Crop Factor, Low Light and Aperture with m4/3 lenses?

Started Jun 15, 2014 | Discussions thread
Anders W Forum Pro • Posts: 21,468
Re: Oh no, not again please ..
2

Sergey_Green wrote:

Anders W wrote:

Sergey_Green wrote:

Very nicely summed up, I would only add few words about the low noise, if I may. Most of the scenes in the world are middle-gray (or reflect about 18% of light),

On the contrary, most scenes are not middle gray. Rather, most scenes include tones that range all the way from very dark to very bright.

and that is where the larger formats are often ahead regardless of what sensors they have.

On the contrary, smaller sensors are more efficent than larger and therefore tend to do better for equivalent photos like those described by Great Bustard above. This is true for middle gray but even more so for darker tones, which have the poorest signal-noise ratio and where noise is therefore most visible.

The dark shadows, on the other hand, is usually not where the least most important information in the images is,

On the contrary, both the bright and dark tones of an image tend to be important. And the dark tones do not need to be in the shadows. A black cat remains black even if lit.

and can be cleaned without ill-effects to the rest of the captured scene. That is, if anyone is bothered by it.

On the contrary, the dark tones cannot as a rule be "cleaned" without ill effects. Consider for example the hair of the girl in the example to which I link below.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison?attr18=lowlight&attr13_0=oly_em1&attr13_1=sony_a7&attr13_2=sony_a7r&attr13_3=nikon_d800&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=3200&attr16_1=12800&attr16_2=12800&attr16_3=12800&normalization=print&widget=1&x=0.8342357734262059&y=0.2753099540100277

I think that is why you are so un-accomplished as a photographer, as obvious simply eludes you.

Fortunately, noone here cares much about what you "think" about anything.

Let's start with this example you linked, and why it does not show what potential differences (between the cameras) there are. First, if the images are to be judged by this tone alone (very unlikely, unless you done something wrong from the start with it) there is not much difference between them. And if these blotches are offending, they all need to be cleaned up in one way or the other.

You missed the point. You said that dark areas can be "cleaned" without ill effects. I just showed they cannot.

Secondly, (now you need to think as a photographer, just pretend you are one)

No need for me to pretend that.

every good image will have some central point in it, where you want your viewer to look at first.

That's a rule with exceptions, but I realize you are hard pressed to understand that. You appear to compose in a rather stereotypical fashion.

Do you remember what I said above? - It is mid-Gray.

Yes, I remember you said that. And since it is obviously wrong, it is stupid to repeat it. The central point, if there is one, can, and often does, have tones ranging all the way from very dark to very bright.

That is how we see what is in the light, and that is how the cameras are designed to meter, unless you over-write it to fit your specific as you see it needs. You meter on the dark, it becomes gray. You meter on highlights, they become gray. That is just the way it is. Regardless how dim the light may appear, if you meter correctly, the most important parts of your image(s) will inevitably become gray.

If you meter like you do. I use better methods. But how the two of us determine exposure is obviously beside the point in this discussion.

As the series of images in this link demonstrate,

http://acwilli.smugmug.com/Other/Jakes-B-Ball-Jan-2014-EM1-35/

If it is not so obvious, let us look at few others. Camera phones are not known to prodice clean images (regardless of ISO), especially when pushed outside their comfort zones, but should we even care. Here's where noise was cleaned up, and only what matters is left intact (would you even know about it?),

Current phone cams do perfectly well at low ISOs (which you used here), especially at the very small display sizes you prefer to use. No need to clean any noise here.

It would have been very different had the image had noise in the areas where it matters the most.

Here is another one, taken rather early, and when the sun just only started showing up from over the mountains. Again, should the noise in the deepest of the shadows ever bother anyone, it is easily removed with no ill-effects to the image.

Yes, that's an example of a scene where there isn't any important detail in the dark areas. Sometimes that's true in bright areas too, e.g., the sky. In both cases, we can then "clean" with relative ease (although your image doesn't really need any at this ISO and display size). In other cases, like the one I exemplified, we have difficulties with the "cleaning" and this happens in dark and bright areas alike. So no significant difference in this regard.

-- hide signature --

- sergey

 Anders W's gear list:Anders W's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus E-M1 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH +28 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow