Photography tips 101: Exposure (Basics of Photography)

Hello welcome to my tips 101, today i'm gonna talk about exposure, the basic of photography, when you take a photograph basically the old skool way says you are taking an exposure.... (bahaha i read that somewhere or i just created it).....
Anyway, this is more of a guide to newbies than photography tips actually, but tips and guides are similar i guess....

So the basics of photography is exposure. What is exposure? in photography terms exposure is the combination of 3 things.

a) Shutter
b) Aperture
c) ISO

With these 3 you basically create an exposure,which means you are taking a photo. Whether you use your iphones to take a picture, a compact point and shoot or a frikkin DSLR or even a film camera, these 3 things are always in play.

Exposure is also the gathering of light. These 3 things are used to how much light is gathered...How much light reach the sensor of your camera or film back in the day. These light gathering will affect the brightness and quality of your photos. Do i make it sound complicated? Well just get this:-

Exposure = Shutter, Aperture and ISO.

Each settings will affect the brightness or dim of your photos. I explain more below.

So lets explore each... im not gonna go in depth. just a basic in my own words/understanding.

Lets start with Shutter.

a) Shutter = speed = is how many seconds it takes to create an exposure. You will always encounter the terms faster shutter speed (eg. 1/1000s) and slower shutter speed (eg. 10 seconds or 10").

One of the reasons to use a Faster shutter speed is to freeze motion. You want to take a SHARP photo of a skateboarder jump mid air?? Use faster shutter speed.

This is at 1/640s shutter speed

But using a fast shutter speed also means less light reaching your camera sensor which can results in dim photos. BUT BUT BUT you can play around with aperture and ISO settings to bring back the light which means to brighten back your photo. which i come back to that later.*

One of the reasons to use a Slower shutter speed is to create motion blur. Why motion blur? Sometimes you wanted to show that the subject is moving rather than static. It also look better with motion blur than a static subject but that is based on your subject or preferences . Subject such as water flow, a cyclist.

This is shot at 1/4s. This is not a good photo but its the only one i have in collection. but just an example to create a sense of motion

Using slower shutter speed also lets you gather more light which is the technique to shoot night photography or astrophotography. Slower shutter speed also = long exposure. When you heard the term longer exposure it just meant they use slower shutter speed.

This is a 15 second shutter speed. A tripod is much needed.

So slow shutter speed is better right? More light gathered?? BUT BUT BUT you will encounter camera shake problem. Camera shake means your photos will come out blur, not sharp. Anything slower than 1/60 second can cause camera shake... when i say slower it means eg. 1/40, 1/15, 1/8 and so on.... unless you have sturdy hands and a good technique you can achieve SHARP picture with 1/30 but lets just stick with 1/60 is your limit. So a tripod is needed for sturdy non shake camera. But there is also image stabilization but lets not get ahead of ourselves. lets not get into that.

On most cameras like Sony and Olympus, Shutter mode is represent with the letter S on the camera. On Canon i believe it is Tv. On Fuji, they shown the speed itself to indicate Shutter mode.

Next is Aperture

b) Aperture is how wide or narrow the opening or hole on the camera lens to gather light. The term is usually f-stops. Aperture is a always a lens feature, nothing to do with camera body. So when they say Aperture it means your lens.

So a wide opening/hole means more and better light gathering. Wide Aperture. A lens with the ability to open wide is called a FAST LENS. Wide aperture means wide opening/hole. So aperture such as f1.2, f1.4, f1.8, f2 these are known as fast lens/wide aperture. Aperture such as f3.5, f5.6 these are known as SLOW lens, narrow opening/hole, narrow aperture.

So when to use a wide aperture? When you need bokeh!
Bokeh is defined as “the effect of a soft out-of-focus background that you get when shooting a subject, using a fast lens, at the widest aperture, such as f/2.8 or wider.” - i got this definition from nikonusa.

This is shot with Sony's 55mm at f1.8. Check out the background and foreground bokeh. OOOoooohhh Yummeh!

So the most common fast lens of any camera brand is f1.8. With Fuji it is f2.

Fast lens is also used when you shoot low light such as indoors, or maybe at night. Because fast lens gathers more light. With a fast lens, you can use a faster shutter speed and a lower ISO value. Why fast shutter speed? Because you dont want blurred photos, why lower ISO? Because you want the least noise in your photo which i come back to that later.**

So when to use NARROW aperture? Narrow aperture such as f8, f11, f16 are usually used when shooting landscapes or a group photo where you want the whole picture to be sharp. When i say the whole photo it means the foreground and background is sharp. But distance between subject also takes into consideration but thats for another story.

