PDA

View Full Version : Not impress yet


Rooky007
5th November 2012, 05:59 PM
Being a new owner of a OMD I am not that impress yet.. I've been trying figure out best way and setting to shoot at high iso as images I am getting are quite noisy.

Raw is terrible but jpeg is ok but what are people using as there settings ie NR or sharpness etc settings in the menu. I need to learn to get the best out of this if I can't then it has to go.

Seonnaidh
5th November 2012, 06:31 PM
What ISO levels do you wish to shoot at specifically?
I use my OMD regularly at ISO1600 and I have no problems. The noise level is exceptionally low.
My settings are RAW, aperture priority and I process through Aperture software.

Rooky007
5th November 2012, 06:35 PM
What ISO levels do you wish to shoot at specifically?
I use my OMD regularly at ISO1600 and I have no problems. The noise level is exceptionally low.
My settings are RAW, aperture priority and I process through Aperture software.

I love to have my ISO as low as possible but recently I had to use 3200 even 5000 to get the shutter speed to take images of my daughter who wiggles so need fast shutter to get sharp images not blurred

Ive also got aperture the Noise Reduction in aperture is POOR

Ulfric M Douglas
5th November 2012, 06:49 PM
Rooky neither here nor in your posts on TP have you shown a noisy high-ISO example.

It would be nice to see what you're not impressed with and get an idea of what you would want to be better from your camera.

Rooky007
5th November 2012, 06:54 PM
Rooky neither here nor in your posts on TP have you shown a noisy high-ISO example.

It would be nice to see what you're not impressed with and get an idea of what you would want to be better from your camera.

Reason to that I only posted images I got good the noise ones goes in the thrash I hate them... I will do some tmr or later and post them to show...

What the best way to host images to show on here as over the TP I put them in the gallery belonging to TP

Rooky007
5th November 2012, 06:58 PM
Even when I want to try and show the noisy images they need be full size to show you it hard to show....

tomphotofx
5th November 2012, 07:36 PM
I also process in Aperture, I use Topaz Denoise, or Nik Define for noise reduction and I must say the quality is superb up to 12,800 ISO. To say I'm impressed is an understatement, I also shoot in RAW so I can extract the best out of the photo.

Perhaps you should post a couple of examples so we can see what you're talking about. If you use Dropbox (which is free) to upload a full size file then just post the link then those on the forum willing to help will have all the information they need to offer advice.

Hope this helps.

Tom*chr

Rooky007
5th November 2012, 07:40 PM
I also process in Aperture, I use Topaz Denoise, or Nik Define for noise reduction and I must say the quality is superb up to 12,800 ISO. To say I'm impressed is an understatement, I also shoot in RAW so I can extract the best out of the photo.

Perhaps you should post a couple of examples so we can see what you're talking about. If you use Dropbox (which is free) to upload a full size file then just post the link then those on the forum willing to help will have all the information they need to offer advice.

Hope this helps.

Tom*chr


Hi I will do that, that a great idea as I really want to get the best out of this camera as I love the size of it.

In mean time till I get some images could you show me a couple of full size images at high iso please?

Raw seem impossible lots of noise

Rooky007
5th November 2012, 07:45 PM
How do I get a full size image out of aperture undedited over to drop box as when I export they jpeg

Jim Ford
5th November 2012, 07:56 PM
I need to learn to get the best out of this if I can't then it has to go.

I'd be interested in what you have in mind as an alternative if the camera "has to go". The review of the OM-D on the highly respected dpreview site says that:

"If you're absolutely unwilling to compromise on image quality then spending twice the money and moving up to the bulk of full-frame is the only way of gaining a significant step up from the E-M5."

Is that what you're considering - going FF?

Jim

tomphotofx
5th November 2012, 08:01 PM
Here is a 12,800 ISO

https://www.dropbox.com/s/1m2mwqt13yu1ghi/_A090002%20%281%29.jpg

Tom

Rooky007
5th November 2012, 08:04 PM
Here is a 12,800 ISO

https://www.dropbox.com/s/1m2mwqt13yu1ghi/_A090002%20%281%29.jpg

Tom

How you manage to get that with very little noise did you do any editing to that? Ive Define do you let it do it automatic or you do it

Rooky007
5th November 2012, 08:05 PM
I'd be interested in what you have in mind as an alternative if the camera "has to go". The review of the OM-D on the highly respected dpreview site says that:

"If you're absolutely unwilling to compromise on image quality then spending twice the money and moving up to the bulk of full-frame is the only way of gaining a significant step up from the E-M5."

Is that what you're considering - going FF?

Jim

If I was not happy yes a Nikon D600 probably but I seen soo many people getting good images with their OMD

Ulfric M Douglas
5th November 2012, 08:09 PM
Rooky just snip out a 100% crop 1000 pixels wide from your noisiest Jpeg, converted from your noisiest RAW of course.
Upload the 1000 pixel wide crop to this forum's gallery space : it is simple to use here.

Rooky007
5th November 2012, 08:20 PM
http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/data/500/PB050022.jpg (http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/54053)

Looks more noisy than that before it exported via aperture

tomphotofx
5th November 2012, 08:23 PM
It might be worth your while to look at this webinar as it explains in detail how to use and get the best out of Define 2.0

http://www.niksoftware.com/learnmore/usa/index.php/webinars/archives/#/dfine-2-0-and-sharpener-pro-3-0/0/2/0/new-to-old/0/page:1

Tom

Rooky007
5th November 2012, 08:24 PM
here another but that is out of camera 4000 ISO pretty noisy?

http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/data/500/PB050022_1_.jpg (http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/54054)

timmypreston
5th November 2012, 08:44 PM
That's a very heavy crop!

Have you tried using flash?

tomphotofx
5th November 2012, 08:48 PM
Just thought you might like to take a look at the work from a guy who is very impressed with the EM-5 and lenses. He makes his living by taking photos and has won more awards in the Uk than anyone else. He is known as the BIG DOG.
Take a look

http://www.damianmcgillicuddy.com/journal/tag/swpp

Tom

Rooky007
5th November 2012, 08:57 PM
Should I really need to use flash in day light?? I hate flash and like try get away with it..

Alot of people was saying the OMD noise level is better thant he 7D I read a few places about this and i yet to witness it

Zuiko
5th November 2012, 09:03 PM
Rooky, have you got Gradation set to "Auto" by chance? It's a recipe for noise, especially in the shadows at high ISO. Set it to "Normal" and you should see an improvement.

I've uploaded a full size, unedited, OOC Jpeg on Flickr, shot at ISO 6400 with Noise Filter set to Off. http://www.flickr.com/photos/johnperriment/8158960232/sizes/o/in/photostream/

Rooky007
5th November 2012, 09:10 PM
Rooky, have you got Gradation set to "Auto" by chance? It's a recipe for noise, especially in the shadows at high ISO. Set it to "Normal" and you should see an improvement.

I've uploaded a full size, unedited, OOC Jpeg on Flickr, shot at ISO 6400 with Noise Filter set to Off. http://www.flickr.com/photos/johnperriment/8158960232/sizes/o/in/photostream/

I NEVER get a image like that out of camera...

HMMMMMMMM something not right somewhere

Rooky007
5th November 2012, 09:11 PM
Rooky, have you got Gradation set to "Auto" by chance? It's a recipe for noise, especially in the shadows at high ISO. Set it to "Normal" and you should see an improvement.

I've uploaded a full size, unedited, OOC Jpeg on Flickr, shot at ISO 6400 with Noise Filter set to Off. http://www.flickr.com/photos/johnperriment/8158960232/sizes/o/in/photostream/

How did you manage that with NR off???? What lens

Rooky007
5th November 2012, 09:15 PM
Rooky, have you got Gradation set to "Auto" by chance?

Where that as cant find gradation

tomphotofx
5th November 2012, 09:26 PM
Page 53 of manual

Tom

Rooky007
5th November 2012, 09:31 PM
Page 53 of manual

Tom

Thanks and they are all set to normal on all picture modes

Rooky007
5th November 2012, 09:33 PM
I am using Normal Picture mode btw

Zuiko
5th November 2012, 09:33 PM
Rooky, have you got Gradation set to "Auto" by chance?

Where that as cant find gradation

Open Super Control Panel, 3rd row down on right side is a symbol which looks like a figure 8 squashed and slanted. If it has "AUTO" next to it then Gradation is set to auto. Highlight this setting using the 4-way arrow keys and press "OK" button. On next screen highlight "NORM" and press OK again.

The lens used for my shot was a Panasonic 14-45mm f3.5/5.6 kit lens.

Rooky007
5th November 2012, 09:38 PM
I wonder if it the lens I have that poor????? Am using the 12-50 kit lens

Rooky007
5th November 2012, 09:39 PM
Zuiko I gather you shoot your photos in Jpeg rather than Raw and you have NR Turned off anything else you like me to know please as that image is a cracker

Zuiko
5th November 2012, 09:43 PM
I wonder if it the lens I have that poor????? Am using the 12-50 kit lens

A poor lens could cause all kinds of image quality problems but would not affect noise.

tomphotofx
5th November 2012, 09:46 PM
The 12-50mm is an excellent lens.

http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/data/1479/8270031_-_Aug_2012.jpg (http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/51259)

Tom

Rooky007
5th November 2012, 09:47 PM
Zuiko do you not shoot raw? What editing software your using?

