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)

Sony A7S vs A6000 Indoor low light test UPDATED!

So i screwed up my previous comparison where i compare A7S HIGH ISO NR set to LOW and A6000 HIGH ISO NR set to OFF. Thats just plain stupid. bwahahaha. thats what happen when you do a rush job. By you i meant me!  😂

Anyway, i did another quick test aka rush job, the same settings like previous, A7S fitted with 55mm f1.8, A6000 fitted with 35mm f2.8 aka FF equivalent 52mm. I set the shutter speed to 1/60, aperture at 2.8, ISO varies depends on comparison. Now for both cameras i set the HIGH ISO NR to LOW. And these are JPEGS OOC except for ISO6400 i brighten in post at 2 stops and ISO128000 brighten in post at 1 stop.

 A6000 ISO6400, brighten in post 2 stops.

A7S ISO6400 brighten in post 2 stops

 A6000 ISO128000, brighten in post 1 stop

A7S ISO128000 brighten in post 1 stop

 A6000 ISO256000 OOC Untouched

A7S ISO256000 OOC Untouched

A7S still comes out better as expected. I like the grain structure of the A7S. Both cameras have color noise but its worst on the A6000 and the A6000 is smudgy as well. 

I blog more when i have time now i gotta go. duty calls!

ciao

Sony A7S vs A6000 Indoor low light test

*UPDATE*
"Apparently i had the Sony A6000 High ISO NR to OFF but the A7S is on LOW! Thats not a fair fight!! Instead of editing this post i'll just make a new post"

I am getting way ahead of myself.

Actually i wanted to do a quick first impression of my brand newly own Sony A7S... but to satisfy my pixel peeping OCDness, and to convince myself that the A7S is truly the king of low light as many netizens called it....i did a non scientific comparisons between Sony A7S and the Sony A6000..... fuck science. You wanna shoot charts n bricks go ahead....not gonna find it here.... bahahaha.

Anyway, long story short, after owning the A7S, there's a side of me keep telling me that Fuji can also take great pictures in low light, i mean of course they do duh, then whats the advantage of my Sony? why did i bought the A7S? Should have stayed the idea on buying Fuji. Reading reviews on countless blogs didnt help. Steve Huff compared it with Olympus EM1 mark ii and the results were kinda astounding for a micro four third sensor! Its almost on par. Then why the hell did i go with Sony?? Or is this just GAS talk? just because i already have the A7S, now i want the Fuji....fuck sakes GAS...

Anyway, enough crap talk, lets get to the comparison. Lets compare apples vs apples. No one apple is the same right? 😂 I did this comparison because,

1) i have pixel peeping OCD
2) To convince me that the A7S is truly great in low light
3) and because i happen to have two Sony bodies, namely the A7S and the A6000.

Lens fitted on A7S is 55mm 1.8 (I FRIKKIN LOVE THIS LENS) and on A6000 is 35mm 2.8 (I USED TO LOVE BUT AFTER 55mm NOT SO MUCH) , so FF equivalent is roughly the same focal length about 52mm. I set the aperture of both lens to f2.8 and shutter speed at 1/60. ISO varies depends on comparison. Everything OOC JPEGS. Noise Reduction LOW.

*UPDATE* (A7S HIGH ISO NR LOW vs A6000 OFF) Sorry this is what happen when i do a rush job!!

This is the level of darkness the eyes see. Not pitch black dark but still pretty dark for general photography.

 First the A6000, using ISO 25600 (Max ISO). Color noise is partying!

Here is the Sony A7S, same ISO 25600, Hmmm pretty darn impressive! There's noise of course but looks pretty clean (Useable). I think i satisfied my OCD. Yes A7S has that low light advantage.

But lets get real, normally people would stop at max ISO6400. For nowadays-camera this is the max usable highest ISO for a clean image.

Here's A6000, i brighten it in post by 2 stops to get the optimum exposure. Hmmmmm...

Here's Sony A7S. I brighten it 2 stops just like the A6000. Its definitely better than the A6000.

Here's for fun, Sony A7S ISO51200,

Thats still usable right? Yeah sure there's noise but look at the wordings on the lens, still look kinda sharp.

And a word about AF, i think both camera are pretty much the same speed. I didn't noticed who, what or which is slower or faster. They do hunt initially but once they locked focus, afterwards its just quick AF....(thats As Fuck) bahahahahahahah.... i meant Auto Focus....... or both. 😂

And that concludes my non scientific comparison.....

Ciao...

Torn between X100S or X-Pro1

I am heading to London later in the evening, and surely this long haul flight is gonna suck *$$. I love travelling but i hate the flying part. One, there's the long flight, crammed in a confined space, cant straighten your legs, and the elbow resting invasion. its either you or him, that get to rest their elbow on the elbow rest. i love the aisle but this time i got checked in the middle like sandwiches, sitting next to a stranger. I'm socially retard and i'm not good at making small talks. breaking the ice is worst. Two, there's that thing called turbulence. Man, i hate it when the plane trembles, shaking like you're in a cocktail shaker. Thats when you'll remember god. Oh please god, save me. Third, take offs and landings, especially take offs, my mind goes wild when the plane starts rising at 45 degree angle, the plane at full throttle against the wind, i hate my life for seeing that youtube video where the plane take offs and rise to an angle of 90 degree upwards (thats a straight line upwards) and goes round all the way till 180 and boom. i'm not sure if i was looking at a real plane or a big scale model that looked like the real thing. but still that thing look real as sh!t. and me being a worrier, i have a lot of negative things in my mind when flying.

Travelling to London plus Italy, is a photography opportunity, be it street, buildings, landscape and snapshot photography. and dont forget food photography! So which camera is the best? I have the x100s and the X-pro1 but bringing both is not an option. i dont want to lug 2 cameras for travelling. Just not my style. i love photography but i'm not really that 'serious' into it, what it really means is that i'm not about to bring a tripod, 2 cameras, few lenses, and do long exposure shots. Mostly i just get away with snapshots. I want to enjoy more on the travelling, exploring the city and the camera is just for recording the memories. I dont want it to be a burden. and i'm not about to sell a poster of the tower bridge or the tower of pisa. I just need one camera. The ultimate camera.

Both have their pros and cons. I've already decided to bring the X100S but i'm having second thoughts.  I prefer the JPEG images that i got out of it compare to the X-pro1. I found that there's more headroom for editing the X100S Jpegs. and its more punchy and contrasty compare to the X-pro1 but to be honest they're similar but x100s is better/cleaner. Speaking of cleaner thats also the cons of the X100S, the noise reduction is too aggressive at high ISOs. Skins would turn to plastic or wax. I love shooting low light and indoors, thats the worst light for taking pictures of humans with the X100s, ISO bumped up to 3200 - 6400 and humans turns to mannequins. I used to love Fuji skin rendering and when my eyes were 'open', it was actually the effect of aggressive noise reduction. i wish i could turn off the NR or turn off my NR 'eyes'. Maybe future firmwares but i doubt it, it seems that the NR is built into the sensor. Oh wait, they said RAW did not have this wax skin problem. I havent try it though.

The X-pro1 is much more versatile as the lens can zoom. i have the 18-55 kit lens. and its also one of the reason that i didnt want to bring it with me. its just too long. Not DSLR long, but its no compact too. I want a smaller camera, thats where the X100S shines. Its size being smaller than the X-pro1 makes it much easier to bring it anywhere. But since i acquire the Wide Converter Lens, it's always on the camera. and it adds a considerable amount of length. I love 28mm. Just nice wide angle. Really good for taking pictures of the city. More objects/subjects to fit in. But the size of the X100S is now similar to the X-pro1. Arghh. Choices, Choices.

If i remember correctly, the reason i bought the X-pro1 is for this planned trip and GAS. I have a love and hate relationship with this camera. I love it and then i hate it. I just recently used this camera for my evening coffee with friends. and i'm in love with it again. its like an old fling. Sometimes the feelings just comes back. LOL. I love how it feels good in my hands. But i also bought the WCL for my X100S for this trip. WCL is a much more recent purchase. and i love the versatility. 28mm? no problem. 35mm? perfect! But i have 3 batteries for the X-pro1, surely thats enough. I only have 2 for the x100s which i still doubt if its enough for a day. The battery life on the X100s sucks.

Looking at both cameras, i love how handsome the X-pro1 look and i kinda have a change of heart.
Sorry X100s.

You're still coming with me.

Below are photos taken from iphone4 OOC.

Almost similar in size but the X-pro1 is bigger. Sorry for that messy desk.

 X-pro1 is definitely longer and bigger

The WCL fitted to the X100S makes it similar in size to the X-pro1.
Choices, choices

I'm stopping by Dubai on the way to London, i might get myself a Ricoh GR.

Oooops.

I'm a sucker for presets.

I'm a sucker for Lightroom/Photoshop presets. Period. I'm just too lazy. One-click-boom. Thats why i love VSCO presets. They are so worth it. Recreate film looks, polaroid looks.... ya know, those vintage looks. But at the moment, i'm done with film looks, i got a bit tired of it. But thats today, maybe tomorrow i'm back into it. Right now, i'm into those contrasty but desaturated colors. I was actually looking for a tutorial on recreating that look when i stumbled upon free presets for Lightroom. See, i'm not that lazy, i want to learn on how to recreate those looks but instead i found presets thus diverted me from learning to just using the presets. Lazy over learning. Nice.

While browsing the internet, i found presets and tutorials but mostly free preset on creating gritty, grungy look, which is the look im into right now, some are really nice which made me search for more free presets all over the net. Who doesnt like free stuffs right?

While on the topic of grunge look, I also stumbled across a bloke named Dave Hill. Though his pictures are nice but not really my type, i mean i really like it but i'm not gonna use it all the time. and then there's the DRAGAN effect too. Based on my findings these free presets that tried to recreate the grunge, dave hill and dragan effect look are mostly pushing the sliders in lightroom to the max!