This is taken at f9.5. basically overall picture is sharp.

So this is good right? BUT BUT BUT with a narrow aperture, less light is gathered which means it can lead to the camera using a slower shutter and a higher ISO!! These are especially true if shooting in low light (eg. indoors and night time). In broad daylight no problems! Plenty of light!

Slower shutter = camera shake = blur.
High ISO = noise.

On most camera, the Aperture mode is the letter A. on Canon i believe it is Av. On Fuji, they shown the aperture value on the lens itself.

Next is ISO

c) Basically with ISO, this guy will affect how bright or dim your photos. BUT BUT BUT the thing with ISO is, the higher value they are the noisier your photos will be. When i say NOISIER, its the grain in your pictures. With digital cameras the noise/grain is ugly. it also smudges your picture, less details.
So the best image quality is to use lowest ISO value possible. On most camera it is ISO100. on Fuji it is ISO200. With high ISOs such as ISO3200, ISO6400, your picture will definitely show noise/grain and also less details. But with nowadays modern digital cameras, ISO3200 up to ISO6400 is acceptable. The noise is what they say similar to Film grain. So its up to you whether you like the grain or not. but for me, yes, ISO6400 is acceptable. For instagram or web, ISO6400 is more than acceptable.

So low ISO is the best right? Definitely!!! when you have plenty of light, BUT BUT BUT when the light start to goes dim, when you're indoors or nightfalls, your camera will struggle to keep its low ISO value, while it can, it will start to use slower shutter speed and its widest aperture. With slower shutter speed = camera shake = blur. If you happen to have a slow lens which is basically what comes with your camera (kit lens), less light will be gathered, so that means higher ISOs and slower shutter speed to gather more light to get the optimum exposure.

So when to use HIGH ISO? when you're indoors or low light, and you need a fast shutter speed (at least to avoid shake). thats about 1/60s

This is ISO25600. This is extreme high ISO. Your photos will look like shit! noisy/grainy. But i shot this handheld and the milkyway is visible! HANDHELD!!

This is at ISO6400. When light goes dim and you need to shoot handheld. Shutter speed here is 1/30. Aperture wide open at f2. See ISO6400 is acceptable.

On Fuji cameras, ISO is a dial and on most cameras they are in the menu or at one of the camera dials.

i hope i have covered the 3 aspects of exposure wisely. haha

So if you have read all the way up to this, basically EXPOSURE has got to do with the amount of light. if you're shooting in broad daylight with plenty of light, this is the best image quality out of a camera you can get. with lowest ISO, the picture will come out squeaky clean. no noise no grains.

When the light starts to get DIM, this is when your pictures will start to get noisy/more grain.

So lemme conclude the 3 aspects of EXPOSURE which are the SHUTTER, APERTURE and ISO.
So basically these 3 affects each other when taking a photo.

*When you want to use a fast shutter speed and the overall photos are dim, you can adjust your aperture to its widest setting such as f1.8 and use a higher ISOs such a ISO1600 and above to gather more light to bring back the brightness.

** Low ISO = less noise, less grain, more details, no smudging.
     High ISO = more noise, more grain, less details, smudging.

Here's a tip or guide on exposure:-

IN Broad daylight,

when shooting landscapes, travel or street, when you want sharp pictures all over, use a narrow aperture such as f8, a fast shutter speed such as 1/60 onwards eg 1/100, 1/200 to freeze motion and the lowest ISO such as ISO100 to get squeaky clean image.

Note:-
Fast shutter speed = freeze motion = no motion blur = less light
Slow shutter speed = motion blur = camera shake = tripod = night photography = astrophotography = more light
low iso = less noise
high iso = more noise
wide aperture = fast lens = bokeh = more light = can use fast shutter and lower iso
narrow aperture = landscapes = sharper foreground and background = less light


all photos by me. Hope you enjoy this post and learn something from it. If else (fail)

Leica adventure: Chapter 1 New Orleans (Day 1)

I've been in an airplane for a total of 20 hours now, that's how long the journey is for me to reach America. This time its New Orleans. I could not get my eyes to open, i slept the whole time on my way to New Orleans from Seattle. I remember waking up and this lady looking out of the window, looking at all these white icy lands. I believe that is Colorado Springs. It was beautiful but i was sitting at the aisle, i didn't get a really good look of it but i was too sleepy as well to stay awake. Probably jet lag kicking in. I brought my Leica M8 that i acquired late last year for this trip. This is the start of my Leica adventure.

