Does anyone shoot in genuine low light?

[captura]

Good to know and I'll do some more work on mine to clean it up.

 

[captura]

It's interesting that some people don't see the G1 as a low light camera but I would other than the light output issue. I find that ISO 3200 can be cleaned up to look good and in any case that's just an issue if shooting hand held or keeping the shutter speed up for some reason, mount the camera and use low ISO and image quality is fine IMVHO.

I've loaded a few GF1 (the same image quality as the G1 far as I can see) ISO 1600 hand held low light shots into my gallery if anyone is interested and this is a G1 test shot I remembered doing at 3200... whole image and 100% crop which I think is ok quality...

Nice work!

I am trying to learn some low noise techniques ... to avoid HDR and a tripod when/if possible.

I experimented with my GX7 earlier tonight .... very high luminance range in low light. Shot this from the road at ISO 200, cleaned up in LR4.3:


OOC RAW converted in LR4.3 ---- exposed to just blow the bright portion of the sky.


Black point: +100, Shadows +100, Exposure: +3, highlights backed off, some clarity, some luminance noise reduction. Obviously a HDR candidate ... if I really WANTED that image.

I should've shot my GH2 and LX7 side by side for a comparison but I am not a fan of shooting from teh side of a busy highway! .... besides I was more interested in what I could get out of my NEW CAMERA! :-D

Lotsa fun, eh?

t

The last one reminds me of a Group of 7 painting.

 

[BBbuilder467]

I have 2 G1 bodies and over 100,000 shots. I've used them both in nearly total darkness with no problems or concerns.

I just did a quick comparison to the shot you displayed and they are nowhere near that bright. Unless there is something about the image that exxaggerates the brightness, I can't find a way to get it to look that bright.

I remember when I got the second body, I thought there was something wrong with it, and then noticed it still had the original firmware. Updated, the two are identical.

I'm not sure the firmware has anything to do with it, but in similar light to what you're showing, I'd barely see that reflection in my hand. All I get is a very soft reflection. No distinct outline like your reference.

I don't think there is anything to adjust the brightness in the EVF of the G1, so I couldn't have changed anything. Neither of my bodies are nearly that bright.

Has anyone else with a G1 noticed that?

 

[24hrexposure]

I would think thats a great advantage. If you're looking for reality get an optical viewfinder camera like the Fuji x100s or a Leica. I for one think EVF's are amazing.

I have a G1 and one major issue with it is its EVF's high light output which even with everything adjusted for best effect makes it (for me) unusable in genuine low light. As soon as I raise the camera to my eye night vision is gone and it's like having a torch shining directly into my eye. Just to be clear, I'm not talking about ISO 1600 on a well lit suburban street when there's enough light to read a newspaper, I'm talking about genuine low light such as really dingy venues and out of town night time shooting.

FWIW, at least with Fuji's X-Pro1, the OVF still has lit framelines which are bright enough to destroy night vision. I've given up on keeping night vision in both eyes and use one eye for the viewfinder and the other to look at the world.

 

[ragmanjin]

With some Fuji ILCs, you get the option of an OVF with info overlay which would be much dimmer than what looks to be a flashlight in your eye in your photo. Next time you happen to be in the city I'd recommend giving the X-Pro 1 a look.

Good luck,
Raj.

 

[ioshadha]

I do lot of low light on E-M5... haven't notice anything too bad so far.

 

[3DrJ]

I have a G1 and one major issue with it is its EVF's high light output which even with everything adjusted for best effect makes it (for me) unusable in genuine low light. As soon as I raise the camera to my eye night vision is gone and it's like having a torch shining directly into my eye. Just to be clear, I'm not talking about ISO 1600 on a well lit suburban street when there's enough light to read a newspaper, I'm talking about genuine low light such as really dingy venues and out of town night time shooting.

My Olympus E-M1 lets you adjust the brightness of the EVF. I haven't noticed any problem, however, since the display is lighted, there will be some affect on night vision for at least the eye used for the EVF. I doubt that you could find a camera shop were you could try cameras in such a setting, but you could look through the viewfinders and compare them. The only thing that would have no effect would be an OVF. However, unless you get one with a very good, bright OVF, it would be not be useable in very low light. My older E510 with a dim OVF would not work, my E5 would be much better, but would still be less usable than my E-M1 in very low light. I think the higher end Canon and Nikon FF cameras would be best for very low light for individuals who have a problem with the lighted EVF displays.

 

[RichRMA]

Tip from amateur astronomers and night--flying pilots.

 

[woof woof]

I have 2 G1 bodies and over 100,000 shots. I've used them both in nearly total darkness with no problems or concerns.

Has anyone else with a G1 noticed that?

Well... It's a bit of a mystery...Or maybe not...

As I may have said earlier my G1 has 2 (very) low light issues...

1. The light output.

2. In very low light the EVF just blacks up and fails to display detail easily visible by eye. The rear screen is a tiny bit better but still not usable.

That link I posted with examples from a kind poster here shows what I see with MY G1...

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3560987?page=3

So even if the light output wasn't an issue my G1 would still be almost useless in low light as you can't frame the shot and just have to point the camera and hope the framing is ok.

I don't think that mine is actually faulty as other people have reported the same thing but if yours is better, and I believe you I think that the answer could be that mine's an early one and they made them better, quietly and without tellling anyone I may be wrong but I think I've read of sneaky Panasonic fixes being incoporated into other products with no publicity so that could well be the reason for different experiences?

 

[woof woof]

PS. Just checked and I'm on firmware version 1.5 which I think is the latest.

 

[AlbertTheLazy]

How about a Fuji? My X-E1 is pretty well behaved or you could go for the X-Pro1 with its OVF (not reflex but optical).

I understand that the new X-E2 has an option to change the gain-up behaviour of the OVF, but can't speak from experience.

I just tried this one in a pretty dark room illuminated (!) by light coming from a 20w mini-fluorescent eco-bulb in another room the other side of a corridor . The EVF was not dazzling, although I normally keep it on its brightest setting. I certainly wouldn't reckon on shooting in much dimmer conditions without a tripod. To give you some idea, it was too dim to read the titles of the books.


1/12 sec, f:2, ISO25600, Fuji X-E1 18mm f:2 About midnight.

Edit: I don't know why the DPR EXIF extract insists on showing the shutter speed as 10/120 rather than 1/12 !

--
Albert
Every photograph is an abstraction from reality.
Most people are more interested in the picture than the image.

 

[Lab D]

I do like shots without flash too, but more often than not, I use flash.

I really wish Olympus would build a camera with a EVF and built in flash.

 

[Dougbm_2]

I do with my X100 and have not noticed the evf to be too bright.