I have just turned off NR for the jPeg and it looks like a little improvement so the NR in the camera seems a nit naff?

Rooky007
5th November 2012, 09:49 PM
The 12-50mm is an excellent lens.

http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/data/1479/8270031_-_Aug_2012.jpg (http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/51259)

Tom

Yes it does a VERY good job at Macro I not had a problem with it doing that sort of thing...

My only gripe is ISO noise at the moment... I Know low light indoor is a bit of a struggle with this lens that why I am waiting for my Free lens to arrive. As it to take pictures of the 3 years old so need fast shutter to take clear non blurred images

Rooky007
5th November 2012, 09:49 PM
Tom do you shoot raw or jpeg also any tips from you please :)

Zuiko
5th November 2012, 10:00 PM
Zuiko I gather you shoot your photos in Jpeg rather than Raw and you have NR Turned off anything else you like me to know please as that image is a cracker

I often shoot raw actually, but that shot was a JPEG because I'd just got the camera and I hadn't upgraded my software (Adobe Elements) to support E-M5 raws at that stage.

When I shoot JPEGs I have noise filter off (prefer to use Dfine 2 if needed), contrast 0, sharpness minus 2 (prefer to sharpen in post processing), picture mode natural, gradation normal.

Zuiko
5th November 2012, 10:02 PM
Zuiko do you not shoot raw? What editing software your using?

I have just turned off NR for the jPeg and it looks like a little improvement so the NR in the camera seems a nit naff?

Noise Reduction or Noise Filter? These sound similar but are two different things.

Rooky007
5th November 2012, 10:02 PM
I often shoot raw actually, but that shot was a JPEG because I'd just got the camera and I hadn't upgraded my software (Adobe Elements) to support E-M5 raws at that stage.

When I shoot JPEGs I have noise filter off (prefer to use Dfine 2 if needed), contrast 0, sharpness minus 2 (prefer to sharpen in post processing), picture mode natural, gradation normal.

I know Raw images have more noise but should there be that much noise? Define I do have with aperture do you just open define let it do it work and apply?

I am Hard Of hearing so not been able to watch the video on how to use it properly

Rooky007
5th November 2012, 10:02 PM
Noise Reduction or Noise Filter? These sound similar but are two different things.

They are both off

Zuiko
5th November 2012, 10:26 PM
I know Raw images have more noise but should there be that much noise? Define I do have with aperture do you just open define let it do it work and apply?

I am Hard Of hearing so not been able to watch the video on how to use it properly

There shouldn't be much more noise with raw, if the noise filter is turned to Off for JPEGs, but depending upon the camera a nominal amount of noise filtering may still be taking place even when set to off.

I rarely just let Dfine do the work, at the very least I will adjust the colour and luminence sliders up or down while I check the effect in preview. However, one of the great features of Dfine is the ability to set control points to vary the treatment given to key areas of the image, rather than just make a global reduction.

However, with the E-M5 you shouldn't be needing noise filtering at ISO 4000.

Jim Ford
5th November 2012, 10:28 PM
It seems to me that as you're considering a FF Nikon D600 and believe it's more suited to your needs, you ought to just go for it!

Jim

Zuiko
5th November 2012, 10:46 PM
It seems to me that as you're considering a FF Nikon D600 and believe it's more suited to your needs, you ought to just go for it!

Jim

A bit unfair, Jim! :)

I think Rooky is struggling to get to grips with the E-M5 but really wants to make a go of it. It's capable of great results but is quite a complex camera to master - as I'm sure the D600 is, too!

tomphotofx
5th November 2012, 11:31 PM
I love to have my ISO as low as possible but recently I had to use 3200 even 5000 to get the shutter speed to take images of my daughter who wiggles so need fast shutter to get sharp images not blurred

Ive also got aperture the Noise Reduction in aperture is POOR

Going back to this post it seems to me that Flash would be your best solution to capture a child running around indoors, use bounce flash or use something like the Gary Fong Lightsphere. You'll be a lot happier than what you are now with the results.

Just a thought, if one method isn't working try another.

Tom

Rooky007
6th November 2012, 05:26 AM
A bit unfair, Jim! :)

I think Rooky is struggling to get to grips with the E-M5 but really wants to make a go of it. It's capable of great results but is quite a complex camera to master - as I'm sure the D600 is, too!

Yes that correct I am really wanting to get this to work I've sold my big gear was too much to carry around so was not using as much. So I really want get the omd to do it job..

I know using flash should have but have read many people saying high iso on this camera is great this to me has not approved yet but have alter some settings for jpeg. I rather shoot raw so all these setting don't take effect. My raw pictures were awful too the brick sample above was raw

Rooky007
6th November 2012, 05:48 AM
There shouldn't be much more noise with raw, if the noise filter is turned to Off for JPEGs, but depending upon the camera a nominal amount of noise filtering may still be taking place even when set to off.

I rarely just let Dfine do the work, at the very least I will adjust the colour and luminence sliders up or down while I check the effect in preview. However, one of the great features of Dfine is the ability to set control points to vary the treatment given to key areas of the image, rather than just make a global reduction.

However, with the E-M5 you shouldn't be needing noise filtering at ISO 4000.

Then something might be wrong raw images at 4000 or noticeable

Ulfric M Douglas
6th November 2012, 06:53 AM
here another but that is out of camera 4000 ISO pretty noisy?

http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/data/500/PB050022_1_.jpg (http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/54054)
Yes that is as noisy as ISO800 on the first generation cameras...

Rooky can you double check the gradation setting, since in the exif for this picture the gain control is reading 2 (=high gain UP), which I suspect indicates Olympus gradation on some setting other than Normal.
Double check that it is actually set to normal and not another setting, for example Auto.

If this were my thread I'd be posting screenshots of the SCP and side-by-side images from both my e-M5 and my 7D ... just saying.

Rooky007
6th November 2012, 07:36 AM
Yes that is as noisy as ISO800 on the first generation cameras...

Rooky can you double check the gradation setting, since in the exif for this picture the gain control is reading 2 (=high gain UP), which I suspect indicates Olympus gradation on some setting other than Normal.
Double check that it is actually set to normal and not another setting, for example Auto.

If this were my thread I'd be posting screenshots of the SCP and side-by-side images from both my e-M5 and my 7D ... just saying.

I've no longer got my 7d.

Should I be doing tests in raw or jpeg pls. I would of though the gradation setting Wong be effective in raw?

Bikie John
6th November 2012, 08:01 AM
I think there are some settings which can fool you - you think they will only affect the generated JPEGs but have some indirect effect on exposure, which in turn shows up in raw. Another thing that can happen is that the settings are recorded in the metadata inside the image file, and some raw processing programs will read them and try to apply them in post-processing. I'm not sure what those settings are though, sorry.

I'd suggest keeping everything as straight as possible, then double-checking the settings in your raw processing program to make sure that it isn't doing anything strange. Your ISO 4000 sample does look very noisy - I would certainly expect some noise at that speed but not that bad and it should be reasonably easy to deal with.

Good luck, I'm sure you're nearly there, just a question of finding the right recipe.

Ciao ... John

David Morison
6th November 2012, 08:19 AM
I believe the high ISO noise characteristics of the E-M5 sensor are exceptional, the reason I bought the camera in the first place and the main reason I keep it. I set the ceiling at 6400 but have used it at much higher values. I only shoot RAW on most occasions and process in LR4.2. One example of low light photography which required a little exposure manipulation, a little sharpening and only a little noise reduction:

http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/data/500/PA271832.jpg (http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/53831)

1/4 sec at f3.7 and ISO 6400, handheld. Where is the noise problem here?

David

OlyPaul
6th November 2012, 08:24 AM
I posted in your lens thread with a Pen E-PL3 example ( Panasonic sensor) but will also post here to see if I can throw some light on the matter.

In the 100% crop you posted the noise detail does not look like the typical Sony sensor noise pattern, Johns (Zuiko) out of camera shot looks more typical of the Sony sensor noise pattern.

Looking at the orange peel effect of the noise grain in your image leads me to believe that you shot in Raw and processed in Aperture. Now I have not used Aperture but have used Lightroom 4 and if you have the detail slider in noise reduction set to high then you get this orange peel effect at 100% veiwing.

I never shoot jpeg so this example this time is from a 2 and1/2 year old Pentax with the Sony sensor, the OMD should ( and indeed does) outgun it as it has the latest Sony sensor tecnology.

It has only been processed in my favourite raw converter and has not been in another noise reduction program.

ISO 6400

http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/data/1473/Blue_Tit5.JPG (http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/54080)

100% Crop

http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/data/1473/Picture0003.jpg (http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/54081)

As I have downloaded high ISO OMD RAW files when it first came out and processed them to test them and got better results than this I really think that it is probably operator processing error.

I'd gladly exchange my Pentax for your OMD if you want.;)

OlyPaul
6th November 2012, 08:31 AM
I believe the high ISO noise characteristics of the E-M5 sensor are exceptional, the reason I bought the camera in the first place and the main reason I keep it. I set the ceiling at 6400 but have used it at much higher values. I only shoot RAW on most occasions and process in LR4.2. One example of low light photography which required a little exposure manipulation, a little sharpening and only a little noise reduction:

1/4 sec at f3.7 and ISO 6400, handheld. Where is the noise problem here?

David

While I agree with you David you really need to post a 100% crop to make your point as all web sized images look good.:)

David Morison
6th November 2012, 08:45 AM
While I agree with you David you really need to post a 100% crop to make your point as all web sized images look good.:)

Here you go:


http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/data/500/PA2718321.jpg (http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/54083)


Straight jpeg from unprocessed RAW


David

OlyPaul
6th November 2012, 08:51 AM
Great David and proves my point that the Sony sensor in the OMD is top class.*chr

Greytop
6th November 2012, 09:25 AM
Another example for you Rooky007...

This shows the E-M5's capabilities at ISO 5000 with IBIS (1/160 @ 300mm).
Processed from RAW using default settings in Capture One Pro 6 together with a touch of noise reduction using Neat Image 7.2
http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/data/500/E-M5_ISO5000.jpg (http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/47712)

And here is a crop @ 100% straight from Capture One, untouched by Neat Image
http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/data/500/P6090592_100Percent.jpg (http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/47726)

I have a question for you, just wondering if your ISO 4000 image was underexposed and pushed in PP?
Getting the exposure nailed is more and more important the higher the sensitivity goes (however I'm sure you know this) :)

Rooky007
6th November 2012, 09:32 AM
Hi

Thank you everyone for showing me these awesome images. Could getting Lightroom help maybe aperture rubbish?

I want shot raw I prefer it. But need get good images whether it some settings or lens or software?????

What mode people use. I u P A S sometime M these should make a difference?

Can some of you tell me the settings ur using and I carbon copy it and do some test. Shame no one near Hope to visit

Rooky007
6th November 2012, 09:34 AM
Right how do we get light meter working on omd like it works on a dslr with the meter bar pls

Rooky007
6th November 2012, 09:40 AM
How can you check exposť properly on omd pls

Greytop
6th November 2012, 09:42 AM
How can you check exposť properly on omd pls

I always have the histogram up in the EVF or rear screen, just cycle through with the info button and it will appear.

Rooky007
6th November 2012, 09:45 AM
I always have the histogram up in the EVF or rear screen, just cycle through with the info button and it will appear.

Will do that when home :) see what we can do really hope you all ok helping me. I love the camera took it out every day didn't do that with 7d. Just need you kind buddies to bare with me and help :)

David Morison
6th November 2012, 09:47 AM
I have front dial assigned to exposure compensation and use it with either EVF or LV to get the image how I want it to look - easy peasy!

David

Greytop
6th November 2012, 09:49 AM
Will do that when home :) see what we can do really hope you all ok helping me. I love the camera took it out every day didn't do that with 7d. Just need you kind buddies to bare with me and help :)

I'm sure everyone is keen to help you get to the point where you're enjoying your OM-D :)

Rooky007
6th November 2012, 09:51 AM
I have front dial assigned to exposure compensation and use it with either EVF or LV to get the image how I want it to look - easy peasy!

David

That how I've been doing it. Argh must be some settings somewhere not right. Could some one share there settings shooting raw.

I've both noise turned off. Sharpener to -1 graduation is set normal. Anything else?

Rooky007
6th November 2012, 09:52 AM
Can the kit lens be the problem it great for macro. I've seen most of you using panny lens.

Greytop
6th November 2012, 09:56 AM
That how I've been doing it. Argh must be some settings somewhere not right. Could some one share there settings shooting raw.

I've both noise turned off. Sharpener to -1 graduation is set normal. Anything else?

I wouldn't 100% trust what you see in the EVF as an indication of the true exposure, particularly in low light conditions it amplifies the light giving an impression of correct exposure.
I also use the front dial for exposure compensation but only rely on the live histogram as my gauge for true exposure.

Rooky007
6th November 2012, 10:05 AM
I would though camera measure it itself in a p s modes?

Greytop
6th November 2012, 10:10 AM
I would though camera measure it itself in a p s modes?

The short answer is yes but it depends on how you are metering.
I find in low light I do have to use compensation more often than not to get it right.

Rooky007
6th November 2012, 10:12 AM
Is it always good over expose rather than under

Greytop
6th November 2012, 10:22 AM
Is it always good over expose rather than under

I would say that depends on what you are looking for from the image. For example a campfire shot where you are perhaps looking to expose for lighting on faces etc may be different from a street scene.
Generally speaking though I would tend to expose to the right of the histogram.

Rooky007
6th November 2012, 10:26 AM
Tell you what send me a screen shoot how you like the histogram then I work from there then I do all tests later and post back :)

What software u use Lightroom or aperture

Greytop
6th November 2012, 10:49 AM
Tell you what send me a screen shoot how you like the histogram then I work from there then I do all tests later and post back :)

What software u use Lightroom or aperture

When I have an opportunity I will do that for you.
With regard to RAW conversion, I use Capture One Pro (http://www.phaseone.com/en/Imaging-Software/Capture-One-7.aspx) (version 7)

Edit:

Here is a snap of the EVF with histogram visible and +0.3Ev compensation applied.
In darker conditions I would tend expose even further to the right whilst of course watching the highlights.
http://i870.photobucket.com/albums/ab269/Greytop_photos/EM-5%20EVF/E-M5Evfhistogram.jpg

Rooky007
6th November 2012, 01:44 PM
Thanks will give all this a gooooooo :)

What shutter speed should I be using to take pictures of a 3 years old who impossible keep still ive always thougha bout 120 or 160

Rooky007
6th November 2012, 01:49 PM
Am now downloading Capture one express 6 to see if software helps? But I cant see it being software related

Greytop
6th November 2012, 01:54 PM
Trial and error is your friend :)
Try starting off at 100-125/s

Greytop
6th November 2012, 01:56 PM
Am now downloading Capture one express 6 to see if software helps? But I cant see it being software related

I doubt this will help to be honest, I suspect it's more to do with underexposure.

Rooky007
6th November 2012, 01:59 PM
Ok what about Spot metering does that make any different ie Centre weight etc

Greytop
6th November 2012, 02:01 PM
Yes it does affect the exposure because the metering is concentrating on a smaller or central area of the image which might happen to be lighter or darker than the rest of the frame.

Rooky007
6th November 2012, 02:03 PM
Yes it does affect the exposure because the metering in concentrating on a smaller or central area of the image which might happen to be lighter or darker than the rest of the frame.

Thanks so what metering do you suggest then please that might be where I am going wrong..

Just looking and weighing up different options..

Jim Ford
6th November 2012, 02:06 PM
Here is a snap of the EVF with histogram visible and +0.3Ev compensation applied.
In darker conditions I would tend expose even further to the right whilst of course watching the highlights.
http://i870.photobucket.com/albums/ab269/Greytop_photos/EM-5%20EVF/E-M5Evfhistogram.jpg

You may be as much as a stop under exposed, in which case you've missed out on half of the available data for capture!

I push the exposure as far to the right as I can without actually touching the RH side of the graph.

Jim

Rooky007
6th November 2012, 02:10 PM
IS anyone here using aperture at all.. All Raw images are been processed terrible without me touch is there a setting anywhere

Ulfric M Douglas
6th November 2012, 02:15 PM
See if you can produce a similar noisy result with Jpegs straight from the camera : if you can't then that's a sure sign your Aperture processing is doing a bad job.
If you CAN get bad noise at 4000 ISO (or whatever) you might be the first I've seen with a duff noisy camera.

Rooky007
6th November 2012, 02:18 PM
See if you can produce a similar noisy result with Jpegs straight from the camera : if you can't then that's a sure sign your Aperture processing is doing a bad job.
If you CAN get bad noise at 4000 ISO (or whatever) you might be the first I've seen with a duff noisy camera.

What you using? I have downloaded a Lightroom too...

Are any of you doing any NR within software?

Zuiko
6th November 2012, 02:18 PM
Here is a snap of the EVF with histogram visible and +0.3Ev compensation applied.
In darker conditions I would tend expose even further to the right whilst of course watching the highlights.

http://i870.photobucket.com/albums/ab269/Greytop_photos/EM-5%20EVF/E-M5Evfhistogram.jpg



What Huw said. In low light, and even in good light, I try to get the histogram as far to the right as possible without actually clipping. More so when using raw as the highlights are more recoverable if needed. Typically I find this requires about +0.7 exposure compensation. It must be said that in some respects the compensation is reducing the effective ISO from, say, 6400 to around 4000, but this will give a better result than a slightly under-exposed image shot at ISO 4000.

Just a point, I see you took the bricks shot using shutter priority and ISO 4000. Was the ISO set at 4000 or Auto? The reason I ask is that if it was set, or limited to 4000 the camera would have no option but to under-expose when it hit the maximum aperture for the lens. The histogram for your shot is bunched to the left, which is what you don't want. Personally I would take this type of shot using Aperture Priority, aperture wide open, Auto ISO with a ceiling of 12800 and minimum shutter speed set to 1/200th second by the slow flash sync speed in the menu. I know you are not using flash, but you can use this setting to influence the minimum shutter speed chosen by the camera even when flash is not used. It's a very handy feature.