Upon landing New Orleans, it was already dark and it was cold about 7 degrees celsius, probably warm for some but me coming from an all day summer country, this is totally different. I forgot to bring my jacket which is annoying and only have a flannel shirt which is pretty much thin. I can see my breathe.

I've checked in at Loews hotel and i avoid myself going to sleep, it was just 7pm, i dont want to get jet lag, so i've decided to go to the nearest mall, the Riverwalk Outlet Mall. It was damn quiet. It was like nobody were there. As i explore the mall, there it was, the legendary Cafe Du Monde. Sweet! Its here in the mall. I thought i had to walk down to French Quarter which is 15 min walk from my hotel. Of course i had to get and try the famous Beignet.

And my first bite of the Beignet, i'm a believer. It was just out of the deep fryer , it's super hot and the butter melts inside. Combines with the powder icing sugar, it was amazing. Its best paired with coffee. At this moment i have yet taken out my Leica M8.

It was not until i reached Bourbon Street that i decided to get my M8 out of the bag and have a go. Bourbon street was similar to Vegas but less grander. Neon lights, long straight street, just like Downtown Vegas.

 M8 works well in black and white they say

 I think colors are fine too

 The 15mm is wide, i had to crop some pictures and still the M8 with its 10Mp is more than enough

 The M8 paired with the 15mm Voigtlander is sharp.

 I love taking pictures of alleys

 Huge Ass Beers!

 Another alley shot

Canal Street, edges of french quarter 

 There are lots of these guys, a dollar a block

Hop in a bar and enjoy some music

I think the M8 fared well in low light, most of the shots were in either 1/15s or 1/20s, the slowest i'd go was at 1/8s and i used max auto iso at iso 640. most of the pictures are pushed at an extra stop. Noisy sure as hell if you pixel peep but at normal view, it didn't really make the pictures unwatchable? Is that the word? Well what i'm trying to say is its fine. Print these at 4R 5R should come good. And these are at f4.5. A faster lens should perform well but then if you shoot wide open you had to deal with depth of field, which in my case, i did not have to worry as f4.5 is sharp by 1meter onwards. I used my M8 just like a point and shoot, i have to guess the composition as i dont have the external viewfinder, mostly shot at f4.5 and auto shutter.

Bourbon street is noisy and a tourist place, so people dont really mind me shooting away although i refrain myself from shooting a candid portrait as i dont want to cause a stir. This place is also full of hobos, they might not be comfortable of me taking their photos or at least they wanted me to tip them. Remember i said about New Orleans being dangerous and stuffs, forget what i said, this is just like any normal city, there will be trouble if you're looking for it otherwise you are safe. although a local did tell me not to stroll the city at night alone.

First few hours with my Leica M9 in 2015

I'm pumped up! Finally my Voigtlander lens is here. But bummer its not the 40mm because i like bokeh in my pictures, anyway its the 15mm super wide heliar, enough for testing both of my newly acquired Leicas. I've been waiting for these lenses for weeks now. My Leicas are there on the desk, sitting and waiting for the lens. Its odd that my 40mm has not yet arrived since thats the first lens i bought. These HK mail is weird. I hope its not lost though! To be honest i haven't tested my Leica M8, somehow i'm more excited with the Leica M9, maybe because it's younger and supposedly better than the M8 IQ wise but everyone said its the same except for the crop factor of the M8.

I bought the 15mm for my M8 because its the first Leica i bought so that it'll convert to 21mm or 24mm, i love a wide angle lens. i didn't expect to win the bid for my M9, if i knew i was crazy enough back then to get the M9, i should have not bought the M8. Oh well, its water under the bridge now. 24mm is wide enough for me, i never thought to go 15mm wide, but now with the full frame M9, i have a 15mm super wide angle lens.

With this tiny lens to go with the M9, it looks super awesome. For me the size is just right for the Leica M9. If only all Leica M mount lenses are this small. And this is the first time i brought the M9 out into the sunshine. Man, this thing is more sexier under the sun!

Holding the M9 feels solid. like a brick made of metal. Its unlike the Fuji X-Pro1, which kinda feel hollow. like theres a hole inside the body. but with that its lighter. The M9 is heavy but it's solid heavy, if you get what i mean. You hit someone on the head with a Fuji X-pro1, boom! concussion. You hit someone on the head with the M9, boom! dead!

