First XF1 photos

Started Aug 2, 2013 | Photos thread
davidge Regular Member • Posts: 158
Re: Great comparison M vs L

CAcreeks wrote:

I think the M size (KimL) is far nicer than the L size (Dave). It could be entirely a matter of exposure. Weird, but the L size is overexposed by more than 1 EV (6.6 vs 7.8). Don't know how that happened. Also don't know why ISO 400 was selected for M size (bit of noise at pixel level). I feel your Silkypix raw conversion comes in a close second to the M size DR 400. Thanks for posting!

My understanding from reading elsewhere on DPR is that because the M size is ISO 400 DR400%, the 'clever' EXR processing would not be performed in this case (i.e. splitting the sensor to expose highlights and mid/shadows separately then combining to produce the final image) as that only happens when ISO is less that DR. When they are the same (or ISO>DR?) then the same processing happens as for L size DR - i.e. underexposure of the whole frame to preserve highlights with tone curve adjustement to raise the shadows and mids. So in theory the only differences between the two are the overall exposure value and the M size discarding pixels. The M size one looks sharper because the L size one is not in focus or is suffering from camera shake - look at the writing on wine glass or bottle at full size.

This EXR stuff can be damn confusing!

 davidge's gear list:davidge's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX3 Fujifilm X10 Fujifilm X-E3 Fujifilm XF 18mm F2 R Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R +8 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow