the early versions of micro m43 ......... not that great ?

Started 3 months ago | Discussions thread
OP Mr Giggles Contributing Member • Posts: 788
Re: Blame the early raw processors

pannumon wrote:

ahaslett wrote:

Mr Giggles wrote:

I remember what happened

I bought a GH2 or 3 because of the hype about its video prowess

so on the first outing I wanted to see what the photo quality was like

I took a number of different images using RAW and I downloaded the Panny raw editor - what ever that was at the time

I then loaded the images and processed them

I remember looking at them and being startled

" these look like crap " .... I thought

Lots of people have been shocked by the flat rendering of RAWs in their first processor, unless it uses something like the camera jpeg parameters as it’s starting point.

You are absolutely correct. Back in 2009, I tried raw development with SilkyPix Developer Studio 3.0 that came with GH1. The images were extremely flat, something similar to how ungraded log video looks today. I spent an hour or two trying to get the images look nearly as good as the JPEGs. The software was very slow. I did not succeed. I gave up. Later I got Lightroom version 3, and was blown up that the raw images looked totally normal and usable right after import!

Newer versions of SilkyPix of course do the initial things for you.

TLDR; Don't blame the early µ4/3 cameras, blame the included raw processing software.


thats it - you hit the nail on the head

I believe it was silypix that came with it and the images were extremely flat

its not so much an issue with the dynamic range as it  was how dead looking the images were

it must have been the dopey editing software they packaged with the camera

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow