Back to Canon :)

I haven't been shooting for over year now, sold my gear a ways back. Most reviews noted that Canon has fallen behind everyone else including mirrorless and as I wanted a really compact body I decided to purchase the Olympus OMD-EM10, Sony NEX 6, and Canon SL1 for a comparison trying to decide what to buy (thanks Amazon for your fantastic return policy !).

I expected in every measure (considering the reviews) that the Olympus and Sony would produce better images than the SL1, only to find that the SL1 did better at high ISO, had better color (Olympus color is all over the map), better metering, better detail, and better dynamic range.

Now I haven't owned a Canon since the 60D and I assumed the SL1 would be more or less the same in terms of IQ considering everyone states it's the same old sensor. Well this couldn't be further from the truth. The SL1 is simply stunning at high ISO. I never shot my 60D above ISO 800. The SL1 rocks all the way to ISO 6400 and is incredibly clean to ISO 3200 (I haven't had a chance to venture above ISO 6400) The dynamic range is better, much better in fact.

Anyways, maybe it's just me, and that's ok if is LOL. I returned everything and kept the SL1. It's not as compact as mirrorless, but not too far behind either. It's not as beautiful as the Olympus (I really wanted to love that camera), but with a prime the SL1 is quite compact and cute (and feels better in hand with better menus).

The raw differences between the SL1 and the 60D are nil, because they indeed do share at least the same basic sensor. Most likely you are shooting JPG, and what you are seeing is how long Canon has gone with their old JPG engine and they finally upgraded it. So now you get 1-2 stops better in JPG output in the SL1, and many other cameras since vs the older ones, but the raw images themselves are really no better.

However if JPG works for you and you are happy, welcome back! That is all photography is about.

Also that is exactly what Canon was striving to do, create a body that was close to mirrorless in stature, but still provide the full Canon DSLR experience.

Whatever works best for you is indeed the best camera. Enjoy

TeamSpeed wrote in post #17230650
The raw differences between the SL1 and the 60D are nil, because they indeed do share at least the same basic sensor. Most likely you are shooting JPG, and what you are seeing is how long Canon has gone with their old JPG engine and they finally upgraded it. So now you get 1-2 stops better in JPG output in the SL1, and many other cameras since vs the older ones, but the raw images themselves are really no better.

However if JPG works for you and you are happy, welcome back! That is all photography is about.

Also that is exactly what Canon was striving to do, create a body that was close to mirrorless in stature, but still provide the full Canon DSLR experience.

You are correct. While I did shoot JPEG + Raw and did process a few images, I mostly was looking at JPEGs. The reason I selected Olympus is that they are known for excellent JPEGS. I had an Olympus EPL1 years ago that had beautiful color and excellent OOC JPEG. Unfortunately I I really didn't care for the output of the EM10 - color hues were all over the place and the dynamic range was limited. I shot RAW exclusively for years, but I have grown so tired of PP every image. I have twin girls and my time is quite limited so I just want a good quality compact JPEG camera with options of adding some nice glass. The SL1 has some of the best JPEGs I have seen thus far.

If you are looking for a camera to shoot jpeg only, check out the fuji mirrorless options. Their jpeg rendering is one of the best. Anything from the XE-1 up to the XT-1 produces fantastic jpegs.

Do you have any pictures to compare from all three cameras you had? I have been going back and forth between Canon and Olympus. I loved the video quality from the Canon cameras, but haven't been impressed by the quality on the Canon. I really did like the SL1 though. I just felt like I couldn't raise the shadows without getting a lot of noise. I went from the T2i, to the E-M5, to the SL1, and back to the E-M5. What I love about the E-M5 is the size, IBIS, color, and weather sealing. I don't like the EVF though, and really miss the OVF!

Comparsion

First up Olympus. Notice the strange gradient to the sky ? I had lot's of blown highlights and strange color hues. The sky didn't look like that at all. There is something very 'digital' looking about the Olympus files, even when run through lightroom. Other photogs have said the same thing. I prefer the organic look of Nikon and Canon.

memo90061 wrote in post #17231229
Do you have any pictures to compare from all three cameras you had? I have been going back and forth between Canon and Olympus. I loved the video quality from the Canon cameras, but haven't been impressed by the quality on the Canon. I really did like the SL1 though. I just felt like I couldn't raise the shadows without getting a lot of noise. I went from the T2i, to the E-M5, to the SL1, and back to the E-M5. What I love about the E-M5 is the size, IBIS, color, and weather sealing. I don't like the EVF though, and really miss the OVF!

Honestly, the OMD-EM10 is the camera I wanted to keep. It's beautiful. The EVF was excellent, the touch shutter is faster than the canon. Built quality is superb. The menu system is typical Olympus, a f***king mess. I kept accidentally changing settings which is quite annoying, but in time I would figure it out. The IQ just left a lot to be desired. I took a few hundred pictures indoors, outdoors under various lightening conditions. There were strange hue shifts in WB. The per-pixel detail is good, but not as good as the Canon, lot's of noise reduction combined with crunchy sharpening - yes you can turn this off. Olympus overstates their ISO so it's hard to compare, but the Canon was better at high ISO. I know people say otherwise, but the dynamic range of the Canon was excellent.

The Sony is a good camera, but I can't seem to bond with it. Something about Sony bothers me, I just don't feel like I am shooting with a camera. It's feels 'incomplete'. It was a bit slow to operate.

I have yet to try Fuji, but I have been around the block so many times over the years and I always come back to Canon. It's the most well rounded and predictable of the bunch.

Nice to know how good Canon is.
You forgot about Panasonic, Nikon, Sigma and Leica
But amazon might not forgive you

kf095 wrote in post #17231310
Nice to know how good Canon is.
You forgot about Panasonic, Nikon, Sigma and Leica
But amazon might not forgive you

LOL, I had Panasonic (G1), Never tried Sigma, can't afford Leica. Did Have Nikon D5100, D3200, and J3. I have returned probably about 10-12 cameras in last two years, I am surprised I am not banned by Amazon. But how can you possibly know unless you try before you buy ? Amazon makes a ton of money off of me either way.

watson76 wrote in post #17230621
I haven't been shooting for over year now, sold my gear a ways back. Most reviews noted that Canon has fallen behind everyone else including mirrorless and as I wanted a really compact body I decided to purchase the Olympus OMD-EM10, Sony NEX 6, and Canon SL1 for a comparison trying to decide what to buy (thanks Amazon for your fantastic return policy !).

I expected in every measure (considering the reviews) that the Olympus and Sony would produce better images than the SL1, only to find that the SL1 did better at high ISO, had better color (Olympus color is all over the map), better metering, better detail, and better dynamic range.

Now I haven't owned a Canon since the 60D and I assumed the SL1 would be more or less the same in terms of IQ considering everyone states it's the same old sensor. Well this couldn't be further from the truth. The SL1 is simply stunning at high ISO. I never shot my 60D above ISO 800. The SL1 rocks all the way to ISO 6400 and is incredibly clean to ISO 3200 (I haven't had a chance to venture above ISO 6400) The dynamic range is better, much better in fact.

Anyways, maybe it's just me, and that's ok if is LOL. I returned everything and kept the SL1. It's not as compact as mirrorless, but not too far behind either. It's not as beautiful as the Olympus (I really wanted to love that camera), but with a prime the SL1 is quite compact and cute (and feels better in hand with better menus).

Yes, you have to take the reports of Canon's demise in the proper context: they excel at the things the majority of enthusiasts value; there are of course areas where they aren't as good as other manufacturers. IMHO, the weaknesses are overblown and certainly Canon's strengths are undervalued. As you have discovered, Canon is more innovative than they are given credit for and they deliver where you need it.

I've got an EM5, 70D and 6D and I much prefer the jpgs from my Oly. As a matter of fact, it's the only one of my cameras I regularly shoot jpg with. I agree with you about the EPL1 having great jpgs (very filmlike to me), and I've got one, but I still shoot with the EM5 nearly exclusively for my personal use.

To each their own, I suppose, but for me the answer was: both.

If you want great JPEGs, you might want to consider the offerings from Fuji.