Dynamic range advice

[ahaslett]

A lot depends on metering and if the camera meters off a dark subject matter, whether it is back lit or not. The camera/phone metering is set to try and make the general image appear how it thinks the user might like to see the finished product.

Therefore different metering, different EV setting, different expectations of what the user wishes to see can result in different end result in jpg.

Not necessarily a dynamic range issue as the RAW file would contain more detail in this regard that can be extracted by altering the processing information in the metadata file.

This can be done by processing the raw file which could both bring out both the detail in the dark building and the lighter sky at the same time.

But if you wish to avoid the need to process of manipulating the raw file then you could try both varying the type of metering and changing the EV setting per image to partially over-ride the camera's engine that is trying to make the best image it can out of the settings that you are using.

Yes. The image is overexposed, as far as the sky is concerned. The lower left part of the sky is blown out. There's nothing there. Had that not been the case you might have been able to save it, but nothing can be done about data that isn't there.

The appearance of no detail doesn't necessarily mean there isn't any. If the OP had shot Raw they may have been able to recover whatever detail, if any that's present in the sky.

It’s certainly blown in jpeg.

Yes.

I’d say it would be blown in RAW too,

Why?

so probably needed attention to the histogram.

Given OPs work process, why not get a used MFT body where you can turn on in camera HDR easily.

Andrew

Well I didn't notice it was blown in jpeg until having a go in Snapseed so what do I know!

From producing blown skies myself, the gradation towards the edge of the building looks too steep for the RAW to be OK. You are right that this is speculation. Recovering cloud details from RAW is a common experience for this RAW only shooter.

Andrew

 

[Dino Anderson]

Olympus cameras have a setting where you can set the Gradation to Auto and this helps with high contrast situations like that. Maybe Panasonic has something similar. Then you expose for the bright sky and the shadows are automatically lifted up to expose the darker building.

 

[acfo]

Thanks for the input. I think the GX80 was already set to iDynamic high, but apparently that was not enough in this case. Perhaps I can try to underexpose in such cases in the future.

Would the 20MP sensors have more headroom to handle this kind of thing better?

To be honest, it'a bit dissapointing that the phone does a better job with that sky than the camera. I know that it's doing HDR trickery and all that. Nevertheless, I can't help but think: why can't the camera do it as well?

As others already mentioned the gx80 will easily outperform any current phone or to that matter any phone for the next 10 years at least.

If you want to use your camera in the way you use your smartphone you can set it to iAuto+. You can also do in-camera hdr. My Pen-F has an art filter (digital effect) called dramatic tone which works wonders for dull skies and old buildings. Your GX80 probably has something similar.

However I would recommend to also always save a raw file. If you do not feel like post processing on a computer with a raw file you can do in camera processing after you have taken the picture. Saving only the jpeg is very limiting and you will be happy you started saving the raw files in the years to come.

 

[Cafe Racer]

A lot depends on metering and if the camera meters off a dark subject matter, whether it is back lit or not. The camera/phone metering is set to try and make the general image appear how it thinks the user might like to see the finished product.

Therefore different metering, different EV setting, different expectations of what the user wishes to see can result in different end result in jpg.

Not necessarily a dynamic range issue as the RAW file would contain more detail in this regard that can be extracted by altering the processing information in the metadata file.

This can be done by processing the raw file which could both bring out both the detail in the dark building and the lighter sky at the same time.

But if you wish to avoid the need to process of manipulating the raw file then you could try both varying the type of metering and changing the EV setting per image to partially over-ride the camera's engine that is trying to make the best image it can out of the settings that you are using.

Yes. The image is overexposed, as far as the sky is concerned. The lower left part of the sky is blown out. There's nothing there. Had that not been the case you might have been able to save it, but nothing can be done about data that isn't there.

The appearance of no detail doesn't necessarily mean there isn't any. If the OP had shot Raw they may have been able to recover whatever detail, if any that's present in the sky.

It’s certainly blown in jpeg.

Yes.

I’d say it would be blown in RAW too,

Why?

so probably needed attention to the histogram.