Highlights pushed to 100
Shadows pushed to 100
Blacks bring down to balance the look
Clarity pushed to, yes you guess it right, to 100. I love pushed clarity. Gave that painted look
Vibrance pushed to 100
Saturation pull to taste, -50, depends on how unsaturated look you're looking for.
Exposure to taste.

Some presets pushed the sharpness too hard, like 80, but for my taste i pulled a bit and just play around with it.

Let's use a sample image i've downloaded from Robin Wong EM10. I hope he don't mind. This are not my photo. It's Robin's.

Original File 

This is my Bleach Bypass look, i've edited from Lightroom's own bleach bypass preset 

 Not too forget, the "300" look, i found this lightroom preset on google

I called this my Wannabe Dave Hill look although i adjusted to my liking. I dont remember which preset i based this on. but i adjusted it to make it less painted effect.

*I based this on the Grunge preset i found on google*

Some may dig the look, some may not. Its for fun, sometimes i just want to push the files to never before land lols.

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.

Fuji X100S with Yongnuos stuffs...

Last weekend i had a pre-wedding photoshoot.
The couple suggested that they wanted a photo of them on a motorcycle.
I brought along my Yongnuos flash the yn560iii and its latest trigger rf603ii. I have to say last time doing this off camera shots are bloody expensive. A Canon speedlites alone can buy me about 4 or more Yongnuo's flash. And then the pocket wizard too cost more money. Yongnuo is cheap and it works as advertised. As long as you dont need TTL but although there are TTL models for the Canons and the Nikons, (not yet for other mirrorless cameras) but i like to use manual. so i'm in control. More power, less power, just bump it up or down. I gotta say i love these chinese products. Cheap and working although reliability is a mystery. So far none of them breaks.

Mine is a YN560iii flash which has a built in wireless and its pretty handy. You dont need a receiving trigger to put on its hot shoe. So no height added, just place it on a stand and ready to go. My trigger is the latest ones from Yongnuo, the RF603Cii, so far it works with all my camera, the x-m1, x100s and the omd em10.

Since i'm on Fuji mode so i took my X100s for the session. and it did not disappoint. Though there are few mislock focus pics but the ones that it nails, are so good. There's so much information in the Fuji Jpgs files for editing. Just a lil sliding in the lighroom basic settings sliders are fine.

Here is one from the session.

I used two flashes here, one is behind the motorcycle, my left about 10 o clock, to light up the background grafitti, you can see the tripod foot on picture left. Thats an easy fix. Either you crop or use the spot healing brush. I forgot to take a picture of the setup so i purposely shown the tripod foot. The 2nd flash is infront of the motorcycle, to my right, about my 1 or 2 o clock, facing directly on the couple. These flashes did not have softboxes on them, just the flash diffuser thats fitted on them. i dont remember the settings as i set them on manual. set to taste.
And then my favorite move, VSCO to death! Lol. I think ISO is about a 1000 and im confident what fuji can achieved. Nice clean files. Theres grain but its an okay grain. Unlike ones on Olympus. Too digital for my taste. Sorry Oly. I still love you but just not tonight.

I need, I want, the WCL-X100

With the recent announcements of a tele-conversion lens now officially available for the X100S, now i have the luxury of having a wide, normal and zoom lens in one great camera! There's the wide conversion lens already available which equivalent to 28mm focal length, not so much wide in my opinion but wider than the 35mm, would be great if it was 24mm wide, now thats a very much difference! And now the recently announced tele conversion, which will make it at 50mm focal length, great for tight crop portraits!

Which ultimately make me ONLY need to have one camera.
No more buying gears.
Just get these 2 conversion lenses and i'm covered.
Thats pretty much focal length that i need for my kind of photography.

I dont have to drool over the X-T1 or the bad ass X-pro1.
But GAS is GAS.
So many toys to own.
So much money not well spent.

After my previous post,
i do have a gut feeling that i'd be selling my Olympus OMD. GASP!
Its a great little camera, speed demon, great for candid photos but it just that my OCD will always kicks in. I will always pixel peep zooming in and out my OMD pictures. I'm just not happy with the noise that its JPEGs created. i know i'm crazy, i dont do large prints, its just that my OCD will always have that mindset that the OMD is not capable of doing very large prints. The noise is just not that clean to my eyes. i blame Fuji for that. Too fine quality. I might be wrong. Because i haven't prove it yet. But when will i be printing large banners for corporate ads? Right?? ironically, that picture of the x100s above is from my OMD EM10.

I still want to keep the Olympus but i'm no photographer pro. I dont make a living from photography, its still a hobby of mine, something i'm passionate about. i would love to go pro but yeahh ..not so at the moment.

Actually i'm out of my topic, suddenly the urge to rant is just stronger.
Actually i wanna talk about the WCL-X100.
I've been eyeing one on ebay, but i haven't pull the trigger.
I want it, i dont want it.
Next week, i want it. Next minute, i dont.
GAS is bad, but now after my OMD stint, i think i want to shoot Fuji exclusively.
I think i want the WCL and the new TCL................................. plus the X-T1 and the X-Pro1.
And be done with it.
Boom!

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.