Everyone on the internet cringed at the LCD screen of the Leica M9. That LCD is a joke. I couldn't agree more. It was so bad that it reminded me of the old school Nokia symbian phones of the early 2000s. It didn't serve the M9 justice. It is so bad that it cannot be use for chimping, previewing or checking for focus or camera shake, so bad that its better to just switch off the LCD or dont use it for review thus saving battery power. You have to treat the M9 just like you treat a film camera. Know you got it right after it is developed. The LCD is so poor it doesn't belong on a what used to be a $7000 camera. And it still doesnt belong now! You cant see the great IQ of the M9 on its LCD, you have to look it on your computer. Unlike Fuji X100S, what's on its LCD is what you probably get on your computer screen. Every time i took a shot with the M9 and i'm so used to chimping, i probably think i didn't nail the shot. Ok, it was that bad. Enough of the LCD. Lets talk about something else.

I have to say i got a great deal on the M9. I just check the shutter actuations and it was only 386 shutter count. I mean this camera is seldomly used. Probably a collector's camera. Dont know why it got sold but i believe in "your gain, my loss" kinda phrase. If you wanna check your M9 shutter actuations you have to check your EXIF data, maybe using the free EXIF Viewer for Mac, and check the imageuniqueid number. I could not get it using the built-in "get info" via Mac. Its in Base16, there'll be a lot of zeros, you have to convert it to Base10, just google for the converter, and then you'll got your shutter actuations. This is a link which i find useful on checking your shutter actuations. http://diglloyd.com/blog/2013/20130809_1-EXIF-info-shutter-actuations.html 

The shutter sound is awesome. It reminded me of film days. Like i said, i'm gonna treat the M9 just like a film camera. No chimping. Manual focus. Those are the days. The shutter is not so loud, not so quiet. But i think it's not so discreet though. If you try candidly taking a picture of the guy within 2 meters , i think he can hear you. unless it's a loud street or environment. That is why i really like the X100 series, it is silent.

Rangefinder focusing takes a little bit of getting used to but its fun. I love the experience. I love the simplicity or "i'm in charge" old school kinda thing, although i'm still slow at it. I'm super slow to be honest. Just now i'd try to take a picture of my friend while she posed, i think she posed for more than the comfortable posing time LOL. I was so focus trying to align the rangefinder square patch. I wish there was an autofocus button that i could use so that she dont have to pose that long haha. i'm still learning the system. pardon me lol.

The M9 looks awesome under the sun, i just wanna fondle it all day and all night long.

I'm a JPEG shooter and with the Leica M9 i try to shoot RAW. I've been shooting with both format DNG + Jpg fine, i'm trying to see if the JPG is good enough for me, i know RAW will be great but there's something in the JPG look that i just cant replicate with the RAW file. I know its my limited knowledge of processing RAW and using Lightroom. But after looking at both format, i think i'll stick with DNG (RAW). It preserved the shadow detail better. With the JPG, its kinda darker, more contrast but losing the shadow detail. shadow turns to black. and a little bit greenish too. but that could depend on the lens's coding. I've used the 16-18-21 coding for the 15mm voigtlander. I read around and 21mm elmarit 11134 was recommended. I've yet to try it.

Let's see some pictures right? I only used the M9 for few hours and there's only a few pictures that are worth showing, the others are just snapshots, testing exposures and such. Shooting with the M9 i found that it underexposed a bit. and again i'm not sure maybe its the coding of the lens. I was shooting outside under the sun and it underexposed. I had to bump the exposure in PP to a full stop. I'm still in testing phase and getting to know the camera, i might not get the exposure right yet. The metering i have to be honest is tricky, i'm so used to auto everything in Fujifilm and with its great metering i get most exposure right. But with the M9, if i shoot directly at a light source, of course everything turns dark except for the light itself. Its like spot metering but i honestly dont know what's the metering on the Leica but it feels like spot. so sensitive to bright light. but then again, i'm still getting familiar with the camera. Trying to take a picture of my kid with a bright window behind her, boom! Dark face, bright window. This is a manual camera, just like film. Prepare your Sunny 16 app.

So what its like shooting 15mm on a full frame?

So far my maths is Leica M9 + 15mm Voigtlander = Cyan corners + vignetting. 

This is RAW. Processed in Lightroom.

I don't mind so much of the vignetting. but the cyan corners on the left is worst.

and this is OOC. See how underexposed it is. Probably the lens coding. or maybe it's just the way it does exposure.

There's a program that can fix or reduce this cyan corners. Its called CornerFix. I haven't create my own profile (just take a picture of a white wall and let the program try to fix the cyan and vignetting).

That profile is used as a reference to fix all your cyan pictures. I found a 15mm profile online by someone in the leica forum and used it, here's the result.

Well, it didn't really fix mine, so i guess i need to create my own profile. It did remove the cyan but instead giving a yellow corners instead. I'll post the result of my own profile on another post. But if you search cornerfix on google, it did help a lot of users! Good for you CornerFix!

I've used auto ISO max at 640 and auto shutter, so i'm on aperture priority. Composing with the 15mm is way off. I had to guess the composition. There's no way to compose using the M9's viewfinder, i need a 15mm external viewfinder to compose correctly. The widest the Leica M9 viewfinder can go is 28mm. I set my photo review for 1s, just for checking composition. Thats the only use of the LCD although i felt disgust looking at the quality of the LCD. i was like eeeeeeeeeeeeeeekkkk! I mean i can go on spilling out my hate of the LCD but you have to tried it yourself. Beat yourself in the head if you say "The LCD's alright".

The menu is simple on the M9. Its brilliant. No mumbos jumbos to deal with. Just set it once and forget. Set and forget. Forget about it!...(imitate Robert DeNiro slang). 

One thing Leica did to the digital Ms is that they staying true to their traiditions, taking out the battery and SD card is like taking out the film in Leica film days. You have to unscrew the bottom plate of the Leica and take it off, its unlike modern digital cameras where there is a flip door for battery and SD card. I didn't mind Leica did this but some are irritated by it.

I've set my max iso at 640 because i read somewhere that its the best ISO to bump up in low light. I could have use ISO1250 but i chose not to. Its about something how sensor meters the light bla bla bla, there's a chart that go with it, i'm not going into the technical stuff or the science of it, i just wanna take pictures. i never understand it anyways and i didn't even try. Here's the science though if you're interested http://blog.kasson.com/?p=2724 . I didn't bother to read the whole thing, i just need to know that i just need to use ISO640, and bump it up in PP (post processing). By the way, thanks Jim Kasson for your research. I just realised there's like 16 part for that one particular topic.

The Voigtlander 15mm center is sharp. I'll post more pictures soon. I love wide angle. I dont have to take that many steps backward to get the whole picture. Although it will get distorted towards the edges. But thats the signature of wide angle.

I can take sharp images at 1/8sec with the M9. Its pretty incredible. No OIS and everything but the Leica M9 still take sharp pictures at slow shutter. Its amazing. The body is so rock solid that it's kinda stable and hard to shake. Of course your hands need to be extra steady. My friend used to say my hands are like a tripod or monopod because i can glide his GoPro videos like it was using a steadicam. So far indoor low light with max ISO640 is sufficient for me. I could pushed it in PP and i still get decent quality. 

So far i'm loving the IQ of this Leica M9. I am probably still in my honeymoon mode with the Leica, so everything is beautiful. Our Love is still blooming. Except for that LCD.

Random 35

Sometimes, i just have no idea what to rant about, but i have some pictures that i would like to post. Just to update the blog. ya know, its kind of like a diary to me. maybe in the future i can look back and read all the nonsense that i had written.

So i'm calling this new set "Random 35", just some random collection of pictures from my X100S.

Handheld, x100s, night shot wide open at f2, iso3200 at 1/25s

My first impressions on my Fujifilm X-pro1

So far.... So Good.... So What!... - Dave Mustaine

Fuji X-Pro1 18-55mm at 39mm 1/75s f/3.6 ISO3200

I know this is old news, right now its all about the new X-T1. The X-Pro1 is.... sort of forgotten. Everyone that i followed who used a Fuji in their professional work, they seem to all talked and upgraded to the new Fuji X-T1, no harm done, i would have but instead i chose to get the X-Pro1, for one reason only, the rangefinder looks..... and of course the great deal its on. Hahah...condemn me all you want but that's just me. i just love the looks. Maybe next time X-T1. I'll wait for your weather sealed lens bundled kit. 

I owned the X100S and i just loved the JPG files that i get from it. Great image quality, High ISO is so good, clean and the grain is just film like, so my standard IQ must equal or higher to the X100S and not lower, thats why i sold my Olympus as , to my eyes, its not on par with the X100S but maybe that is just me. 

So when i test fired my X-pro1, the files didnt look anything like my X100S. I was gutted. I thought the IQ should be the same. it must be the same. But after comparing images between the two fujis, i could see that the X100S is a stop cleaner and better. My X-Pro1 just seems to generate a lot of noise and looked washed out. Ever since i owned the Olympus i turned into a noise-pixel-peeper. Zooming in every pictures looking for noise level. Its not healthy. To my eyes, the X-pro1 files are similar to what i could get from my Olympus. and to be honest, the Olympus is a better camera feature-wise. I have a slight regret of selling my Olympus too soon. and its not helping seeing it everyday, making things worse, seeing my friend playing with its features, touch screen to take pictures and wifi abilities..... i'm screaming silently! lol.

So what is wrong with my X-Pro1? I thought i had a bad copy. It could be the old vs new X Trans sensor and the old vs new EXR II processor. I searched the internet and no one seems to mention about these two cameras. No one compared the IQ. They all said its the same IQ...... being a Fuji. But thats not what i'm seeing. I do found some words of encouragement from fellow blogger who said that the new Fujis are a tad better in terms of image quality. But still i find that hard to believe. I'm in denial. "The IQ should be the same", i said to myself. 

If i'm not making myself clear, here is a summary of my first impressions on my Fuji X-pro1.......

1 - I see DEAD Pixels. (Ok, so i assume this is normal, its only 3 out of millions. But how come i never came across this on my x100s and x-m1? .... maybe i wasnt pixel peeping back then)

2 - Its prone to HOT Pixels. (Yep, at higher ISOs, these white specks randomly appeared especially on shadows area, its like dandruff as i've always seen it on hairs but.... theres a but.... i've never seen this on my other Fujis)

3 - Its MORE noisier than my x100s. (I am making myself believe that this is due to the new processor on x100s which makes its files cleaner)

4 - The JPGs files have not so much "headroom". (I tend to underexposed a picture and upped the exposure one stop in post processing. This is fine with x100s but with my X-pro1 the hot pixels start to appear)

Is there a number 5? i'm not sure.... but all these problems only occur when i zoomed in at 100%. Its not nice being a pixel peeper. Where is thy joy? On standard view, the IQ is awesome, its what you would expect from a Fuji files. So how do i find the remedies that i mentioned above? .....Google is my friend.

a - All digital cameras have dead pixels, you were just not looking.... and mine have 3 dead pixels out of millions? ... it sure bugs the hell out of me but i just have to take it out of the equation. its not visible, unless i looked for it. thats why pixel peeping is bad, it takes out the joy out of photography.

b - To confirmed myself on the HOT pixels mentioned, i searched the internet for Fuji X-Pro1 and the X-E1 High ISOs pictures, since they shared the same sensor and processor and indeed the hot pixels are there too! Those white specks just appeared randomly especially at ISO3200 and onwards. I noticed that its less on RAW files. But since i'm a Jpg shooter, the HOT pixels are not so bad, its still not visible unless i zoomed in...... i can live with it. This also shows that the newer cameras, the x100s, XE2 and XT1 can handle the HOT pixels better.

c - Well noise is noise. I'm lucky that Fuji's grain are film-like. I also believe the newer technology in the X100S handles the noise better and produce better image quality. Look for lens modulation optimizer.

d - About it being not-so-much headroom, i just had to change my way of taking shots. i need to get the exposure just right... i mean thats the best way to take a shot anyway, the best/right exposure. Even if i have to upped the exposure in post processing, its only HOT pixels i have to deal with, which only a problem if you pixel peep or zoomed in at 100%. I mean, i'm not gonna print big canvas any day now... if i would i should have shot in RAW and get the exposure right!

I mean Phewww... i thought i had a bad copy. I'm just obsessed that it needs to be on par with my X100S. But then the X-Pro1 is older and used older technology. which in a way makes sense that X100S is better in every aspect. eg. IQ, faster AF

Like i said, all these problems only occur when i zoomed in 100% and in JPGs. The pizza shot above is fine to my eyes, no lighting involve except the house indoor lights .... thus the high ISO. I'm so used to seeing my x100s files, i find all other files inferior. In fact, i compared so many images of my X-pro1 to my X100S and found out that the X100S seems to used a lot of noise reduction in camera. .....How about that??...... I was too worried that my X-pro1 was inferior, in finding the weakness of my Xpro1, i exposed the weakness of my x100s, maybe not a weakness to some but it is using too much noise reduction. Sometimes i find the faces gets a little smooth and waxy. Now i'm on the lowest setting of my NR.

But thats the thing with my X-Pro1, I am more forgiving to it than i am with the Olympus. I dont know why and to be honest i think my EM10 is a better camera. Small, Fast and Grainy pictures... my X-pro1 only has grainy pictures, minus speed and size lol. 

So thats basically my first impressions, i have yet to put it through its paces, just some random shots and VSCO it to death. and i gotta say i'm liking those grainy pictures of the X-Pro1!

Focusing moving subjects..... at night!

To be honest i'm not really an experience photographer when it comes to tracking moving subjects although i have the "theories" embedded somewhere in my brain. One theory is to use Not-so-fast shutter speed or otherwise the subject looked static, not moving at all.

Last weekend, i had the pre wedding photoshoot session with the motorcycle and just for fun, i'm gonna take a picture of them riding the motorcycle. It was 10pm, low light, the roads are all lit with ambered/orange colored road lights which gonna look suck in the photos and i just have to rely on my cameras to do the work for me. Pre-focus, and continuos high speed shooting. Its gonna be an experiment. For this work, i kinda trust my Olympus for its high speed AF although i did give my X100S a fair chance, the Fuji did nailed it but as it was in different lighting situation, the rider's faces were a bit too much shadow, i prefered my Oly pics for this..... if i dont pixel peep. Most of the Olympus pictures were in the right lighting condition or at the right moments. And even Oly did not accurately nailed focus everytime. and of course these pictures look great if you're not zooming pixel peep style. 4x3 or even 8x10 should be fine without showing not so sharp faces.

Here's one from EM10. i used the olympus 25mm.

i adjusted the white balance and thanks to the filter fitted in front of the lens, i get the blue flare. (clapped hands....NOT)

Here's from X100S.

Forget the colors. Forget the white balance. Pictures like these i'd prefer to convert it into black and white. as you can see the girl's face has too much shadow. 

But the point is, 

the x100s is able to get in focus with moving subjects.....in low light too.

But for the above 2 pictures, i'd prefer Oly for its moments and composition.

Between Fuji and Olympus...

Okay,

This is an old age debate i've been having ever since i got the Olympus OMD EM10. From shooting with a Fuji system with stunning images quality to the small micro four third system of Olympus which is also praised all over the internet/world for its images quality. But i am still having second thoughts on Olympus. How did the world praises it so much that sometimes some would say the images quality is the same or even greater as the bigger size sensor of the Fuji? 

First off, i'm a totally JPEG only shooter, i like to shoot people, portraits, and candid plus street photography. Expression is more precious to me than a beautiful landscapes. With landscapes, you can come back to it twice, triple or more, to get a better light, better composition, better this and better that but not with expressions, that can only come once and its gone. Poof! Thats my type of photography, For me Out of Camera JPEG, the Fuji wins hands down. Something about the skin tones that the Olympus failed for me. I always read Olympus colors are the best and best this, best that.. but i think Fuji wins hands down. But salute Olympus for having a small sensor to produce a great image quality that can rival say, a crop Canon DSLR like a 700d. But people talking about Olympus being great than Fuji? That is just nonsense talk.

Or Maybe i should start shooting RAW with Olympus but that is just adding work for me. More hassle. With Fuji i can just shoot JPG and be done with it. If i want to edit the files, there are so much details in the Fuji's JPEG file.

Then there's the High ISO talk. Okay, noise is noise, grain is grain. But Olympus JPG files produce something what my friend like to call "a low JPG quality effect". There is just this black artifacts, or oversharpen kind of effect, that is always visible on skin tones. And it does not just affect the HIgh ISOs even at base ISO of 200, there's still that effect. i'll show you what i mean.

 Nothing is wrong with this pic.

OCD kicks in. Zoom in. See those black dots/spots on the face. This is ISO200.

 Nothing wrong with this one too.

 Zoom in and see those fingers, black spots/dots or smudges (i cant explain). i dont think its grain or noise. This is at ISO400.

Here's the Fuji. Shot with X-M1

OOC JPG. Look at it. There's little or no editing you can just print it or post it straight away.

Clean noise free at ISO400. 

There's maybe noise reduction in camera but still it doesnt look painted to me.

Let's try another Olympus picture.

I think this is not a bad one. 

 OMD EM10 at ISO500. Not bad not bad.

Ooooh mama. Ouch! What is those black spots-dots-smudges? i did not add grain here. Thats edited JPG.

Its just annoying. I hate looking at those black smudges (i dont know what its called). Its just annoying. I know its only visible if you zoom in and pixel peep but its just annoys me that its there if you wanna look. It probably matter if you do a lot of large prints which i dont but it still annoys the hell out of me that its there. it might be my OCD talking but its there. i would just zoom in and pixel peep and look at it and be frustrated about it. Gosh! But there's none of that effect with Fuji. I'm not bashing Olympus     (maybe i did a lil bit) but its just there.

 Well maybe thats just me being anal wanting the best, perfect and ultimate camera. but there's none. I can praise Fuji for all of their fine stunning images quality but the focusing is slow. Sometimes its painful to miss a shot just because my Fuji's aren't locking the focus. Thats where the Olympus win.

Olympus is speed king. If your photography needs speed then i would suggest Olympus.

Its been a while since i last use a Fuji, i've been shooting with Olympus (its the new toy!). But yesterday i get to used my X-M1 for the whole time and i did not zoom in pixel peep. Man, i just realised it was tiring to pixel peep. With the Olympus i pixel peep a lot! hohoho... but with Fuji, i dont have to. Clean noise free images and no black spots, dots artifacts. But i do miss shots because of Fuji's slow auto focus technology. Sometimes it focus quick only to get the focus box in red color which means it didnt focus right. Blarghh!

Since i am too picky over image quality but i still need the speed of Olympus, i guess i need to realise that i have to get that....

Fuji X-T1 !!!!

GAS alert!

Comparing ISO noise between Fuji X100S and Olympus OMD EM10

Okay,
First off, this is gonna be an apple and oranges comparison.
Some will say these are 2 different cameras but they both take pictures.
Coming from a straight Jpg shooter only, no RAW involve.
I just want to compare how Fuji and Olympus tackle ISO noise.
This is not even a high ISO test.
I always had in mind that Fuji is better than Olympus.
First sign showed me, Yes, its true Fuji is better.
But i always read online that some claimed Olympus is on par with Fuji.
Or at least, its negligible.
That i find it hard to swallow.
Is my OMD settings wrong? someone please shed a light...please.
The noise on my OMD pictures are too obvious to ignore, at least compared to a Fuji.
You see, i owned the Fujis first and then OMD second, so my view is coming from a Fuji ISO perspective. My eyes probably got used to Fuji's quality.
But everywhere i read on the internet claims OMD is on par with Fuji... did i say that already?
You see my disbelief?
It could be the complicated menu of the OMD or wrong settings or thats normal OMD ISO...
Maybe i need to shoot RAW but then i just want to shoot JPGs.
Fuji JPGs is awesome.
Based on my ISO findings of these two camera, it only matter if you print large.
Do you ever print your photos?
Well i do though mainly just normal 3Rs, 4Rs.
It didnt matter. The OMD will do just fine.
But there's always a corner in my mind that knowing the noise on the OMD makes me frustrated.
i just cant brush it off.
Knowing its there, it just unease you.
Its like having a dead pixel on your camera. You cant see it. But you know its there. And over time you'd know the location of the dead pixel everytime you look at your pictures.
I cant keep sliding the luminance noise slider all the time...everytime i import new OMD pictures.
And if you slides too much, you lose details and the skin tones will get smooth and painting like effect.
Some claim Fuji has noise reduction in camera which you cant turn off but hey, the picture is still awesome.
Enough me whining let show you photos already.
Exposure is different but i just wanna show you ISOs

The first photo is from OMD. OOC. Large SuperFine.

OMD EM10

Noise reduction AUTO

Noise Filter LOW

ISO400 

Can you see how grainy the skin tones? 

Its not the grain that really bothers me, its that over sharpen kinda effect noise that really really bothers me.

This is Fuji X100S. OOC

ISO500

There maybe noise reduction in camera here but at ISO500, this is just clean.

Excuse the exposure settings. These are OOC. i could brighten the OMD pic but lets just leave it like that.

So let me ask you Olympus OMD users.... is this noise normal? or i had my settings wrong?

Is there any way to improve my OMD Jpg settings?

I did read Olympus OMD sharpening could exaggerate the noise. i haven't fool around with that kind of settings yet. Mostly default except for the noise settings above.

Note: i also like the fact that i can easily get the look that i wanted with manually setting exposure quickly on my Fuji.(if you get what i meant. i dont know how to explain it). i dont have to adjust the flash brightness. Just play around with the shutter speed and ISO. There! Or maybe i already know my Fuji well. i'm already one with my Fuji, He's the one. Blue pill or Red pill. Down the rabbit hole. Oh sorry my mind wanders to the Matrix.