Given OPs work process, why not get a used MFT body where you can turn on in camera HDR easily.

Andrew

Well I didn't notice it was blown in jpeg until having a go in Snapseed so what do I know!

From producing blown skies myself, the gradation towards the edge of the building looks too steep for the RAW to be OK. You are right that this is speculation. Recovering cloud details from RAW is a common experience for this RAW only shooter.

As a Raw shooter, recovering cloud detail is also not uncommon to me.

I don't think the OP is aware of the amount detail that can potentially be recovered in a Raw file, which appears to be lost in a JPEG. The first time I demonstrated it to a friend who was not familiar with Raw, he was amazed!

 

[meow]

A lot depends on metering and if the camera meters off a dark subject matter, whether it is back lit or not. The camera/phone metering is set to try and make the general image appear how it thinks the user might like to see the finished product.

Therefore different metering, different EV setting, different expectations of what the user wishes to see can result in different end result in jpg.

Not necessarily a dynamic range issue as the RAW file would contain more detail in this regard that can be extracted by altering the processing information in the metadata file.

This can be done by processing the raw file which could both bring out both the detail in the dark building and the lighter sky at the same time.

But if you wish to avoid the need to process of manipulating the raw file then you could try both varying the type of metering and changing the EV setting per image to partially over-ride the camera's engine that is trying to make the best image it can out of the settings that you are using.

Yes. The image is overexposed, as far as the sky is concerned. The lower left part of the sky is blown out. There's nothing there. Had that not been the case you might have been able to save it, but nothing can be done about data that isn't there.

The appearance of no detail doesn't necessarily mean there isn't any. If the OP had shot Raw they may have been able to recover whatever detail, if any that's present in the sky.

But he didn't. And there isn't any. :-D

 

[Cafe Racer]

A lot depends on metering and if the camera meters off a dark subject matter, whether it is back lit or not. The camera/phone metering is set to try and make the general image appear how it thinks the user might like to see the finished product.

Therefore different metering, different EV setting, different expectations of what the user wishes to see can result in different end result in jpg.

Not necessarily a dynamic range issue as the RAW file would contain more detail in this regard that can be extracted by altering the processing information in the metadata file.

This can be done by processing the raw file which could both bring out both the detail in the dark building and the lighter sky at the same time.

But if you wish to avoid the need to process of manipulating the raw file then you could try both varying the type of metering and changing the EV setting per image to partially over-ride the camera's engine that is trying to make the best image it can out of the settings that you are using.

Yes. The image is overexposed, as far as the sky is concerned. The lower left part of the sky is blown out. There's nothing there. Had that not been the case you might have been able to save it, but nothing can be done about data that isn't there.

The appearance of no detail doesn't necessarily mean there isn't any. If the OP had shot Raw they may have been able to recover whatever detail, if any that's present in the sky.

But he didn't.

That's right. But it's worth the OP trying out Raw like some have suggested.

And there isn't any. :-D

Has the OP tried to recover anything from the jpeg?

 

[Star Geezer]

I'm looking for some advice on dynamic range.

Recently, I was on a long vacation in the US, and took lots of photos. I used mostly the GX80 with 14-140, and also a GX800 with the 7-14. I'm a casual photographer and use mostly SOOC Jpegs. I was generally pretty happy with the photos, except for the skies sometimes. I took the following photos in Chicago. I took the first picture with the GX80, and the sky looked really flat. I then took the same picture with my S22+ phone.

In reviewing the pictures later, to my surprise, the sky looked much better on the S22+ image. I had checked the ISO to make sure it was at 200 on the GX80, and I thought that should maximize the dynamic range.

Am I being unrealistic as to what to expect a m43 sensor from 2016 to do?

I'm hoping that there are things I can improve, to avoid this issue in the future. Looking forward to hearing feedback on this.

(I know, shooting raw might be better, but it is not my cup of tea, so I shoot jpg only.)

Your problem is not DR but that you took a photo in a dull uninspiring background for which there is no solution other than taking a better photo. You get what you shoot. Next time wait for better background, clouds etc.

