AMAZING!!!
Doing some SNR comparisions between the ISOLOW and the ISO200, I have realized I made a mistake when analyzing the RAW files to determine the relative exposure: the gap of 1/3EV is correct but... ISOLOW is the file with higher RAW values!. I thought I made a mistake when renaming the files and ignored that ISOLOW had more exposure because I thought that was not possible.
I.e. when you shoot using the same aperture and shutter at ISOLOW, you get RAW data 1/3EV
more exposed (confirmed) than at ISO200. That means that if you use camera's metering at ISOLOW (that seems to work as an ISO100 for metering), RAW files will blow up to 1,33EV of highlight information vs correct exposure using any other ISO. This matches a reported video on other forum with more blown highlights when using ISOLOW than when using any other ISO value.
If that were tue, the new ISOLOW would be an effective
ISO250 (250=200*1.25), not ISO160 nor ISO100.
Could this be a mistake by Olympus or I am missing something?
I am requesting RAW files with blown highlights at ISOLOW and ISO200 to confirm, keeping the same aperture/shutter.
If anyone wants to do some analusis, these 2 RAW files were shot using the same aperture/shutter but different ISO setting:
isolow.ORFiso200.ORFUnfortunately they have no blown highlights.
Regards