Advice needed: Should I sell my m4/3rds for Canon? (Temporarily) - Page 8

Blu-by-u · #71 August 25th, 2010, 02:49 AM

Thanks hmpws. I owe those panorama stitching to a wonderful software called PanoramaMaker by Arcsoft. I have been using this software since their version 3.0.

To shoot panorama, rotate the camera at it's nodal point . Read this to find how to get the Nodal point of the lens you intend to use.

When shooting a panorama, try to have around 50% overlap. Some people may not agree to this but I find that I can drop images if needed and the sky consistency is better with more overlap.

It's best to lock your WB, Exposure and focus. Focal length must be locked. With PanoramaMaker, it's not possible to use shots from different focal lengths but I find that Giga pano can use shots of different focal lengths.

Oops..I think I went off tropic. Sorry.

flash · #72 August 25th, 2010, 06:43 PM

While you are away, also remember that the lowest noise of the GF1/EP2/EPL1 is actually iso 200, which is the native iso of this sensor. Shooting at iso 100 has over a stop less dynamic range and is to be avoided if possible.

Gordon

pictor · #73 August 26th, 2010, 01:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flash

Shooting at iso 100 has over a stop less dynamic range and is to be avoided if possible

Slide film has a dynamic range of somewhere between 8 and 10 EV. My Olympus E-PL1 has a dynamic range of 10 EV at ISO 200. If you are right, than ISO 100 should have a dynamic range of about 9 EV. I could deal with that when I shot slides and I don't know any reason why I should not be able to deal with that now. Using ISO 100 my E-PL1 produces pictures having much less noise than pictures taken at ISO 200. There are situations, where the difference in dynamic range may be significant, but in many situations this is not the case.

flash · #74 August 26th, 2010, 06:24 PM

Olympus E-PL1 Review: 9. Photographic tests: Digital Photography Review

Also see their review of the ep-1 for more information. Personally I avoid iso 100 unless absolutely necessary. I suppose the point was that there is no real world disadvantage to using iso 200 in low light and this will help the usability here. Low light is one area where a large DR can be very useful.

Gordon

pictor · #75 August 27th, 2010, 02:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flash

Personally I avoid iso 100 unless absolutely necessary. I suppose the point was that there is no real world disadvantage to using iso 200 in low light and this will help the usability here. Low light is one area where a large DR can be very useful.

If dynamic range is critical, it will be best to use the ISO, at which the camera has the maximal dynamic range. But don't forget to consider, that the E-PL1 has its maximal dynamic range at ISO 200, thus all ISO are worse in this respect.

There is a real world advantage of using ISO 100: The shortest shutter time of the E-PL1 is only 1/2000s. If you want to get shallow depth of field, 1/2000s will soon be not enough and ISO 100 will give you an advantage of one EV.

Although one does not see the noise in reasonable sized prints, there is less noise with ISO 100. I can see this clearly looking at the sky. Even although I most probably won't print that large to see this, having less noise is still better than having more noise in a photograph. Thus using ISO 100 may be better than using ISO 200 unless dynamic range is critical.

Most times dynamic range is not that critical as many people tend to think. What did you do when you shot slides? Dynamic range of slide film was about the same or even less (depending on the film) than that of the E-PL1 at ISO 100. If a shot is exposed properly, dynamic range won't be very critical in many cases. It depends on the situation if ISO 100 or ISO 200 is better. However, in most cases there is only little difference.

flash · #76 August 27th, 2010, 06:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pictor

If dynamic range is critical, it will be best to use the ISO, at which the camera has the maximal dynamic range. But don't forget to consider, that the E-PL1 has its maximal dynamic range at ISO 200, thus all ISO are worse in this respect.

There is a real world advantage of using ISO 100: The shortest shutter time of the E-PL1 is only 1/2000s. If you want to get shallow depth of field, 1/2000s will soon be not enough and ISO 100 will give you an advantage of one EV.

Although one does not see the noise in reasonable sized prints, there is less noise with ISO 100. I can see this clearly looking at the sky. Even although I most probably won't print that large to see this, having less noise is still better than having more noise in a photograph. Thus using ISO 100 may be better than using ISO 200 unless dynamic range is critical.

Most times dynamic range is not that critical as many people tend to think. What did you do when you shot slides? Dynamic range of slide film was about the same or even less (depending on the film) than that of the E-PL1 at ISO 100. If a shot is exposed properly, dynamic range won't be very critical in many cases. It depends on the situation if ISO 100 or ISO 200 is better. However, in most cases there is only little difference.

Fair enough. Everybody has their own priorities that suit their shooting style. Personally, I would prefer to have a little noise and keep maximum dynamic range. Especially since I shoot only in raw and use wide gamut monitors and printers, even for my personal photography. I can always use a bit of noise reduction in post processing. But I can't get the DR back if I need it. Some tests showed that there was more DR at 400 than at 100 which is a shame. I'm quite happy to use a neutral density filter to lower shutter speeds and I also kept my EP-1 partly because it will offer a higher shutter speed when required.

As much as I loved Velvia and other slide films I am very happy to have the improvements in DR that each new generation on digital cameras brings.

Anyway, I thought, since the topic was discussing low light photography, that it was worth mentioning.

Gordon