Gave The GX7 MkII Another Go...

jhunna wrote:

Jacques Cornell wrote:

jhunna wrote:

I don't consider them underexposed. I see them as exposed for Post processing, where you expose for the highlights, and pull the shadows in pp. This sort of exposure gives you the best chance at recovering the most details in pp.

No, it clearly doesn't. This could be exposed at least one stop brighter, maybe two, and the highlights could be recovered. This would give far more latitude in the shadows. Even with my a7RIII, I would never expose this way, planning to push shadows at least three full stops. The results will always be badly compromised.

That said there is a balance, I would have given up a bit of the highlights to recapture more of the shadows. But I am familiar with the limitations of that sensor. Even so, he was still able to recover a usable photo in the end.

Not really. Even after processing, his shadows are all blocked up, and this is what he's complaining about. User error, plain and simple.

Now you are just arguing for the sake of arguing. You first paragraph says the same thing I say in my second paragraph, and then you disagree with my second paragraph.

I disagree that they're not underexposed. I don't disagree that a little underexposure to protect highlights can be useful. I disagree that "he was still able to recover a usable photo in the end". He went way beyond the underexposure needed to protect the highlights, ruined the shadows in the process, and then blamed the camera for not having enough DR to rescue him from his error.