Thats insane!  A bit of an eye-opener to me as I had picked what I was sure was the Nikon shots only to find out they were not!  Think I’ll go stand in the corner now….. 

Sorry, newbie question….how did you view the exif data?

Pretty obvious which one is which by looking at the depth of field, no need to look at exif data or even look at it full-size. lol

While the EM-5 is definitely impressive for a micro 4/3 camera, the D700 still has better noise performance.

That being said I’d still choose the Em-5 for being half the size and price of the D700 while being competitive performance-wise. It’s also just a lot better designed (gotta love Olympus design).

feel fre to look at my pictures on my web site http://www.dinkok.dk all taken with the GF1 think 4/3 perform fantastic.

Nice comparison. It gives an impression of the high ISO performance of both camera’s. However, these photos where made in relatively good light. It even looks like it was daylight too. Daylight has all the colors in it. Artificial light often has not and that’s when a digital camera will show it’s true colors.

Pierre-Paul could have tried another scene with less light, higher contrast and more shadow regions. The image quality of the micro 4/3 sensors quickly deteriorates and the Nikon full frame sensor will do better for sure. I don’t think micro 4/3 technology is suitable for serious low light work yet. Maybe in a year or five it will be. If you don’t need good low light performance and don’t mind the harsh contrast, a micro 4/3 camera is an interesting light weight alternative.