moonhawk wrote:
True, but in the real world the differences are not noticeable until you get to a very, very, large print.
It is really easy to see the differences between cameras if you go to
http://www.dpreview.com and check out the test reports performed in conjunction with dxomark.com. There is an interactive tool there that allows you to "pixel peep" the same test target:
https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonic-lumix-dc-gh5/9https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilm-x-t2/6https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympus-om-d-e-m1-mark-ii/8https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-alpha-a6500/9I don't know about you folks, but the image quality differences I see among these cameras are small. The conclusion I came to a long time ago is that it comes down to the FEATURE SET that you need, that you can live with, that appeals most to you when you use the camera.
It's sort of like cars... Any automobile will get you from point A to point B. HOW you want to experience the trip is a matter of choice, budget, need, and other personal factors. Pickup truck? Prius? Corvette? Lincoln? Smart Car?
Linux, Macs, and Windows can all run on essentially the same (Mac) computer hardware. The question is, which do you need? Which do you prefer, if you know more than one? Which one is least intrusive in your use of the computer? (Don't answer that... HOW you want to experience the computer is a matter of choice, budget, need, and other personal factors.)
My point is that the cameras linked above are all really good now! Within reason, you can quit worrying about performance at the margins, and concentrate on things like portability, versatility, ergonomics, menus, lens availability and compatibility, AND compatibility with the way you work. What fits your hand best? What fits your needs best? What is fun to use, and satisfies you with the kind of images you (will) want to make?
Knowing the answers requires a bit of study...