Also, whilst you are getting to grips with the camera, why not use Auto Bracketing with High Speed Drive? I suggest a 3 exposure bracket to start, 0, +0.7, - 0.7.

Rooky007
6th November 2012, 02:25 PM
What Huw said. In low light, and even in good light, I try to get the histogram as far to the right as possible without actually clipping. More so when using raw as the highlights are more recoverable if needed. Typically I find this requires about +0.7 exposure compensation. It must be said that in some respects the compensation is reducing the effective ISO from, say, 6400 to around 4000, but this will give a better result than a slightly under-exposed image shot at ISO 4000.

Just a point, I see you took the bricks shot using shutter priority and ISO 4000. Was the ISO set at 4000 or Auto? The reason I ask is that if it was set, or limited to 4000 the camera would have no option but to under-expose when it hit the maximum aperture for the lens. The histogram for your shot is bunched to the left, which is what you don't want. Personally I would take this type of shot using Aperture Priority, aperture wide open, Auto ISO with a ceiling of 12800 and minimum shutter speed set to 1/200th second by the slow flash sync speed in the menu. I know you are not using flash, but you can use this setting to influence the minimum shutter speed chosen by the camera even when flash is not used. It's a very handy feature.

Also, whilst you are getting to grips with the camera, why not use Auto Bracketing with High Speed Drive? I suggest a 3 exposure bracket to start, 0, +0.7, - 0.7.

Is there a setting in menu to set a minimum shutter speed

brian1208
6th November 2012, 02:26 PM
I've been following this and wondering what was going on with your images Rooky so had a quick play myself using the 12-50 kit lens (not using Aperture but LR4 though, sorry)

the first 3 images are all 100% crops, in JPG and untouched apart from crop, SOOC from ISO6400 to ISO25600

http://i1130.photobucket.com/albums/m531/oldcanon/OM-D%20EM5%20test%20shots/iso6400100pccrop.jpg

http://i1130.photobucket.com/albums/m531/oldcanon/OM-D%20EM5%20test%20shots/iso12800100pccrop.jpg

http://i1130.photobucket.com/albums/m531/oldcanon/OM-D%20EM5%20test%20shots/iso25600100pccrop.jpg

This one is converted from a 100% crop ISO25600 .orf file converted in LR4 using heavy noise reduction

http://i1130.photobucket.com/albums/m531/oldcanon/OM-D%20EM5%20test%20shots/iso25600100pccropORF.jpg

and the last one is a test shot I took some time ago at ISO6400 processed through LR4 (one of my printed and framed images on the wall of my office)

http://i1130.photobucket.com/albums/m531/oldcanon/OM-D%20EM5%20test%20shots/iso6400chiffchaff.jpg

all shot with the exposure set to Zero Compensation using matrix metering and the Histogram central or slightly to the left (under-exposed) and filling around 75% of the available space (ie: not touching either end of the graph by a significant margin)

On this basis I'm not sure what is going on with your images except, as already suggested, that you may be trying to recover underexposed image files?

Zuiko
6th November 2012, 02:37 PM
Rooky, unlesss you really know what you are doing with spot metering, i.e identifying a key area of the subject that requires to be perfectly exposed and corresponds to an 18% grey card in tonal value or you have the experience to judge necessary compensation by eye, I would avoid spot metering and stick to the excellent matrix metering.

Zuiko
6th November 2012, 02:39 PM
Regarding raw converters, why not try the free to download Adobe DNG software?

Rooky007
6th November 2012, 02:40 PM
I want to send a image it 13mb full size to show a raw image that been through aperture and now exported as jpeg to see what you think

Zuiko
6th November 2012, 02:46 PM
Is there a setting in menu to set a minimum shutter speed

Menu > Gears > F (Flash Custom) > Slow Limit > adjust up or down according to your requirements.

NOTE: Although a flash setting, it does set a minimum shutter speed when using Aperture Priority in combination with Auto ISO even when flash is not used.

Zuiko
6th November 2012, 02:53 PM
I want to send a image it 13mb full size to show a raw image that been through aperture and now exported as jpeg to see what you think

Do you have a Flickr account? It's free and you can upload original file sizes. If you make your image "Public" anyone can access it to download (like I did with my example earlier).

Rooky007
6th November 2012, 03:08 PM
Menu > Gears > F (Flash Custom) > Slow Limit > adjust up or down according to your requirements.

NOTE: Although a flash setting, it does set a minimum shutter speed when using Aperture Priority in combination with Auto ISO even when flash is not used.

So i need to set this Slow limit to 1.200 as you suggested?

Zuiko
6th November 2012, 03:24 PM
So i need to set this Slow limit to 1.200 as you suggested?

Try that as a starting point, it should be enough to freeze your mobile little subject! If that pushes the ISO up too high, i.e. beyond 12800, consider reducing minimum shutter speed to 1/160th or 1/125th. It depends on the light in your room, really - and on how fast your little one moves, of course!

Note that the fastest minimum shutter speed you can set is 1/250th second, as this is the maximum flash sync speed for the camera.

Try simultaneously shooting JPEGs and raw; if your raw conversions are worse than the JPEGs it's down to the conversion and processing.

Rooky007
6th November 2012, 03:45 PM
Light room seem to be better so far it seem the Raw Conversion in Aperture not as good dunno what going on thou... Any aperture users here

Rooky007
6th November 2012, 04:00 PM
Right I have uploaded a image let us know what you think please

http://www.flickr.com/photos/89717647@N05/8161327919/in/photostream

Seonnaidh
6th November 2012, 04:39 PM
I've looked at your image and actually I thinks its not too bad considering the ISO speed.

I use Aperture so I will take something in RAW at 6400 turn it into a JPEG and post it onto my Flickr page.
I have just done that so if you go to flickr and find Jon Pear the image is on there now.
Sorry I don't know how to put links to flickr on forum posts.

brian1208
6th November 2012, 04:40 PM
what settings / ISO for that one?
At first glance it doesn't look too bad if its ISO6400 ish (but its quite small so difficult to judge)

Sorry - my lack of experience using Flickr, I've just looked at the full size image and it still doesn't look too bad, fine grained but not intrusive (imagine what a ISO6400 film image would look like - we tend to take for granted just how magical modern tech is )

Rooky007
6th November 2012, 04:43 PM
what settings / ISO for that one?
At first glance it doesn't look too bad if its ISO6400 ish (but its quite small so difficult to judge)

Full size image is on Flickr if u mean me?

Rooky007
6th November 2012, 04:44 PM
I've looked at your image and actually I thinks its not too bad considering the ISO speed.

I use Aperture so I will take something in RAW at 6400 turn it into a JPEG and post it onto my Flickr page.
I have just done that so if you go to flickr and find Jon Pear the image is on there now.
Sorry I don't know how to put links to flickr on forum posts.

Looks pretty good wht setting what mode did u out exposure up?

Rooky007
6th November 2012, 04:44 PM
I've looked at your image and actually I thinks its not too bad considering the ISO speed.

I use Aperture so I will take something in RAW at 6400 turn it into a JPEG and post it onto my Flickr page.
I have just done that so if you go to flickr and find Jon Pear the image is on there now.
Sorry I don't know how to put links to flickr on forum posts.

Also have u altered any settings in aperture?

Rooky007
6th November 2012, 04:49 PM
Jon,

Just looked through your Flickr and wow did you do most those images in jpeg? How much processing thou as they are wow love leaf in water and the landscapes

Seonnaidh
6th November 2012, 04:56 PM
The settings for the 6400 are contained in the EXIF data. If you move your cursor to the right of the image you will see what camera was used. Click on this and all the EXIF data becomes available to you.

All my images are taken in RAW always. I have only ever use JPEG to see what this camera produces, none of them are on the Flickr photostream. I think.

Rooky007
6th November 2012, 04:59 PM
The settings for the 6400 are contained in the EXIF data. If you move your cursor to the right of the image you will see what camera was used. Click on this and all the EXIF data becomes available to you.

All my images are taken in RAW always. I have only ever use JPEG to see what this camera produces, none of them are on the Flickr photostream. I think.

I guess you do a lot of processing? What plug in have you got for aperture? Since you a mac user how do you see exif I'm safari

Seonnaidh
6th November 2012, 05:01 PM
I do very little processing. Adjust contrast, maybe a small crop, and adjust the levels.
That is about it. I was taught to get it right in the camera.
It doesn't matter what browser you are using, I believe we can all access the EXIF by
following the above instructions.

Rooky007
6th November 2012, 05:03 PM
I can never get EXif at all no where

Strange since your a Mac user and you can view Exif hmmm

Rooky007
6th November 2012, 05:05 PM
I know what you mean now via Flickr... I was referring to that some people can right click images that are posted on this forum and view Exif

Rooky007
6th November 2012, 05:06 PM
Have you really got your camera set as this and shoot in raw and get that image at 6400

Gain Control High gain up
Contrast Normal
Saturation High
Sharpness Hard

Where gain Control on the OMD

Zuiko
6th November 2012, 05:15 PM
... I was referring to that some people can right click images that are posted on this forum and view Exif



Doesn't work for me either; I save into Windows and then it does.

Rooky007
6th November 2012, 05:19 PM
Doesn't work for me either; I save into Windows and then it does.

Tough windows users can right click in ie to view exif.

Mac users need to install some plugin but trying to find which is best and free

Zuiko
6th November 2012, 05:26 PM
Right I have uploaded a image let us know what you think please

http://www.flickr.com/photos/89717647@N05/8161327919/in/photostream

Not bad actually for ISO 6400, certainly better than the bricks shot at ISO 4000. That's not to say it couldn't perhaps be a little better with this camera.

Checking the EXIF, though, I'm a little puzzled by this:-

Gain Control High gain up

Can anybody confirm what it means, please? I have a suspicion that Auto Gradation is still enabled, but I may be wrong.

Seonnaidh
6th November 2012, 05:53 PM
John I'm not sure whats going on with my OMD.
I no nothing about gain control but suspect it might do something automatically when you rack up the ISO to high levels.
Images taken at low ISO's show no gain control hardness or sharpness settings.
Weird, but then again I'm no expert with the new toy as yet. Maybe one day.

peak4
6th November 2012, 06:48 PM
Checking the EXIF, though, I'm a little puzzled by this:-

Gain Control High gain up

Can anybody confirm what it means, please? I have a suspicion that Auto Gradation is still enabled, but I may be wrong.

I don't think it's that John. Just tried two consecutive shots with Grad set to Normal and Auto. Both show "Gain Control High" there is also a separate value in exif for Gradation

"Norm" equated to "Normal; User-Selected" in the exif, whereas "Auto" equated to "Normal; Auto-Override".

I assume this means that in both the photos, the camera took the photo with Normal Grad, but that that in the latter, it would have changed the graph it thought it needed to.

That's only a guess of course, but the other two options give "High Key; User-Selected" and "Low Key; User-Selected" as I effectively force the option on the camera.

However
ISO 200 = none
ISO 250 = low gain up
ISO 320 = low gain up
ISO 400 = low gain up
ISO 500 = high gain up
ISO 640 = high gain up
ISO 800 = high gain up
ISO 1600 = high gain up
ISO 3200 = high gain up

All taken from E-M5 and read in Phil Harvey's wonderful "exiftool (http://owl.phy.queensu.ca/~phil/exiftool/)", in this case using the GUI (http://www.heise.de/download/exiftool-gui.html) though in an earlier version than the one I've linked to here. Must update mine.

Ulfric M Douglas
6th November 2012, 07:02 PM
Right clicking to view Exif info hasn't so much to do with the operating system : more to do with the functions of your browser.
I've always used Opera as my main browser : right click enables showing EXIF info if it exists.
I don't know what browsers are available for the Mac ...

Thanks for the quick test Bill, I'd say the EXIF 'gain' number seems a bit 'unfinished' as a measure of what's going on then ...

Seonnaidh
6th November 2012, 07:13 PM
I'm accessing Flickr through Safari.
It's all getting a wee bit complicated with all these settings and controls.
Wish Oly would make something with the simplicity of the OM series, but digital.
I bet there would be a lot of very happy bunnies then>

peak4
6th November 2012, 07:15 PM
I've always used Opera as my main browser

Completely off topic, so do I. Have you noticed lockups & freezes since the release of version 12? reducing "connections to server" and "total connections" seems to help

Ulfric M Douglas
6th November 2012, 07:36 PM
Opera 12 : I got freeze and DPReview crashed it! Nothing since the first few days, very stable now. Spellchecker is ACE. I have at least ten tabs open all the time, nothing else copes as well. Amazon won't show pictures, so I use Firefox for that. Z & X for back & forward. + & - for zooms. Totally sensible, bit like FastStone really. I like good working programmes.

You may now return to topic ... :)

Rooky007
6th November 2012, 07:40 PM
Not bad actually for ISO 6400, certainly better than the bricks shot at ISO 4000. That's not to say it couldn't perhaps be a little better with this camera.

Checking the EXIF, though, I'm a little puzzled by this:-

Gain Control High gain up

Can anybody confirm what it means, please? I have a suspicion that Auto Gradation is still enabled, but I may be wrong.

So it sounds I need to take better care of taking my photos and try keep noise low as I can

This gain baffled me too as I've got it turned off.

Do you all think I've nothing to worry and that photo ok? Anything else I need know?

Seonnaidh
6th November 2012, 07:42 PM
Just keeping using the camera and taking lots of images.
Study your settings and see what effects theycan have on the image.
Being digital all you don't want get binned and at no real 'on cost' to yourself.
Perfick.

Rooky007
6th November 2012, 07:48 PM
Just keeping using the camera and taking lots of images.
Study your settings and see what effects theycan have on the image.
Being digital all you don't want get binned and at no real 'on cost' to yourself.
Perfick.

Suppose your right but your images are cracking jet wondering if there any other settings I should be aware off

Your using aperture do u use any noise reduction software?

peak4
6th November 2012, 07:56 PM
Speaking of Faststone; jpg straight out of camera with In Camera Noise reduction set to Auto, Noise Filter set to Standard.

Original just resized in Faststone with no enhancement taken at 12800 ISO
http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/data/1518/High_ISO_Test_00001.jpg (http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/54131)

Crop from above resized in Faststone
http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/data/1518/High_ISO_Test_00002.jpg (http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/54132)

orf developed in DxO Optics, no enhancements, just Noise Reduction-resized in DxO
http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/data/1518/AB061461_DxO-small.jpg (http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/54130)

Crop from above resized in Faststone
http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/data/1518/High_ISO_Test_00006.jpg (http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/54133)

Probably overdid the Noise Reduction, but you get the idea. Really don't have time to re-process at the moment; I want some tea. :)

Rooky007
6th November 2012, 08:02 PM
Speaking of Faststone; jpg straight out of camera with In Camera Noise reduction set to Auto, Noise Filter set to Standard.

Original just resized in Faststone with no enhancement taken at 12800 ISO
http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/data/1518/High_ISO_Test_00001.jpg (http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/54131)

Crop from above resized in Faststone
http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/data/1518/High_ISO_Test_00002.jpg (http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/54132)

orf developed in DxO Optics, no enhancements, just Noise Reduction-resized in DxO
http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/data/1518/AB061461_DxO-small.jpg (http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/54130)

Crop from above resized in Faststone
http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/data/1518/High_ISO_Test_00006.jpg (http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/54133)

Probably overdid the Noise Reduction, but you get the idea. Really don't have time to re-process at the moment; I want some tea. :)


They are great god knows now you getting iso at good images that high I never get that. Seeing you live in Sheffield maybe we could meet up in Hope one day and you can teach me :)

Ulfric M Douglas
6th November 2012, 08:05 PM
Bill's Jpeg looks the best, but ... I want some fuses like that : I'm now jealous.

No real noise anywhere, and that's ISO 12800 ? Amazing.

Rooky007
6th November 2012, 08:06 PM
Also what setting

Cheers

Rooky007
6th November 2012, 08:08 PM
Bill's Jpeg looks the best, but ... I want some fuses like that : I'm now jealous.

No real noise anywhere, and that's ISO 12800 ? Amazing.

I agree that why am baffled. Look like some omd perform better then others if that the case I might take mine back but till then need do some correct testing

Seonnaidh
6th November 2012, 08:16 PM
Rooky, I don't use any noise reduction software because 95% of my work is landscapes and I just don't need to go that high. Even when doing theatrical productions I find 1600 ISO is enough and more than acceptable.
I find Aperture does nearly all of what I want, I mainly use CS3 for resizing and very rarely Nik Silverefex Pro2 for mono work.

Ulfric, Gotta agree with you they are some mean looking fuses.

Zuiko
6th November 2012, 08:20 PM
I don't think it's that John. Just tried two consecutive shots with Grad set to Normal and Auto. Both show "Gain Control High" there is also a separate value in exif for Gradation

"Norm" equated to "Normal; User-Selected" in the exif, whereas "Auto" equated to "Normal; Auto-Override".

I assume this means that in both the photos, the camera took the photo with Normal Grad, but that that in the latter, it would have changed the graph it thought it needed to.

That's only a guess of course, but the other two options give "High Key; User-Selected" and "Low Key; User-Selected" as I effectively force the option on the camera.

However
ISO 200 = none
ISO 250 = low gain up
ISO 320 = low gain up
ISO 400 = low gain up
ISO 500 = high gain up
ISO 640 = high gain up
ISO 800 = high gain up
ISO 1600 = high gain up
ISO 3200 = high gain up

All taken from E-M5 and read in Phil Harvey's wonderful "exiftool (http://owl.phy.queensu.ca/~phil/exiftool/)", in this case using the GUI (http://www.heise.de/download/exiftool-gui.html) though in an earlier version than the one I've linked to here. Must update mine.

