Sensor differences - EM1.2 vs EM1.3

[pdk42]

@BushmanOrig - sorry, but I find you very hard to understand. I think we're saying the same thing but for some reason you want to over-complicate it and confuse. Let's just leave it at that shall we?

 

[Danny.]

At the end of the day, I doubt I would ever see any difference even if it was triple that. Mind you, I'm not that fussy either Never been into nit picking.

All the best.

Danny.

 

[SojiOkita]

At the end of the day, I doubt I would ever see any difference even if it was triple that. Mind you, I'm not that fussy either Never been into nit picking.

It may have... for instance on my E-M10 I knew I could overexpose quite frankly and still avoid burning the highlights (in RAW).
The E-M5.3 is supposed to be similar to the E-M1X, so it may be a little different on this.

That doesn't mean the image quality is lower, just that you may have to adapt a little bit your habits to the new behaviour.

 

[BushmanOrig]

In Summary

Folks this was an interesting discussion - thank you Paul... love it when a DPR rumor goes positive...

What we see here can be a benefit to all MFT owners. If you go look at the "Custom Menu" K on your Olympus camera you will see the "Exposure Shift" function. Select the ESP option and enter +3/6. This means you dial in a permanent +0.5EV ETTR.....

From what we discussed in this threat, this could be what Olympus did with the EM1 III. (Same sensor, same DR, improved functionality)

By dialing in the +0.5EV exposure shift your camera DR highlight headroom will be a little smaller and the shadows will improve at all ISO's..... When doing this you need to always quickly check the histogram at the back of your camera to make sure you do not over expose.... The advantage using the exposure shift function is you never need to worry if you upped exposure and not the ISO when dialing in a ETTR value, the camera now does it all automatically....

Another way to achieve exactly the same is dial in +0.5EV exposure compensation when you see the histogram is not shifted all the way to the right....

Enjoy

 

[SojiOkita]

From what I understood, if you take 2 photos with E-M1 mk II and mk III with, let's say:
ISO 400 - 1/200s - f/5.6 with the same type of exposure.
The two photos would have a similar exposure on the LCD and the histogram would be similar.

However, the photo on the mk2 would be like shot at ISO 300 with the mk3 (with exposure compensated).
So in the end, to get really similar pictures we would have to setup:
mk2: ISO 400 - 1/200s - f/5.6
mk3: ISO 300 - 1/200 - f/5.6 , +0.5 EV compensation in camera, -0.5 EV compensation in post-processing (with RAW)

 

[BushmanOrig]

From what I understood, if you take 2 photos with E-M1 mk II and mk III with, let's say:
ISO 400 - 1/200s - f/5.6 with the same type of exposure.
The two photos would have a similar exposure on the LCD and the histogram would be similar.

However, the photo on the mk2 would be like shot at ISO 300 with the mk3 (with exposure compensated).
So in the end, to get really similar pictures we would have to setup:
mk2: ISO 400 - 1/200s - f/5.6
mk3: ISO 300 - 1/200 - f/5.6 , +0.5 EV compensation in camera, -0.5 EV compensation in post-processing (with RAW)

General

Please I am not fighting with you or anyone else.... read my response as is... This is the reason I get so irritated with the rumor factory (DPR) and the nonsense they brew....

Everything we talked about on this threat, originates from nonsense (I could use much stronger words). Nowhere we have seen two credible images of the exact same scene with the EM1 II and the EM1 III. Just imagine a complete discussion based on nothing..... based on rumor factory rumors.....

Next, it's not a case of only promoting an article, I invested much effort and time in preparing and writing it. After doing the introduction on this forum I took your feedback serious and implemented it and completely rewrote the article. Why? Because it is so important to be accurate. I believe reading the article can help eliminate many of the rumors and half truths generated over at the dark side..... See the article here:- Link

Until we get more facts, I suggest we make the following assumption - there are NO difference (NO +0.5EV) with the EM1 III. The MKII and the MKIII are the same in terms of sensor, exposure, ISO and on and on.....

Next a few general basics:

What is exposure?

• Exposure is shutter speed and aperture (how much light we get onto the sensor)
• the ISO setting has nothing to do with exposure (getting light onto the sensor)

What is ETTR?

• We know the sensor records more data when exposed correctly (for highlights)
• We use the histogram to help us shift the exposure (histogram) to the right
• More light on the sensor = more exposure = histogram moved to the right
• Key is not to over expose, why - we will then loose data....
• And pls do not get distracted with a stupid histogram arguments......

What does the ISO do?

• In its simplest form... ISO adjusts image brightness..... that's all
• When adjusting the ISO the negatives are delta noise & delta DR

Lets look at an example:

Camera 1​	Camera 2​
No ETTR	ETTR of +0.5EV
Exposure settings - 1/20 Sec & F3.0	Exposure Setting - 1/15 Sec & F3.0
ISO 200 (take not - ISO has nothing to do with ETTR)	ISO 200
Image normally exposed	Image a little brighter

What can I do to reduce Camera 2 brightness to be the same as camera 1?

• Keep in mind the raw file does not change - we now talking about the jpeg file
• Use the camera curves function and pull down the mid tone until the brightness of camera 2 is the same as camera 1
• Again do not get distracted with jpeg versus raw arguments.....

Will the histograms look the same between camera 1 and camera 2?

• No, camera 2 histogram will be shifted more to the right.....
• After the curves adjustment they will look the same
• Why - because the histogram reads the jpeg file

So what if the EM1 does have a permanent "exposure shift" of +0.5EV?

• Will the MKII and the MKIII images have the same brightness - YES
• How? There are so many ways Olympus could do this - lets not speculate
• The rumor factory will pivot to the old rumor - Olympus ISO's are not accurate....
• Accurate? This is such an unimportant and stupid argument - just ignore that....

Why do I feel so strong about the rumor factory?

Why do I feel so strong about the dark side? Do yourself a favor and go see how M43 users nearly apologies for their existence everyday. The poor guys are bullied daily - just go read this thread.... Not blocked - moderators are fully OK with the rudeness on this thread.... Next go see this post and the positive video the poster posted (now blocked) - see the discussion that followed..... What if this behavior is part of their M43 reviews?

I have an intense interest in marketing - if you view this craziness from a marketing point of view then my advice is NEVER go to the dark side - its really intense and you need to take care not to get pulled into misinformation and lies..... The battle for market share has unfortunately become ruthless.....

Hope this helps......

 

[SojiOkita]

Please I am not fighting with you or anyone else.... read my response as just a response

I'm very sorry but it's very difficult discussing with you.
You make assumptions you consider as correct and don't even seem to consider they are not.

And you're talking about curves that affect only JPEG... so I don't know what this has to do with the question.
I also don't know why you talk about rumors... there's just a discussion. There hasn't been any direct comparison by anyone using both cameras so it's all speculations (your comments and mine included).

Why do I feel so strong about the dark side? Do yourself a favor and go see how M43 users nearly apologies for their existence everyday. The poor guys are bullied daily - just go read this thread.... Not blocked - moderators are fully OK with the rudeness on this thread.... Next go see this post and the positive video the poster posted (now blocked) - see the discussion that followed..... What if this behavior is part of their M43 reviews?

I don't know what anything has to do with the discussion here.
You feel bullied using m43? I don't.
It seems that you take any comment here that doesn't agree with you as an attack about Olympus or m43.
It already happened in another topic when talking about the histogram... (for a comment that was applicable to any brand of camera)

I'll prefer to stop here and conclude that we cannot understand eachother. It's probably a communication thing, but I give up.
I've absolutely no problem discussing with people disagreeing with me (that's sometimes the most interesting ones)... but it has to be with someone open to discussion, not someone claiming that he's the only one with the truth.

 

[Machi]

I did some quick analysis of RAWs from imaging-resource and it looks that behaviour in case of red and green channels is identical between E-M1II and E-M1III at lowest ISO (=64).
There is a clear difference in case of blue channel. E-M1III has lower response there.
What does it mean? If color of imaging-resource illumination was the same (I suppose it was) and difference is real then my suspicion is that one of the reasons can be that Olympus slightly lowered response of blue channel for protection of highlights in case of sky. If E-M1III has really its exposure pushed by +0.5EV (as suggested by PhotonsToPhotos) then it means that there would be risk of overexposure of blue channel in case of photos with sunny sky (blue channel is the first overexposed for the sky).
Now when Olympus lowered response of blue channel it means that sky will be properly exposed for every channel and even with +0.5EV higher exposure for E-M1III (vs E-M1II), protection of highlights should be similar (for blue sky).

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[SojiOkita]

I did some quick analysis of RAWs from imaging-resource and it looks that behaviour in case of red and green channels is identical between E-M1II and E-M1III at lowest ISO (=64).
There is a clear difference in case of blue channel. E-M1III has lower response there.

Interesting. That probably means the matter is quite complex... much more than just total exposure.

 

[pdk42]

I'm very sorry but it's very difficult discussing with you.
You make assumptions you consider as correct and don't even seem to consider they are not.

And you're talking about curves that affect only JPEG... so I don't know what this has to do with the question.
I also don't know why you talk about rumors... there's just a discussion. There hasn't been any direct comparison by anyone using both cameras so it's all speculations (your comments and mine included).


I don't know what anything has to do with the discussion here.
You feel bullied using m43? I don't.
It seems that you take any comment here that doesn't agree with you as an attack about Olympus or m43.
It already happened in another topic when talking about the histogram... (for a comment that was applicable to any brand of camera)

I'll prefer to stop here and conclude that we cannot understand eachother. It's probably a communication thing, but I give up.
I've absolutely no problem discussing with people disagreeing with me (that's sometimes the most interesting ones)... but it has to be with someone open to discussion, not someone claiming that he's the only one with the truth.

@SojiOkita - I feel much the same about Siegfried's posts. I think he and I are probably agreeing with each other, but I get lost in his arguments because they're often complex and his style across comes as dogmatic.

This thread needn't have got controversial - it was just an opportunity to talk about sensor differences between the EM1.2 and the newer EM1X/ EM1.3. I think we all understand that definitive information is hard to find, so all that was needed was some polite chat based on whatever we can find. An online version of a chat over a pint down at the local pub!

There's no conspiracy or dark side rumour mill here!