Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: EM-1 at LOW vs 200 vs 200+1 EV

  1. #1
    Subscriber Member tashley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    South of England
    Posts
    3,295
    Post Thanks / Like

    EM-1 at LOW vs 200 vs 200+1 EV

    Curious about the bump in quality I found in shooting the EM-1 at LOW, I shot the same scene of backlit tulips indoors on a tripod at LOW vs 200 vs 200+1 EV (files linked by clicking)

    The camera metered the scenes so that it 'saw' exactly the same EV for each shot (I shot in aperture priority) but the 200+1 shot presents as a little darker and the LOW shot presents as less contrasty. I don't think the light changed, nor did the camera, so I can't know for sure whether there actually is some difference between 100 (LOW) and 200 + 1EV exposure - even repeating it with flash wouldn't tell me for sure because of the variable output of flash units. But I suspect that there actually is some difference and that the LOW file is a little nicer than the 200+1 file. Not sure how that would happen.

    The purpose of this was to understand whether I'm better off shooting at 200 (or AUTO)+1 where subject DR allows, or whether the extra effort of shooting at LOW might be worthwhile. To be continued but I suspect that LOW actually is a little better. What do others think? (RAW files linked above and for reference my preferred processing in LR is sharpening at 50/0.7/70/20 with NR at 17)

    In either event both the LOW and the 200+1 files are a lot nicer than the 200 file.
    Thanks 2 Member(s) thanked for this post
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  2. #2
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    k-hawinkler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The "Land of Enchantment"
    Posts
    3,298
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: EM-1 at LOW vs 200 vs 200+1 EV

    Thanks Tim. Have you tried other apps, like Capture One or Iridient?
    With best regards, K-H.

  3. #3
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Knorp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,995
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: EM-1 at LOW vs 200 vs 200+1 EV

    Believe me: LOW is absolutely much nicer ...
    Bart ...
    Thanks 2 Member(s) thanked for this post

  4. #4
    Subscriber Member tashley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    South of England
    Posts
    3,295
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: EM-1 at LOW vs 200 vs 200+1 EV

    Quote Originally Posted by k-hawinkler View Post
    Thanks Tim. Have you tried other apps, like Capture One or Iridient?
    No, I'm LR only these days. C1 might have a slightly better rendition of some files sometimes but it is such a massive PITA. Keeping to LR means I always have my catalogue in one place and then if a file really needs it I can grit my teeth and go to other developers...
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post

  5. #5
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    k-hawinkler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The "Land of Enchantment"
    Posts
    3,298
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: EM-1 at LOW vs 200 vs 200+1 EV

    Can one set LOW as a lower limit in Auto ISO?
    With best regards, K-H.

  6. #6
    Subscriber Member tashley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    South of England
    Posts
    3,295
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: EM-1 at LOW vs 200 vs 200+1 EV

    Quote Originally Posted by k-hawinkler View Post
    Can one set LOW as a lower limit in Auto ISO?
    Sadly not..
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post

  7. #7
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    k-hawinkler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The "Land of Enchantment"
    Posts
    3,298
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: EM-1 at LOW vs 200 vs 200+1 EV

    Quote Originally Posted by tashley View Post
    Sadly not..
    Thanks Tim. Yup, Olympus should fix that!
    With best regards, K-H.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,446
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: EM-1 at LOW vs 200 vs 200+1 EV

    Images captured with Low vs ISO 200 +1 EV post processed -1EV, should be very close. The differences would be how the image was processed. ie Low lets the camera do the image processing, vs using lightroom, CApture one etc to process?

    Based on Olympus's already amazing image processing engine, my bet is Olympus low ISO setting would be quite competitive.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •