• News about Products and Latest Company Direction • Summaries of Reported Problems and Potential Issues • Technical Articles on Photographic Gear and Technologies
ISO 250, new file I didn't show, ISO 250 (showing highlight recovery mode), fairly wide dynamic range street scene, JPEG from RAW, LR4.0 beta. Full file: http://raist3d.typepad.com/files/imgp0405.jpg
Previous ISO 4000 shot in real bad light (fluorescent fake tungsten at night- fluorescents are BAD because they have the frequency shift for digital cameras).
Previously shown ISO 6400 shot, F1.9, 1/10th. Shot *hand held* in exceptionally bad tungsten indirect light. This is a major stress to all cameras.
Before you go on and knee jerk answer that it has noise, take a shot of the same subject on other compacts, 4/3rds (I have some so I can tell you), and other comparable ones. Also keep in mind having the F1.9 makes this shot even possible- not an option on many other cameras.
OH also this shot was pushed up 0.25 EV so it's more ISO 8000, not ISO 6400. Notice the distinct lack of banding - I can tell you many 4/3rds, m4/3rds would show banding at this point:
For all these files I hardly spent any time in lightroom. Someone with more involvement in post processing may make them better to taste.
Now I dared to put these out there, and delivered. I think it's time you stop the stupid knee jerk commentary - you have shown you have valuable posts at times.
OH and yes, you have a lot of DOF, sure. That's part of this camera system. Depending on what you are doing, that's not always a bad thing. I also have images where even the F1.9 prime has good DOF control to do good things with it.
OH and by the way, the ISO 6400 pushed to ISO 8000 as I linked it originally, is 1600x1200. That's a near 2 megapixel file, *hardly* a "web site* as you pointed out. Web sizes are usually 320x240 to 800x600. In more rare cases 1024x768, not 1600x1200.
Logging you in...
VoiceOfReason · 685 weeks ago
RiceHigh 110p · 685 weeks ago
El Raist · 685 weeks ago
http://raist3d.typepad.com/files/earring.jpg http://raist3d.typepad.com/files/imgp0515.jpg http://raist3d.typepad.com/files/imgp0782.jpg http://raist3d.typepad.com/files/nuclearwinter_q.... http://raist3d.typepad.com/files/bathroomwindow.j...
ISO 4000 in really bad light, mind you:
http://raist3d.typepad.com/files/imgp9913.jpg
ISO 6400 in *exceptionally bad light* (fluorescent, 1/10th exposure, F1.9)
http://raist3d.typepad.com/files/imgp0575.jpg
El Raist · 685 weeks ago
http://raist3d.typepad.com/files/imgp0235.jpg
RiceHigh 110p · 685 weeks ago
And I can see one thing that is really "great", that is, the really *great* DoF! ;-)
El raist · 685 weeks ago
Raist3d · 685 weeks ago
ISO 160, the Lasagna scene, JPEG from RAW, LR 4.0 beta. Full file:
http://raist3d.typepad.com/files/imgp0782-1.jpg
ISO 250, new file I didn't show, ISO 250 (showing highlight recovery mode), fairly wide dynamic range street scene, JPEG from RAW, LR4.0 beta. Full file:
http://raist3d.typepad.com/files/imgp0405.jpg
Previous ISO 4000 shot in real bad light (fluorescent fake tungsten at night- fluorescents are BAD because they have the frequency shift for digital cameras).
100% crop of full file (not giving full file on this one but cut a good section showing from dark shadows to bright): From RAW, LR4.0 beta
http://raist3d.typepad.com/files/imgp9913-1.jpg
Previously shown ISO 6400 shot, F1.9, 1/10th. Shot *hand held* in exceptionally bad tungsten indirect light. This is a major stress to all cameras.
Before you go on and knee jerk answer that it has noise, take a shot of the same subject on other compacts, 4/3rds (I have some so I can tell you), and other comparable ones. Also keep in mind having the F1.9 makes this shot even possible- not an option on many other cameras.
OH also this shot was pushed up 0.25 EV so it's more ISO 8000, not ISO 6400. Notice the distinct lack of banding - I can tell you many 4/3rds, m4/3rds would show banding at this point:
Full shot, JPEG from RAW, LR 4.0 beta
http://raist3d.typepad.com/files/imgp0235-1.jpg
For all these files I hardly spent any time in lightroom. Someone with more involvement in post processing may make them better to taste.
Now I dared to put these out there, and delivered. I think it's time you stop the stupid knee jerk commentary - you have shown you have valuable posts at times.
OH and yes, you have a lot of DOF, sure. That's part of this camera system. Depending on what you are doing, that's not always a bad thing. I also have images where even the F1.9 prime has good DOF control to do good things with it.
Raist3d · 685 weeks ago
Raist3d · 685 weeks ago
VladimirYo · 685 weeks ago
Ying · 685 weeks ago
Matt · 685 weeks ago