Thanks Bill, that explains a lot. I note that the only ISO value that doesn't have a gain up listed is ISO 200, which of course is the base sensitivity. I suppose any increase on the base sesitivity would involve signal gain!

Zuiko
6th November 2012, 08:25 PM
This gain baffled me too as I've got it turned off.

Do you all think I've nothing to worry and that photo ok? Anything else I need know?

Sorry to confuse matters with my query on "gain," Rooky, it was a red herring and my bad.

I think your latest picture is OK for ISO 6400, certainly a lot, lot better than the ISO 4000 sample with the bricks. But more important, how do you feel about it? From memory, how does it compare with what you was getting from the 7D?

peak4
6th November 2012, 08:31 PM
Bill's Jpeg looks the best, but ... I want some fuses like that : I'm now jealous.

No real noise anywhere, and that's ISO 12800 ? Amazing.

Nah, you want one of these; I use it as a doorstop :)


Again jpgs straight out of camera resized in Faststone without enhancements


Taken at ISO 12800
http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/data/1518/Image000018.jpg (http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/54134)

Crop at same 12800
http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/data/1518/Image000023.jpg (http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/54135)

and at ISO 20000
http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/data/1518/Image000035.jpg (http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/54136)

finally at 25600 really pushing the boat out
http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/data/1518/Image000044.jpg (http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/54137)

All exif should be intact
As a guide, the fuse is 9" x 4 1/2"

Rooky007
6th November 2012, 08:36 PM
Oh stop it these images at high iso beats mine hand down. Something not right somewhere :(

Rooky007
6th November 2012, 08:38 PM
In all honestly what setting you got one you not NR on or auto and how strong?

Zuiko
6th November 2012, 08:44 PM
I agree that why am baffled. Look like some omd perform better then others if that the case I might take mine back but till then need do some correct testing

I think you are now on the right lines and your camera is OK. The thing to do now is re-read this thread as it contains lots of good advice, read the manual thoroughly (with the camera next to you) several times and, most important, take lots of pictures in raw and JPEG simultaneously at high ISO in a variety of situations. Pay particular attention to the histogram whilst shooting, with the emphasis on getting the optimum exposure, and practice the Expose To The Right technique explained earlier. In post processing compare your converted raws against the out of camera JPEGs and if the JPEGs are better your processing technique still needs adjusting. You may need a little noise filtering between ISO 3200 and 12800 but not too much!

Also, don't ignore the excellent low ISO performance of the E-M5; you mentioned Jon's excellent landscapes and I'd bet that most of these were shot at base ISO.

Let us know how you get on and post some pictures, but above all enjoy yourself 'cause that's what it's all about. :)

peak4
6th November 2012, 08:44 PM
Oh stop it these images at high iso beats mine hand down. Something not right somewhere :(

Why not try doing a re-set as on page 42 ?

Rooky007
6th November 2012, 08:47 PM
Why not try doing a re-set as on page 42 ?

After I do a reset what setting shall I alter please or shall I just leave it at reset?

Shoot jpeg or raw or both

Zuiko
6th November 2012, 08:52 PM
Oh stop it these images at high iso beats mine hand down. Something not right somewhere :(

Don't despair just yet, Rooky. How many pictures have you taken putting into practice the advice you've received in this thread?

Thought not! :D That's what you need to do now, practice, practice, practise! And keep checking the histogram!

Zuiko
6th November 2012, 08:56 PM
After I do a reset what setting shall I alter please or shall I just leave it at reset?

Shoot jpeg or raw or both

You could try some of the settings we've been recommending throughout this thread! :D

And yes, shoot both raw and JPEG so you have something to compare the processed raws with.

Rooky007
6th November 2012, 08:58 PM
Lastly how dim was it when these high iso photos were taken

peak4
6th November 2012, 09:00 PM
After I do a reset what setting shall I alter please or shall I just leave it at reset?

Shoot jpeg or raw or both

I'd start off not altering anything, just try shooting to test photos in raw + Large Fine jpg.
The various fuse photos were all taken with more or less standard settings, sharpening & contrast set to 0, Gradation set to normal.

At the end of the day, Olympus,like most other manufacturers, set the camera up to give pretty good photos straight out of the box.
As John says, try and expose to the right, although I didn't in those test shots.
In theory, they should have come out a bit better really. Don't let the over processed DxO photo of the original fuse mislead you as I over did it , re-processed it and then deleted the wrong one before posting. :o

peak4
6th November 2012, 09:06 PM
Lastly how dim was it when these high iso photos were taken

Normal room lighting in the evening, 3 x 60watt incandescent bulbs in a 12' square room, but the exif should be intact to show the exposure settings.
I did use a bright lens, but that wouldn't affect the camera body noise performance, just the exposure times.
The exposure times would never have been long enough for hot pixels to be an issue anyway, regardless of the lens I used.
I just used the Leica wide open as it's sharp and also it helped minimise camera shake skewing the sharpness of the final result.
You don't need a fancy lens to minimise noise.

Zuiko
6th November 2012, 09:08 PM
Lastly how dim was it when these high iso photos were taken

How do we quantify that? :confused:

The only way to make a meaningful comparison between our lighting and your lighting is to compare the shutter speed/aperture/ISO settings in the EXIF of your pictures against ours. :)

Rooky007
6th November 2012, 09:19 PM
I'd start off not altering anything, just try shooting to test photos in raw + Large Fine jpg.
The various fuse photos were all taken with more or less standard settings, sharpening & contrast set to 0, Gradation set to normal.

At the end of the day, Olympus,like most other manufacturers, set the camera up to give pretty good photos straight out of the box.
As John says, try and expose to the right, although I didn't in those test shots.
In theory, they should have come out a bit better really. Don't let the over processed DxO photo of the original fuse mislead you as I over did it , re-processed it and then deleted the wrong one before posting. :o

Do you have NR on and what strength ?

Rooky007
6th November 2012, 09:22 PM
I need get opera downloaded then so can view your exif as I am a mac user with safari and no exif viewer

Zuiko
6th November 2012, 09:29 PM
Do you have NR on and what strength ?

The noise filter will not affect the raws, only the JPEGs. Everyone has a different, personal tolerance to noise so I'd recommend doing a few test shots, with the noise filter Off, Low, Standard and High to see what you prefer.

Remember, though, that the higher the noise filter, the lower the resolution of fine detail. Also, in-camera noise filtering is generally cruder than specialist software such as Dfine and certainly offers less control.

I keep comming back to it, but I believe that one of the best ways to limit noise at high ISO is to optimize exposure, generally exposing to the right of the histogram. And keep the wretched Auto Gradation switched off!

peak4
6th November 2012, 09:32 PM
Noise Reduction and Noise Filtering are two very different things. The former helps eliminate hot pixels on long exposures, Noise Filtering helps reduce the sort of noise we've been discussing here.
In my case, I think they were Auto and Standard respectively, but in the short term I'd just leave the factory settings (which I think are these anyway).
Some folks set it to Off or Low, preferring to do the Chrominance and Luminance noise in Post Production, but in the short term I really would leave the default setting and just try changing one thing at a time a bit later on.

Rooky007
6th November 2012, 09:42 PM
Even if I have auto graduation off it still appears in exif

birdboy
6th November 2012, 10:07 PM
How do we quantify that? :confused:

Wow what a thread:confused:
The only way to make a meaningful comparison between our lighting and your lighting is to compare the shutter speed/aperture/ISO settings in the EXIF of your pictures against ours. :)

Its very difficult to compare pictures taken by by different people on diffeent subjects with different lighting. The only guide I use is to look at the Lightvalue reading that's listed in the exif data. My own guide is that values of 12+ will give good sharp pictures. Where I could looking at the examples seen on this thread they ranged around 5. David M's was however around the 0 mark. The photosites need to be filled with light so metering is absoutely critical for noiseless pictures.

I think thye problem you are experiencing may be just be down to you wanting to test the low ISO capability by fixing the ISO at a certain value and then taking pictures guessing shutter and aperature. John advice was good IMHO set the ISO to Auto think about your subject matter in terms of speed and aperature and let the camera decide the ISO setting. But take several pictures at different speed and aperature settings. Shooting RAW and using Olympus Viewer will help reduce the variables as they can be changed.

Set meering to matrix and let the camera decide the ISO is my advice.

John

Rooky007
6th November 2012, 10:15 PM
Its very difficult to compare pictures taken by by different people on diffeent subjects with different lighting. The only guide I use is to look at the Lightvalue reading that's listed in the exif data. My own guide is that values of 12+ will give good sharp pictures. Where I could looking at the examples seen on this thread they ranged around 5. David M's was however around the 0 mark. The photosites need to be filled with light so metering is absoutely critical for noiseless pictures.

I think thye problem you are experiencing may be just be down to you wanting to test the low ISO capability by fixing the ISO at a certain value and then taking pictures guessing shutter and aperature. John advice was good IMHO set the ISO to Auto think about your subject matter in terms of speed and aperature and let the camera decide the ISO setting. But take several pictures at different speed and aperature settings. Shooting RAW and using Olympus Viewer will help reduce the variables as they can be changed.

Set meering to matrix and let the camera decide the ISO is my advice.

John

Which one matrix the first one in option? Then I am going do loads of test tmr then post back. What max iso shall I set it at 12800? Would like be lower thou

birdboy
6th November 2012, 10:28 PM
Which one matrix the first one in option? Then I am going do loads of test tmr then post back. What max iso shall I set it at 12800? Would like be lower thou
I dont have the OMD but an E3 I think the setting is called Digital ESP metering, but Center weighted average metering is also good.

I have been watching the OMD ISO debate and seen some great low light images and it seems that 6400 is the accepatble limit. For my next camera good low performance will be high on my list. But looking at camera manufacturers specs (and their temptation to over state I would take their highest ISO setting and come back one or two stops. I note the default for the OMD is 1600.

peak4
7th November 2012, 12:29 AM
Even if I have auto graduation off it still appears in exif

It will do, please see my comments in post 110. Also, on my camera "Off" isn't an option, only Auto, Norm, High & Low, what version of firmware are you on?

Rooky007
7th November 2012, 07:04 AM
It will do, please see my comments in post 110. Also, on my camera "Off" isn't an option, only Auto, Norm, High & Low, what version of firmware are you on?

Mine set as normal.

Zuiko
7th November 2012, 08:37 AM
Mine set as normal.

Good, that's how you want it to be.

Rooky007
7th November 2012, 02:10 PM
I have reset my camera this afternoon and took this images...

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7259/8163952019_af1d65387f_c.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/89717647@N05/8163952019/)
PB070008 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/89717647@N05/8163952019/) by Rooky5 (http://www.flickr.com/people/89717647@N05/), on Flickr

Rooky007
7th November 2012, 02:19 PM
Also what Aspect Ratio are people using???

Greytop
7th November 2012, 02:27 PM
I have reset my camera this afternoon and took this images...

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7259/8163952019_af1d65387f_c.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/89717647@N05/8163952019/)
PB070008 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/89717647@N05/8163952019/) by Rooky5 (http://www.flickr.com/people/89717647@N05/), on Flickr

Looks pretty good, the subject is well exposed, bit of highlight clipping at the window (to be expected). A 100% crop of part of the image would tell more of story noise wise but I think I would be happy with that at ISO 6400.

Was this an out of the camera Jpeg or a PP'd RAW file?

Seonnaidh
7th November 2012, 02:58 PM
Err! What's wrong with that image.
Nothing really. I think you are sorted now Rooky and should be a very happy bunny.
Well done.

brian1208
7th November 2012, 03:16 PM
Also what Aspect Ratio are people using???


I'm sticking with 3:2 (did try 4:3 but its not my natural way of looking at things - still in "DSLR Eye" mode :) )

Not sure it really matters?

That dog pic looks excellent by the way Rooky

Ulfric M Douglas
7th November 2012, 03:38 PM
Also what Aspect Ratio are people using???
:eek:
99% of people are using 4:3 as that is the only ratio which uses all of the sensor.
That is the ratio the camera starts with too.
All other ratios are a crop from 4:3 so best use it, and if needs be crop later.

I crop for prints, depending on the print size.

birdboy
7th November 2012, 03:50 PM
Looks a cracker to me but I can't see any exif data (shutter aperature ISO focal length light value) so its difficult to judge). More importantly are you happy with it.

Greytop
7th November 2012, 04:10 PM
Make: OLYMPUS IMAGING CORP.
Model: E-M5
Exposure Time: 1/50
F Number: f / 5.6
Exposure Program: Aperture-priority AE
ISO Speed Ratings: 6400
Date Time Original: 2012:11:07 13:49:28
Metering Mode: Multi-segment
Flash: Auto, Did not fire
Focal Length: 12.0 mm
Color Space: sRGB
White Balance: Auto
LensInfo: 12-50mm f/3.5-6.3
LensModel: OLYMPUS M.12-50mm F3.5-6.3
Lens: OLYMPUS M.12-50mm F3.5-6.3

birdboy
7th November 2012, 04:50 PM
Make: OLYMPUS IMAGING CORP.
Model: E-M5
Exposure Time: 1/50
F Number: f / 5.6
Exposure Program: Aperture-priority AE
ISO Speed Ratings: 6400
Date Time Original: 2012:11:07 13:49:28
Metering Mode: Multi-segment
Flash: Auto, Did not fire
Focal Length: 12.0 mm
Color Space: sRGB
White Balance: Auto
LensInfo: 12-50mm f/3.5-6.3
LensModel: OLYMPUS M.12-50mm F3.5-6.3
Lens: OLYMPUS M.12-50mm F3.5-6.3

Thanks Huw. I prefer the Kuso exif viewer software as it shows the light value which is a guide to the available light when the picture was taken. Rooky007's toy brick picture was taken with a light value of 6.4 1/160s F4.6 Iso 4000 fl 20mm. Rooky007 will need to repeat that shot using the same shutter and aperature settings but letting the camera decide the ISO (Auto) to see if this was his problem.

John

Rooky007
7th November 2012, 04:55 PM
Done another at 12800 this time using jPeg as Raw is still showing a bit of noise.

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8062/8164336617_c0431a0d5c_c.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/89717647@N05/8164336617/)
PB070012 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/89717647@N05/8164336617/) by Rooky5 (http://www.flickr.com/people/89717647@N05/), on Flickr

Rooky007
7th November 2012, 04:58 PM
Err! What's wrong with that image.
Nothing really. I think you are sorted now Rooky and should be a very happy bunny.
Well done.

Thanks I am slowly getting there Jpeg seem to be throwing up better results at higher ISO at the moment well above 6400. Up to 6400 Raw if fine above that it starts to hurt but jpeg seem to be great..

birdboy
7th November 2012, 05:01 PM
Are you happy with this I would be. It looks like its giving the low light performance others are experiencing.

Rooky007
7th November 2012, 05:07 PM
Are you happy with this I would be. It looks like its giving the low light performance others are experiencing.

Yes getting there just wish I could shoot raw above 6400 but all raw above 6400 need more work doing to. But Jpeg above 6400 are cracking.

To be honest I think the in camera Jpeg processing is great cant fault it at the moment..

What you be about the low light performance?

birdboy
7th November 2012, 05:26 PM
What you be about the low light performance?

From what I can see with the camera settings 1/25s F 5.6 ISO12800 at fl 85 the picture has good exposure but the available light was not very bright and yet you have a very usable picture.

Such is the advance of digital camera sensors I wonder how long it will be before flash becomes a thing of the past.

Rooky007
7th November 2012, 05:29 PM
I see :)

I guess I am getting there now and this with slow glass. Wait till the 45mm land I feeli be getting crackers

Seonnaidh
7th November 2012, 05:30 PM
Not long Birdboy not long.

Rooky007
7th November 2012, 05:30 PM
From what I can see with the camera settings 1/25s F 5.6 ISO12800 at fl 85 the picture has good exposure but the available light was not very bright and yet you have a very usable picture.

Such is the advance of digital camera sensors I wonder how long it will be before flash becomes a thing of the past.

How you finding these details? Am a mac user be cool if there something

Zuiko
7th November 2012, 05:36 PM
Those are very well exposed shots, Rooky, which appear to have very little noise. Don't be too disappointed that JPEG is better than raw, Olympus JPEGs are almost universally accepted as being the best in the industry and it takes a lot of processing skill and experience to better them from a raw, but with practice and trial and error it can be done. With some other camera systems you need to be able to process a good raw because the JPEGs are so naff, but not Olympus! For now, just enjoy your JPEGs - you've cracked it! *chr

Rooky007
7th November 2012, 05:43 PM
Those are very well exposed shots, Rooky, which appear to have very little noise. Don't be too disappointed that JPEG is better than raw, Olympus JPEGs are almost universally accepted as being the best in the industry and it takes a lot of processing skill and experience to better them from a raw, but with practice and trial and error it can be done. With some other camera systems you need to be able to process a good raw because the JPEGs are so naff, but not Olympus! For now, just enjoy your JPEGs - you've cracked it! *chr

Thanks mate that put a smile on my face :)

I love processing but I find nik define not doing a good job with the 12800 iso image I've got. I wish I could hear so I can watch the tutorial on how use it properly as I've been using the automatic.

Unless there a better noise reduction software to work with aperture ? That free ha ha but not break the bank as lens going break the bank soon

birdboy
7th November 2012, 06:06 PM
How you finding these details? Am a mac user be cool if there something

Post 100 explains how to see the exif when posted on Flickr i.e left click on the Olympus E-M5 top right of picture. "This photo was taken a moment ago using an Olympus E-M5."

As for the pictures you posted on this forum gallery you will need to find software (normally freeware) with an exif viewer. Once installed if the picture (jpg) has been saved with exif data a right click on the image brings up the option to view the exif data. For Windows I use Kuso Exif Viewer 3.0 which also reads my E3 raw files.

Your last picture does not show exif using the right click and Kuso option because it was not in your gallery so I needed to go to the Flickr picture and click on "Olympus E-M5"

It really is worth getting an exif viewer installed as I have found it very useful, when it is available, to view what settings others are using to get their pictures.

Hope that helps.
John

Rooky007
7th November 2012, 06:17 PM
Post 100 explains how to see the exif when posted on Flickr i.e left click on the Olympus E-M5 top right of picture. "This photo was taken a moment ago using an Olympus E-M5."

As for the pictures you posted on this forum gallery you will need to find software (normally freeware) with an exif viewer. Once installed if the picture (jpg) has been saved with exif data a right click on the image brings up the option to view the exif data. For Windows I use Kuso Exif Viewer 3.0 which also reads my E3 raw files.

Your last picture does not show exif using the right click and Kuso option because it was not in your gallery so I needed to go to the Flickr picture and click on "Olympus E-M5"

It really is worth getting an exif viewer installed as I have found it very useful, when it is available, to view what settings others are using to get their pictures.

Hope that helps.
John


Yeah I knew about the Flickr it the right click will look into that :)

peak4
7th November 2012, 07:08 PM
How you finding these details? Am a mac user be cool if there something

Back in a previous post somewhere, I mentioned exiftool (http://www.sno.phy.queensu.ca/~phil/exiftool/) by Phil Harvey
Have a look at the link where there is a command line tool available. It's not the most convenient way of doing things, but is immensely powerful.
For windows users, there is a GUI available HERE (http://www.heise.de/download/exiftool-gui.html) (GUI=Graphical User Interface)

Not being a MAC user I'm not familiar with MAC operating systems or programs, but a quick Google search on "exiftool gui" yeilds the following GUI for Lion (http://softwaretopic.informer.com/mac-lion-exiftool-gui/)

Obviously use any of these at your own risk.

Rooky007
7th November 2012, 07:15 PM
Back in a previous post somewhere, I mentioned exiftool (http://www.sno.phy.queensu.ca/~phil/exiftool/) by Phil Harvey
Have a look at the link where there is a command line tool available. It's not the most convenient way of doing things, but is immensely powerful.
For windows users, there is a GUI available HERE (http://www.heise.de/download/exiftool-gui.html) (GUI=Graphical User Interface)

Not being a MAC user I'm not familiar with MAC operating systems or programs, but a quick Google search on "exiftool gui" yeilds the following GUI for Lion (http://softwaretopic.informer.com/mac-lion-exiftool-gui/)

Obviously use any of these at your own risk.

Thanks. Fancy a meet up in the hope valley sometime ?

Do you have a macro lens?

peak4
7th November 2012, 07:40 PM
Thanks. Fancy a meet up in the hope valley sometime ?

Do you have a macro lens?

A beer/fruit juice in the evening's a possibility, I work 07.15-1645 so it's rather dark when I get home at the moment; what's your local?
re. the macro facilities, nothing in microFT exept the 12-50mm, but 35mm & 50mm + an EX-25 extension tube for full size four thirds.

Also a home made ring light

http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/data/1415/DIY_ring_led.JPG (http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/10289)

and a couple of Sigma Achromatic macro filters; don't go for the cheap ebay sets as they will inevitably lead to frustration with image quality.

Also an old Olympus MCON-35, which whilst not Macro, does allow closer focussing for insects etc.

Taken on an E-P2 with 14-140mm @ 140mm with MCON-35 fitted

http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/data/1255/P7310066_Hoverfly.JPG (http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/37419)

I wasn't trying particularly hard with this one, just exploring the possibilities of the combination. I had to abandon the attempts as Jane surfaced and wanted breakfast.
I think it turned out OK for an initial try, so I want to learn to use the combination on the E-M5 when I get the chance

Not had much chance to play with any of the other filters lately though. :(

Rooky007
10th November 2012, 11:05 AM
My New 45mm Free lens arrived yesterday and here one of the first shot

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8069/8171693452_32048a4726_c.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/89717647@N05/8171693452/)
PB100008 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/89717647@N05/8171693452/) by Rooky5 (http://www.flickr.com/people/89717647@N05/), on Flickr

Greytop
10th November 2012, 11:19 AM
Top shot Rooky *chr
A superb lens that 45mm, you've used it well here.

What were your settings, just out of interest more than anything else.
The EXIF data has been stripped from this image.

Rooky007
10th November 2012, 11:22 AM
Top shot Rooky *chr
A superb lens that 45mm, you've used it well here.

What were your settings, just out of interest more than anything else.
The EXIF data has been stripped from this image.

Hi,

Dunno why it been stripped as I have just figures I can export using aperture straight to flickr and it appears to have stripped the EXIF :(

Rooky007
10th November 2012, 11:35 AM
Dunno what happend think Flickr got a problem? As I know 2 of my images on there had EXIF now they don't

brian1208
10th November 2012, 11:51 AM
You impressed yet Rooky - looking at your recent shots you should be ;)

The 45 f1.8 is a superb value for money lens, I stupidly traded in mine some time ago for the panny 45 f2.8.

I must save up and get another copy

I'd say you have resolved your noise issues now, nice work

Rooky007
10th November 2012, 12:20 PM
You impressed yet Rooky - looking at your recent shots you should be ;)

The 45 f1.8 is a superb value for money lens, I stupidly traded in mine some time ago for the panny 45 f2.8.

I must save up and get another copy

I'd say you have resolved your noise issues now, nice work

I am getting some good shots yup but still getting a few Crap ones and noisy ones I guess it down to me and not the camera.

I am sure we all get crap ones dont we? Unless some of you are Pros ;)

I got the 45mm Lens Free with the Oly Promotion so cant complain and it a lovely little lens and taken some nice pictures Ive yet to download the ones I've taken today

Rooky007
10th November 2012, 12:41 PM
For all of you that cant see EXIF Fickr has moved it it a bit further down on the right hand side where it says Additional Info

Rooky007
10th November 2012, 02:58 PM
This 45mm Lens has impress me :) Love the Bokeh on it

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8485/8172133754_389a591ecb_c.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/89717647@N05/8172133754/)
PB100035 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/89717647@N05/8172133754/) by Rooky5 (http://www.flickr.com/people/89717647@N05/), on Flickr

Zuiko
10th November 2012, 03:12 PM
It looks like you and that lens were made for each other! Your dog makes a brilliant model, too! I think you're flying now with that E-M5! *chr

Rooky007
10th November 2012, 03:21 PM
Look Likes Primes are my Lens. Ive always had Primes for the 7D. Must be something that Primes likes about me?

SO another prime need to be added to my KIT hmmmmmmm Panny 20mm or Panny 25mm But like the price of the 20mm more thou ha ha

Greytop
10th November 2012, 04:45 PM
I had the 20mm but now have the 25mm, of course with the 25mm you have a classic 50 field of view equivalent.
Both are great but ultimately I prefer the 25mm.

Rooky007
10th November 2012, 04:56 PM
If I can get a 25mm cheap enough I'll consider it :)

peak4
10th November 2012, 05:17 PM
If I can get a 25mm cheap enough I'll consider it :)

Here you go
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Panasonic-SUMMILUX-25mm-f-1-4-Lens-H-X025E-/261125258298?pt=UK_Lenses_Filters_Lenses&hash=item3ccc473c3a

Rooky007
10th November 2012, 05:52 PM
Here you go
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Panasonic-SUMMILUX-25mm-f-1-4-Lens-H-X025E-/261125258298?pt=UK_Lenses_Filters_Lenses&hash=item3ccc473c3a

Cheers prob go right up on the last day though ;)

peak4
10th November 2012, 06:06 PM
Cheers prob go right up on the last day though ;)

I'm quite sure it will or I'd have it myself. I was thinking of Buy it Now option. Cheapest new is about £440 I think, so a substantial saving, but still no rock bottom bargain.

Rooky007
10th November 2012, 06:09 PM
I'm quite sure it will or I'd have it myself. I was thinking of Buy it Now option. Cheapest new is about £440 I think, so a substantial saving, but still no rock bottom bargain.

Ha Ha

I can wait for a bargain this 45mm keeping me going with some stunning photos

What your lens line up anyway?

peak4
10th November 2012, 06:20 PM
Ha Ha
What your lens line up anyway?

Too may with not enough time to used them. The only bad one amongst them is the one behind the viewfinder. :o

In mFT anyway, 14 & 20mm pancakes, 7-14mm, 14-140mm, & 100-300mm + 12-50mm which came later with the E-M5. Seems to cover most bases for me.

Rooky007
10th November 2012, 06:29 PM
Which of the Pancake you prefer as i been thinking of either one but if i were to get the 25mm i prob best getting the 14?

peak4
10th November 2012, 07:49 PM
Well both 14 & 20mm are included in the range of your kit zoom. Why not get a bit more use out of that, and then do a quick analysis of the most common focal length of your keepers. There's one or two programs out there that will read the exif and give you the stats

Rooky007
10th November 2012, 07:54 PM
Well both 14 & 20mm are included in the range of your kit zoom. Why not get a bit more use out of that, and then do a quick analysis of the most common focal length of your keepers. There's one or two programs out there that will read the exif and give you the stats

Ok thanks

Now looking for a new compact to put in pocket and for mrs. What shall I go for do oly do good ones? Or best look elsewhere

Rooky007
10th November 2012, 07:55 PM
Thing is with primes they make you think more and compose better i think but will see how I get on with my kit lens :)