Amazing that virtually every reply had misguided solutions and missed the obvious issue with one notable exception suggesting a Luminar sky replacement.

I guess that's expected in a gear forum rather than a photographic forum. Gear nor software is the real answer. Just take a good photo.

 

[ahaslett]

A lot depends on metering and if the camera meters off a dark subject matter, whether it is back lit or not. The camera/phone metering is set to try and make the general image appear how it thinks the user might like to see the finished product.

Therefore different metering, different EV setting, different expectations of what the user wishes to see can result in different end result in jpg.

Not necessarily a dynamic range issue as the RAW file would contain more detail in this regard that can be extracted by altering the processing information in the metadata file.

This can be done by processing the raw file which could both bring out both the detail in the dark building and the lighter sky at the same time.

But if you wish to avoid the need to process of manipulating the raw file then you could try both varying the type of metering and changing the EV setting per image to partially over-ride the camera's engine that is trying to make the best image it can out of the settings that you are using.

Yes. The image is overexposed, as far as the sky is concerned. The lower left part of the sky is blown out. There's nothing there. Had that not been the case you might have been able to save it, but nothing can be done about data that isn't there.

The appearance of no detail doesn't necessarily mean there isn't any. If the OP had shot Raw they may have been able to recover whatever detail, if any that's present in the sky.

It’s certainly blown in jpeg.

Yes.

I’d say it would be blown in RAW too,

Why?

so probably needed attention to the histogram.

Given OPs work process, why not get a used MFT body where you can turn on in camera HDR easily.

Andrew

Well I didn't notice it was blown in jpeg until having a go in Snapseed so what do I know!

From producing blown skies myself, the gradation towards the edge of the building looks too steep for the RAW to be OK. You are right that this is speculation. Recovering cloud details from RAW is a common experience for this RAW only shooter.

As a Raw shooter, recovering cloud detail is also not uncommon to me.

I don't think the OP is aware of the amount detail that can potentially be recovered in a Raw file, which appears to be lost in a JPEG. The first time I demonstrated it to a friend who was not familiar with Raw, he was amazed!

Shadows too eh! Especially with FF DR.

Andrew

 

[Satyaa]

...

Amazing that virtually every reply had misguided solutions and missed the obvious issue with one notable exception suggesting a Luminar sky replacement.

Did you see my two examples?

I guess that's expected in a gear forum rather than a photographic forum. Gear nor software is the real answer. Just take a good photo.

 

[RichardCass]

I'm looking for some advice on dynamic range.

Recently, I was on a long vacation in the US, and took lots of photos. I used mostly the GX80 with 14-140, and also a GX800 with the 7-14. I'm a casual photographer and use mostly SOOC Jpegs. I was generally pretty happy with the photos, except for the skies sometimes. I took the following photos in Chicago. I took the first picture with the GX80, and the sky looked really flat. I then took the same picture with my S22+ phone.

In reviewing the pictures later, to my surprise, the sky looked much better on the S22+ image. I had checked the ISO to make sure it was at 200 on the GX80, and I thought that should maximize the dynamic range.

Am I being unrealistic as to what to expect a m43 sensor from 2016 to do?

I'm hoping that there are things I can improve, to avoid this issue in the future. Looking forward to hearing feedback on this.

(I know, shooting raw might be better, but it is not my cup of tea, so I shoot jpg only.)

Your problem is not DR but that you took a photo in a dull uninspiring background for which there is no solution other than taking a better photo. You get what you shoot. Next time wait for better background, clouds etc.

Amazing that virtually every reply had misguided solutions and missed the obvious issue with one notable exception suggesting a Luminar sky replacement.

I guess that's expected in a gear forum rather than a photographic forum. Gear nor software is the real answer. Just take a good photo.

Wanting to retain detail in an overcast sky is hardly unreasonable.

Sky replacement is a possible solution, but often looks crap unless the light direction and colour temperature bear some sort of resemblance to the subject matter.

In the UK, waiting for an inspiring sky for general keepsake type photos is completely unrealistic.

As I posted earlier, I have to bracket a lot - it's second nature now.

 

[ahaslett]

I'm looking for some advice on dynamic range.

Recently, I was on a long vacation in the US, and took lots of photos. I used mostly the GX80 with 14-140, and also a GX800 with the 7-14. I'm a casual photographer and use mostly SOOC Jpegs. I was generally pretty happy with the photos, except for the skies sometimes. I took the following photos in Chicago. I took the first picture with the GX80, and the sky looked really flat. I then took the same picture with my S22+ phone.

In reviewing the pictures later, to my surprise, the sky looked much better on the S22+ image. I had checked the ISO to make sure it was at 200 on the GX80, and I thought that should maximize the dynamic range.

Am I being unrealistic as to what to expect a m43 sensor from 2016 to do?

I'm hoping that there are things I can improve, to avoid this issue in the future. Looking forward to hearing feedback on this.

(I know, shooting raw might be better, but it is not my cup of tea, so I shoot jpg only.)

Your problem is not DR but that you took a photo in a dull uninspiring background for which there is no solution other than taking a better photo. You get what you shoot. Next time wait for better background, clouds etc.

Amazing that virtually every reply had misguided solutions and missed the obvious issue with one notable exception suggesting a Luminar sky replacement.

I guess that's expected in a gear forum rather than a photographic forum. Gear nor software is the real answer. Just take a good photo.

Wanting to retain detail in an overcast sky is hardly unreasonable.

Sky replacement is a possible solution, but often looks crap unless the light direction and colour temperature bear some sort of resemblance to the subject matter.

In the UK, waiting for an inspiring sky for general keepsake type photos is completely unrealistic.

As I posted earlier, I have to bracket a lot - it's second nature now.

When the sky looks interesting, the urge to photograph overtakes me. One of the reasons for wandering around with a small camera.

Sky can be the subject but it’s usually the back cloth.

In camera HDR has been easy in my Olympus bodies back to the EM1. Like you, I bracket almost automatically when shooting RAW on a tripod and having any suspicion it might be needed. If nothing else, it gives options on the starting RAW.

Having shot with very low DR bodies, the fear of blown skies is always there.



Andrew

--
Infinite are the arguments of mages. Truth is a jewel with many facets. Ursula K LeGuin
Please feel free to edit any images that I post

 

[knickerhawk]

I'm looking for some advice on dynamic range.

Recently, I was on a long vacation in the US, and took lots of photos. I used mostly the GX80 with 14-140, and also a GX800 with the 7-14. I'm a casual photographer and use mostly SOOC Jpegs. I was generally pretty happy with the photos, except for the skies sometimes. I took the following photos in Chicago. I took the first picture with the GX80, and the sky looked really flat. I then took the same picture with my S22+ phone.

In reviewing the pictures later, to my surprise, the sky looked much better on the S22+ image. I had checked the ISO to make sure it was at 200 on the GX80, and I thought that should maximize the dynamic range.

Am I being unrealistic as to what to expect a m43 sensor from 2016 to do?

I'm hoping that there are things I can improve, to avoid this issue in the future. Looking forward to hearing feedback on this.

(I know, shooting raw might be better, but it is not my cup of tea, so I shoot jpg only.)

Your problem is not DR but that you took a photo in a dull uninspiring background for which there is no solution other than taking a better photo. You get what you shoot. Next time wait for better background, clouds etc.

Amazing that virtually every reply had misguided solutions and missed the obvious issue with one notable exception suggesting a Luminar sky replacement.

I guess that's expected in a gear forum rather than a photographic forum. Gear nor software is the real answer. Just take a good photo.

Personally, I consider your reply to be one of the most unhelpful in the thread, and that's saying something because a number of the replies are technically incorrect or misleading. The problem was NOT "a dull uninspiring background". In fact, the cloudy sky, had it been better captured, would have provided an excellent background, but even a fully "blown out" and featureless sky in a shot like this is not necessarily problematic and often desirable. Don't take my word for it. Look at the great B&W cityscape shots and take note of how many of them have nothing in the sky (or nothing more than modest hints of clouds). The reason for using featureless skies is simple: the subject is the buildings and foreground, NOT the sky. An "inspiring background," as you argue for in your post, would just be distracting.

Here's an example from one of the great New York CIty photographers, Bernice Abbott. She was an extraordinary technician as well as a visionary photographer. To truly appreciate the quality of her work, you need to see the prints in person, but here's a fairly representative example of how she intentionally made the skies uniformly featureless:


From the Howard Greenberg Gallery.

Click here to see the source photo and others of Abbott's from the gallery's collection.

And as we speak, there's an exhibition at The Met in New York of Bernd and Hilla Becher's work. They were the founders of the so-called Dusseldorf School of photography and are widely considered among the most important photographic trendsetters of the 20th Century. Here's a link to the images in The Met exhibilt. Note that none of them have an "inspiring sky" background.

 

[meow]

A lot depends on metering and if the camera meters off a dark subject matter, whether it is back lit or not. The camera/phone metering is set to try and make the general image appear how it thinks the user might like to see the finished product.

Therefore different metering, different EV setting, different expectations of what the user wishes to see can result in different end result in jpg.

Not necessarily a dynamic range issue as the RAW file would contain more detail in this regard that can be extracted by altering the processing information in the metadata file.

This can be done by processing the raw file which could both bring out both the detail in the dark building and the lighter sky at the same time.

But if you wish to avoid the need to process of manipulating the raw file then you could try both varying the type of metering and changing the EV setting per image to partially over-ride the camera's engine that is trying to make the best image it can out of the settings that you are using.

Yes. The image is overexposed, as far as the sky is concerned. The lower left part of the sky is blown out. There's nothing there. Had that not been the case you might have been able to save it, but nothing can be done about data that isn't there.

The appearance of no detail doesn't necessarily mean there isn't any. If the OP had shot Raw they may have been able to recover whatever detail, if any that's present in the sky.

But he didn't.

That's right. But it's worth the OP trying out Raw like some have suggested.

I got the impression he wants to stick to JPG.

And there isn't any. :-D

Has the OP tried to recover anything from the jpeg?

I don't know. But I have. :-D

I wasn't opposing what you said. I was agreeing (hence, the Yes). ;-)

If one uses the vendor's software, it should be possible to shoot raw and bulk convert with standard settings, shouldn't it? Then the whole process would be a matter of just a few clicks and further processing could be limited to any problem files.

But still, correct exposure is the best starting point.

[EDIT]
And I'm confused. it wasn't you I says Yes to. But I agree anyway, but still think the main problem is the blown out sky.

 

[ahaslett]

Thank you

 

[Palombasso]

As I understand the Gx80 has in camera HDR (similar to what the phone might be doing).

Not as auto as the phone but as a jpeg shooter maybe you should try it next time in a high contrast situation.

Loading…

www.manualslib.com

Loading…

www.imaging-resource.com

 

[The Ghost of Caravaggio]

I'm looking for some advice on dynamic range.

Here's some advice based on empirical measurements of dynamic range for your camera:use the lowest camera ISO setting that is compatible with the minimum acceptable shutter time and maximum acceptable lens aperture for the task at hand. The goal is to maximize sensor exposure.

Here is an empirical measurement of photographic dynamic range vs camera ISO setting for the GX-80.[1]


Effect of camera ISO setting on the LUMIX DMC-GX80 photographic dynamic range.

(I know, shooting raw might be better, but it is not my cup of tea, so I shoot jpg only.)

Using raw files will always be better than in-camera JPEGs unless the parameters that determine sensor exposure and white balance parameters are perfect. This does not mean it is a mistake to use in-camera JPEGs when a scene's dynamic range is challenging. It means you decided avoiding any inconvenience due to using raw files is more important than making sure the all the data information content is available if needed.

The advice you received regarding dull skies, clipping, etc is also important.

There are two different ways to clip data in the example you posted.

