Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5   Go Down

Author Topic: M43 compared to Fuji APS-C  (Read 35717 times)

TonyVentourisPhotography

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 391
    • Unlocking Olympus
Re: M43 compared to Fuji APS-C
« Reply #60 on: July 13, 2016, 10:07:59 am »

Hi Armand!  Thanks for that file.  So I loaded it up in the latest lightroom and had a go at the file.  Here are the files, what I see, and then my explanation at the bottom.

File 1: As shot.  This is what you provided.  When looking at it objectively I see an image exposed purely for the sky brights.  Moody and dark everywhere else. 
https://www.dropbox.com/s/lyka2nxp6650c0o/Olympus_test1-as-shot.jpg?dl=0

File 2: Exposure lifted +4.  This is raising the exposure in lightroom 4 stops!
https://www.dropbox.com/s/47vgnwej5ot180l/Olympus_test1-exp-plus-4.jpg?dl=0

File 3: Exposure pushed +5 stops, shadows pushed to 100% brighter, and darks pushed to 100% brighter.  That's is just ripping the file to the extreme for demonstration of the "purple."
https://www.dropbox.com/s/9v6aqu0ybulgm14/Olympus_test1-max-exp-shad-dark.jpg?dl=0

File 4: My own adjustments in lightroom to create what I feel is an optimal image based on the data that was recorded...assuming that you are trying to show the entire scene and not just the sky.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/48786t2tbz1ecep/Olympus_test1-optimal.jpg?dl=0

All my adjustments were quick basic lightroom adjustments.  My honest opinion is that few images would hold up to this kind of extreme adjustment.  My medium format gear can handle a +4 boost just fine...as long as you dont touch the shadows additionally.  The Olympus handled the exposure boosting 4 stops just fine too without going ugly purple.  Honestly, if I have a file that I meant to capture the entire scene, and it was still that dark after 4 stops... I screwed up.  Bottom line.  No miracles to expect...I just needed more exposure to be recorded.  I would have shot two images.  Or three.  This is also a perfect scene for a graduated neutral density filter.  I understand this is an extreme example, but I also think as photographers in general we need to know what the cameras can and cant do.  I dont think any camera out there is capable of pulling more than this cleanly.  In fact, for a sensor as small as a m4/3 sensor, this is exceptionally good.  In fact I know for a fact my Canon full frames would have fallen apart just as hard.  I've done the tests myself. 

This all comes down to what do we want.  What are we after as photographers, and what are we doing when we hit the shutter?  Was this file intentionally shot like this thinking "oh ill open it up later?"  Or was it shot for the sky and "oh wouldnt it be great now if I could see more?" 

I am certainly not directing this to you Armand.  I am glad you posted an example.  I think this is a good exercise for everyone to see.  It comes down to what we want...and I feel the file I show as optimal in my opinion, based on my own adjustment preferences is more than acceptable based on what I started with.  If I go to black and white, I have even more liberty to push it.  I bet if you print this, it wouldn't even be that bad up to 14 inches.  In fact all non-photographers wouldnt think twice. 

Anyways, thanks again.  Very cool.  I'de love to hear opinions.  Again, my processing is my own choice, I am sure others would have done this differently.  Not here to knock any one. 


Logged
Tony
Unlockingolympus.com (ebooks & blog on getting the most from your OMD & Pen)
tonyventourisphotography.com (Commercial Photography)

razrblck

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 482
  • Chill
    • Instagram
Re: M43 compared to Fuji APS-C
« Reply #61 on: July 13, 2016, 12:24:22 pm »

I'm impressed, looking at the original you wouldn't be able to tell detail is still captured in the shadows.

I personally prefer the original shot, it has character. I've pushed the shadows just enough to show the trees, and the noise level is still very good and controlled. I've applied sharpening and a slight selective noise reduction, as well as color correction. I don't think any modern camera is going to impact anyone's ability to take good photos as much as their skill level.



Thanks Armand for the photo, I like it and it was a fun five minutes edit!
Logged
Instagram (updated often)

TonyVentourisPhotography

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 391
    • Unlocking Olympus
Re: M43 compared to Fuji APS-C
« Reply #62 on: July 13, 2016, 06:51:40 pm »

I like the moody cool tones in that edit as well.  I would have cropped a bit from the bottom probably.  I would have assumed this photo was captured in this way intentionally for the sky and the heaviness of tones. 
Logged
Tony
Unlockingolympus.com (ebooks & blog on getting the most from your OMD & Pen)
tonyventourisphotography.com (Commercial Photography)

armand

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5540
    • Photos
Re: M43 compared to Fuji APS-C
« Reply #63 on: July 13, 2016, 07:24:46 pm »

Here is another version, almost identical, and how I processed it: http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=111310.msg919438#msg919438

I liked the scene but was in a terrible rush (long story, trying to reach the car to get back to the injured part of the party) so I took few shots trying to preserve the highlights and hoping I have enough room in the shadows. First time with the Olympus, didn't know what to expect. In retrospect a couple of different exposures might have worked better.

I still see the purple showing up fast but maybe because I got used to see it. One of these days I'll take out all my 3 systems and shoot a high contrast scene, preserving the highlights, and see exactly how much room I have in each.

razrblck

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 482
  • Chill
    • Instagram
Re: M43 compared to Fuji APS-C
« Reply #64 on: July 14, 2016, 02:23:41 am »

I still see the purple showing up fast but maybe because I got used to see it. One of these days I'll take out all my 3 systems and shoot a high contrast scene, preserving the highlights, and see exactly how much room I have in each.

Yeah, I had to lower the purple slider and rise the blue in the Hue settings to keep it under control. That is definitely something to keep in mind as you don't have anywhere near the same level of wiggle room you get with a bigger sensor, but overall not too bad. As long as you can edit around the purple (selective desaturation or lack of purple in the scene) I'd say you can manage really well.

The noise was not as pleasant as I expected, but I think you managed it really well in your edit (I just kept everything dark so it doesn't show up much). My ancient D200 and D7000 have a more pleasant pattern, but again nothing you can't really deal with I guess.

How's the 12-40mm 2.8 PRO as far as handling goes? Is it well balanced on the body?
Logged
Instagram (updated often)

Mousecop

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 77
Re: M43 compared to Fuji APS-C
« Reply #65 on: July 14, 2016, 11:26:01 am »

I generally concur with Tony, there's only so much any camera can do in a single exposure. A 35mm sensor will have 1-2 stops more latitude to boost shadows without increasing noise. That is not always critical with landscapes, as you often (though not always) have the option to do HDR.
Logged

armand

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5540
    • Photos
Re: M43 compared to Fuji APS-C
« Reply #66 on: July 15, 2016, 12:05:32 am »


How's the 12-40mm 2.8 PRO as far as handling goes? Is it well balanced on the body?

It's ok. A little front heavy maybe but I usually use 2 hands most of the time so you don't really feel it. Zooms the "wrong" way. It doesn't save any weight compared to my Fuji X-T1 with the kit zoom but you gain some wr and it's wider. For landscape the increased DOF it's desirable. Focuses quite close, you don't really need a macro for flower close-ups, etc.
All in all a good hiking kit.

I feel the ergonomics are superior on the Fuji, even taking into account the fact that I still didn't know the camera. As an example there was a cat drinking from a spring, funny shot (I'll post it when I get to the computer) but my camera was set at iso 200 giving exposures around 1/25, mostly too slow. I only had few seconds to change it. Just too cumbersome to do it so fast (go to the super menu, find the iso and turn to auto then switch to shutter priority), I took few extra shots instead so I have a couple that are usable. On the Fuji I could have turned 2 dials in 1 sec and be done with (iso to A and shutter speed to where I wanted it, around 1/125). With more practice it might take me less. Or I guess I could learn to use custom settings ...

The significant weight savings are on the telephoto side, the Pana 35-100 2.8 is really light, and the Samyang 8mm fisheye is quite light (though not bright).

razrblck

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 482
  • Chill
    • Instagram
Re: M43 compared to Fuji APS-C
« Reply #67 on: July 15, 2016, 03:05:13 am »

I used the Samyang 8mm for APS-C, and yeah it's a lot smaller and lighter than what it looks in pictures online. I gave it to a friend who uses it a lot more than I did.

Is the Fuji system as fast and responsive as the Olympus one? I never tried a Fuji, had them in my hands but the guys at the shop never let me turn one on!
Logged
Instagram (updated often)

donbga

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 454
Re: M43 compared to Fuji APS-C
« Reply #68 on: July 16, 2016, 09:07:57 am »

Maybe I wasn't clear, those statements are meant to be mostly separate. As in pushing the shadows/exposure the noise goes up faster than I would like even at base iso. The other separate statement is about the purple shadows which tend to happen at base iso with hefty processing or at higher iso with moderate processing.


Armand, Your avatar tells me everything I need to know ...

Logged

armand

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5540
    • Photos
Re: M43 compared to Fuji APS-C
« Reply #69 on: July 16, 2016, 02:41:18 pm »

I used the Samyang 8mm for APS-C, and yeah it's a lot smaller and lighter than what it looks in pictures online. I gave it to a friend who uses it a lot more than I did.

Is the Fuji system as fast and responsive as the Olympus one? I never tried a Fuji, had them in my hands but the guys at the shop never let me turn one on!

It's fast enough in daily use that I don't see a difference, the X-T1 at least. The menus are simpler also.
Focus speed is lens dependent, I somehow feel it's slightly slower now after the last firmware update. With a fast lens in decent light is practically as fast as the E-M5. The slower lenses are ok if you don't shoot moving subjects.

razrblck

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 482
  • Chill
    • Instagram
Re: M43 compared to Fuji APS-C
« Reply #70 on: July 16, 2016, 02:48:51 pm »

It's fast enough in daily use that I don't see a difference, the X-T1 at least. The menus are simpler also.
Focus speed is lens dependent, I somehow feel it's slightly slower now after the last firmware update. With a fast lens in decent light is practically as fast as the E-M5. The slower lenses are ok if you don't shoot moving subjects.

Thanks. Today I've been to my usual shop and got to play around a bit.

I tried the Samyang 7.5mm fisheye on a OM-D E-M5 and it's crazy sharp at all apertures! You can correct the distortion to get a very wide rectilinear lens (see attached example, shot at ISO800 mind you), though I would still recommend the Olympus 7-14mm PRO if you have enough money. It's also very tiny and extremely light, very well balanced even on a OM-D E-M10 mk.II without grip.

Next week they should get new Fuji bodies, though not the X-T2 (yet). I'll bug them to try something, they usually don't let me turn on bodies that are not for demo. :(
Logged
Instagram (updated often)

armand

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5540
    • Photos
Re: M43 compared to Fuji APS-C
« Reply #71 on: July 17, 2016, 10:41:27 pm »

I expect the X-T2 to have good focusing. How good we'll have to see, I've been partially disappointed by Fuji's marketing on the focus before. Either way, it should be significantly better than what we have now.
Early reports are promising but they almost always are.

armand

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5540
    • Photos
Re: M43 compared to Fuji APS-C
« Reply #72 on: July 18, 2016, 09:29:48 pm »

Another version with more foreground and the exposure as good as it gets for a single exposure.

Also the well behaved cat that I mentioned earlier in the thread.

razrblck

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 482
  • Chill
    • Instagram
Re: M43 compared to Fuji APS-C
« Reply #73 on: July 19, 2016, 02:31:34 am »

Beautiful stuff!
Logged
Instagram (updated often)

TonyVentourisPhotography

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 391
    • Unlocking Olympus
Re: M43 compared to Fuji APS-C
« Reply #74 on: July 28, 2016, 08:29:49 am »

All week I have been shooting for a client (can't publish the work just yet...) a mix of architectural / landscape images.  I would have thought this was a dream job except for the unfortunate fact that 80% of the work needed to be shot between 11am and 2pm due to restrictions imposed by the client.  Not what I consider ideal in any sense of the word.  Especially in terms of making mundane subjects look amazing.  Regardless, it is what it is.  At least they signed off on what kind of look they would be getting and understand that. 

Anyways, I am not going to deliver anything that looks like a noon snapshot to anybody.  I've been shooting with the E-M1 exclusively.  I found as long as I I picked my based exposure really well for the scene's extremes, and watched the histogram, I could effectively get away with a single shot.  In fact, boosting shadows 100%, blacks by 20 or so, and controlling highlights and exposure as needed in areas, I was actually coming away with a beautiful "daylight" images.  In fact, these are all going to publishing next month. 

I found that if I watched the histogram and got into the clipping "2 clicks" I was for sure safe.  That means non highlight warning, and then keep adjusting exposure speed until the orange appears.  First click it appears, second click it increases.  2nd or 3rd click into clipping was generally manageable in scenes with wide harsh contrast.  Not scenes like the image we played with above, but your every day sunlit afternoon scene.  Of course I had a few tricks up my sleeve too to ensure colors looked good, etc...  However, I just want to say my results have been coming out surprisingly good and the dark areas perfectly clean.
Logged
Tony
Unlockingolympus.com (ebooks & blog on getting the most from your OMD & Pen)
tonyventourisphotography.com (Commercial Photography)

SZRitter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 384
Re: M43 compared to Fuji APS-C
« Reply #75 on: July 28, 2016, 10:10:29 am »

I found that if I watched the histogram and got into the clipping "2 clicks" I was for sure safe.  That means non highlight warning, and then keep adjusting exposure speed until the orange appears.  First click it appears, second click it increases.  2nd or 3rd click into clipping was generally manageable in scenes with wide harsh contrast.  Not scenes like the image we played with above, but your every day sunlit afternoon scene.  Of course I had a few tricks up my sleeve too to ensure colors looked good, etc...  However, I just want to say my results have been coming out surprisingly good and the dark areas perfectly clean.

That mirrors the same basic method I use for the E-M5. Hasn't failed me yet. Knowing the limit of the sensor is critical.
Logged

rodgerd

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7
    • http://diaspora.gen.nz/~rodgerd/
Re: M43 compared to Fuji APS-C
« Reply #76 on: August 12, 2016, 03:12:31 am »

I feel the ergonomics are superior on the Fuji, even taking into account the fact that I still didn't know the camera. As an example there was a cat drinking from a spring, funny shot (I'll post it when I get to the computer) but my camera was set at iso 200 giving exposures around 1/25, mostly too slow. I only had few seconds to change it. Just too cumbersome to do it so fast (go to the super menu, find the iso and turn to auto then switch to shutter priority) .... Or I guess I could learn to use custom settings ...

It's worth noting on the E-M5 II and E-M1 (and the PEN 5, for that matter) the 2x2 switch (located by the rear dial on the E-M5 II) will flick the dials to the secondary mode which defaults to putting ISO and White Balance onto the two dials.
Logged

armand

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5540
    • Photos
Re: M43 compared to Fuji APS-C
« Reply #77 on: August 12, 2016, 12:13:55 pm »

It's worth noting on the E-M5 II and E-M1 (and the PEN 5, for that matter) the 2x2 switch (located by the rear dial on the E-M5 II) will flick the dials to the secondary mode which defaults to putting ISO and White Balance onto the two dials.

I think I had set it up but in the heat of the moment it didn't even cross my mind to do that. This is a case when too many options are not always a good thing.

armand

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5540
    • Photos
Re: M43 compared to Fuji APS-C
« Reply #78 on: August 12, 2016, 12:18:47 pm »

For whatever it's worth I'm going to Zion for day hikes and I'll get the Fuji this time, one reason being the 10-24 (I didn't get the 7-14 on the m43 side) and the second is that when I can afford a little extra weight I prefer the Fuji output, easier to get an appealing image in camera.

Pete Berry

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 445
Re: M43 compared to Fuji APS-C
« Reply #79 on: August 12, 2016, 03:05:57 pm »

I would love to see your raw file that behaves like this.  I've pushed my files well past this with great results.  I use 2 e-m1s on a daily basis and find them doing better than my canon 5d2.  I. Also find my results clean and excellent in print.  In fact, prints even at ISO 5000 can be clean when prepared right and shot well in raw.  I've never seen a file take a purple case from just a small adjustment.  Especially ISO 200.

Just to clarify, I don't doubt or knock your experience, I am just more curious than anything since I've had such an extremely opposite file experience.

Here's an m4/3 Panny GH4 image from RAW at ISO 5000, holding good detail with judicious NR in ACR, which made a nice 15x20 print. Sure, put the nose in it and there's some fine-grained noise, but I dare say much better than ASA 400 Tri-X 16x20's from my Nikon-F 50 yrs ago!

Pete
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5   Go Up