the nikon a chore. Shot discipline is very brittle. Mirror slap another pain. Switching to mirror up and evf makes it slow. OK, on a tripod there is no contest, but that can be impossible when doing street/candid/travel.

So my rather abstract question is this: If I use MFT for its awesome hand-hold-ability to generate awesome shots, will AI gigapixel be able improve the files so I can print 24 x 36 with the same clarity as the files from a z6/z7? Yes I know it's all about the glass too. Assume I am using the panasonic 12-35 pro lens on the oly and the 24-70 f2.8 on the z6/z7. But i cannot imagine the sensor stabilization of the large nikon sensor is nearly as good as the IS that olympus has. It's the issue of shot discipline impacting the image. I cant stand blurry pixels on a print due to my technical incompetence when hand holding. Even the z7 vs z6 makes this issue painful- how impactful is shot discipline between these sensors?

I dont care that AI gigapixel makes up information because that is manipulation at the pixel level-not compositional level. Pixel level manipulations define post processing (sharpening, dust spot removal, etc).

So I am stuck between the choice of upgrading the oly mft to the mark2 or going with the z6?

I've seen the same brittleness of files as you have, and I agree that it's mainly DR when you start pushing the file.  So I don't see how Gigapixel could help (more pixels not more DR).  It will if you have a low(er) DR image that doesn't need a lot of work I'd guess.

Another option is frame stacking and averaging.  4 frames gives you 1 more stop, 16 2 more.  The resulting file could then also be uprezzed using Gigapixel. 

You can try this, or just single files against your native Nikon files as Gigapixel has a 30 day trial.

[Steve Verrall]

I also found hand holding (and hiking with) large DSLRs plus lenses a “chore”. Sore back and shoulders etc. So I invested in the EM1.2 and PRO lenses. Loved hi-res mode though it could not be exploited in many use cases. Loved the IBIS, EVF, Live Comp and other clever features.

The day I held a new Z7 with 24-70 f/4 in one hand and my EM1.2 with 12-40 or 12-100 in the other hand, it was game over for the Oly, for me. Weight and size difference negligible. Hi-res mode always available. Less noise. More DR. And I can (optionally) use AI Gigapixel as well, enabling bigger prints than the Oly, in any given situation.

Still think that Olympus should have gone full frame, but that is another story.

The Z6 also brings many of the same benefits. If you have the spare cash, if we assume comparable portability, if better IQ matters, if you want to spend less time post processing (as much fun as that can often be), then the Z cameras are a no-brainer vs the Oly. And I was a huge fan of the Olympus system.

Example...just returned from trip to the US. Carry on bag only. 6.8kg total weight. Carried Z7, 24-70 f/4, 14-30 f/4, 70-200/f/4, small tripod etc. Try that with a D850 or a 5DIV and matching lenses

Just my opinion and as always, YMMV.