• When the shutter is open, the full-well capacity is exceeded for sensor photo sites in the brightest sky regions.
• After the shutter closes, the increase in signal levels for data from pixels in the sky's brightest regions exceeds the ADC's maximum voltage threshold. When ISO is set above the native value (ISO 100 for the DX80), the amount of signal level increase is determined by the camera ISO setting .

Often only a limited percentage of bright pixels are clipped. One symptom of this with skies is the sky hues render with a slight green tint. As the number of clipped sky pixels increases, the perception of hue infidelity increases. Since raw files contain more information (data) than JPEG files, the ability to correct the sky hue problems is higher with raw.

When the sky has full cloud cover with no or little brightness gradients, the information content for the sky is is low. Intentionally over exposing the sky by a small amount has does not degrade perceived image quality. But the shadow regions' exposure does increase. The result is the data contains more information about the subject o interest (in your case the building).

In some cases auto-bracketing either shutter time or lens aperture for three exposures by 1/3 to 1/2 EV steps means you can use the image with the best sky rendering hue (exposure) and delete the others.

--------

1. Photographic dynamic range different from engineering dynamic range. Photographic dynamic rangeis normalized for the sensor's circle of confusion. The photographic dynamic range in the graph is what "you would expect in an 8x10” print viewed at a distance of about arms length". This definition of dynamic range has no impact on the advice to maximize sensor exposure in order to make full use of your camera's analog dynamic range.

_____________________
“…the mathematical rules of probability theory are not merely rules for calculating frequencies of random variables; they are also the unique consistent rules for conducting inference (i.e., plausible reasoning)”
E.T Jaynes, Probability Theory: The Logic of Science

 

[RebelCake]

Thanks everybody, it's been an interesting discussion, and I got some valuable advice. I guess I'm going to start shooting raw + jpeg from now on, and trying to work with the raws in challenging situations. Any recommendations on some easy to use software for Windows? Or Android?

One point that is still not clear for me is the ISO: generally, I use AutoISO, but switch to S mode if I need to lower ISO further. What is a bit confusing is the minimum ISO selected by the GX80 in AutoISO, for me it is ISO 200, not 100.

• When ISO is set above the native value (ISO 100 for the DX80), the amount of signal level increase is determined by the camera ISO setting .

I can select ISO 100 as an ISO setting, but my GX80 never goes below 200 when AutoISO is set. Have I got some settings wrong?

Am I better off (in terms of dynamic range) setting ISO 100 manually?

 

[kalisti]

Thanks everybody, it's been an interesting discussion, and I got some valuable advice. I guess I'm going to start shooting raw + jpeg from now on, and trying to work with the raws in challenging situations. Any recommendations on some easy to use software for Windows? Or Android?

One point that is still not clear for me is the ISO: generally, I use AutoISO, but switch to S mode if I need to lower ISO further. What is a bit confusing is the minimum ISO selected by the GX80 in AutoISO, for me it is ISO 200, not 100.

This is as it works, dont worry if you want to use auto, the advantage of using 100 over 200 is minimal.

• When ISO is set above the native value (ISO 100 for the DX80), the amount of signal level increase is determined by the camera ISO setting .

I can select ISO 100 as an ISO setting, but my GX80 never goes below 200 when AutoISO is set. Have I got some settings wrong?

Am I better off (in terms of dynamic range) setting ISO 100 manually?

 

[JimH123]

I'm looking for some advice on dynamic range.

Recently, I was on a long vacation in the US, and took lots of photos. I used mostly the GX80 with 14-140, and also a GX800 with the 7-14. I'm a casual photographer and use mostly SOOC Jpegs. I was generally pretty happy with the photos, except for the skies sometimes. I took the following photos in Chicago. I took the first picture with the GX80, and the sky looked really flat. I then took the same picture with my S22+ phone.





In reviewing the pictures later, to my surprise, the sky looked much better on the S22+ image. I had checked the ISO to make sure it was at 200 on the GX80, and I thought that should maximize the dynamic range.

Am I being unrealistic as to what to expect a m43 sensor from 2016 to do?

I'm hoping that there are things I can improve, to avoid this issue in the future. Looking forward to hearing feedback on this.

(I know, shooting raw might be better, but it is not my cup of tea, so I shoot jpg only.)

I didn't read all the replies, but your GX80 has a metering mode to prevent blowouts such as you experienced.

If you go into your camera's metering mode, there are 3 choices:

copied from: Panasonic Lumix GX85 and GX80 settings, tips and tricks - Wim Arys

Metering Mode

You can change how the light is metered here, and hence how a correct exposure is calculated by the camera. If you feel that the camera takes over- or underexposed images according to your personal preferences, it might be worth changing the metering mode.

Implementation of this is quite basic in this camera, you have a total of only 3 methods to choose from:

• Multiple: This is the method in which the camera measures the most suitable exposure by judging the allocation of brightness on the whole screen automatically.
• Center weighted: This is the method used to focus on the subject on the center of the screen and measure the whole screen evenly.
• Spot: This is the method to measure the subject in the spot metering target.

Please note the differences in the 3 modes. The first is "Multiple". This would likely have prevented your problem. It samples the brightness in many places and finds a setting to prevent blowout.

The other extreme is "Spot" where the camera only concerns itself with the brightness under the spot and doesn't care about everywhere else.

The "Center weighted" is just a compromise between the two.

Take a look at what your camera is set to.

Additionally, your camera has a bracket mode in which multiple images are taken with different exposure settings allowing you can select which one you like best. They could also be combined into a single HDR image if desired. But just picking the one you like best is certainly an option too.

Here is the wording for the the Bracket option from the link I gave you above.

Bracket

The Bracket function allows you to take multiple pictures while automatically adjusting a setting like exposure or aperture by pressing the shutter button.

Possible bracket types:

• Exposure Bracket: Press the shutter button and the Lumix will sequentially take multiple images with different exposures. You can select the number of pictures to be taken and the exposure range (from 1/3 EV to 1 EV stops difference).
• Aperture Bracket: Press the shutter button and the Lumix will sequentially take multiple images at different apertures. Either select all apertures or a number of shots (3-5) within a selected range.
• Focus Bracketress the shutter button and the Panasonic GX80 will sequentially take multiple images with different focus positions. You can select the distance between focus positions, the number of exposures and the sequence from far to near or the other way around.
• White Balance Bracket: Press the shutter button and the Lumix GX80 will take three pictures with different white balance settings automatically
• White Balance Bracket (color temperature): Press the shutter button once to take three pictures with different White Balance Color Temperature values automatically. You can also set the correction range by touching the up/down slider on the screen.

But that's not all. Your camera has a setting to darken bright areas and to make dark areas brighter.

Highlight Shadow

This allows you to lighten the shadows and darkens the highlights in your image (or video). So this is a method of creating balance in your image if you feel like the highlights are too strong or the shadows too dark. You have 4 presets available, and you can also make 3 custom presets yourself:

• Standard: no adjustments is set.
• Raise the contrast: Bright areas are brightened, and dark areas are darkened.
• Lower the contrast: Bright areas are darkened, and dark areas are brightened.
• Brighten dark areas: Dark areas are brightened.
• Custom: make your own preset.

And yet one more option:

Dynamic

This setting will change contrast and exposure when there is a big difference from the darkest area to the brightest are in your image. What really happens is that the camera adjusts the exposure in order to capture more details in the highlights. You can choose between High, Standard, Low or Off.

This naturally causes an under-exposure in the shadow areas. But inside the jpeg engine, the camera will compensate for this by boosting shadows. The downside here is that this will obviously lead to more noise in the boosted regions, but because this is done with data directly coming from the sensor, it can be quite useful if you are a jpeg shooter.

There is also an impact on RAW images, because the exposure will be underexposed.

 

[alcelc]

Is indeed 200.

ISO100 is the extended ISO on the lowest end. Therefore under Auto ISO, ISO200 is the lowest ISO it will use.

You need to do manual ISO for 100.