TonyS Posted December 7, 2015 Share #1 Posted December 7, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hey, everybody. I’m a M9 user, but upgraded to M type240 recently. But I just find the photos produced by M always a little bit “grey”. I used JPEG directly, but the shadow details is very very very bad, as well as highlight. I try to set menu, contrast, sharpness, saturation. But no better situation. Please forgive me my poor english, I’m afraid I can not describe it clearly. So I try to upload more pictures (normal EV, No PS) to show my concern. I need your help and want to know more about your M experiences. Is there something wrong with my M240 cmos? Or, just adjust settings, metering method? Or, no solution,this is M240? Thank you . Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/254090-m240-so-dark-so-grey/?do=findComment&comment=2944389'>More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 7, 2015 Posted December 7, 2015 Hi TonyS, Take a look here M240, so dark so grey.. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Peter Kilmister Posted December 7, 2015 Share #2 Posted December 7, 2015 2292528, Welcome to the forum. The simple answer is to set your M to take DNG (RAW) files and then develop them in Lightroom. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
keithlaban.co.uk Posted December 7, 2015 Share #3 Posted December 7, 2015 Your images look consistently underexposed. Check exposure compensation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonyS Posted December 7, 2015 Author Share #4 Posted December 7, 2015 2292528, Welcome to the forum. The simple answer is to set your M to take DNG (RAW) files and then develop them in Lightroom. Thank you, Mr Pkilmister. I will try to use DNG. Maybe it is quite different from M9. So the JPEGs taken by M are normally like this ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonyS Posted December 7, 2015 Author Share #5 Posted December 7, 2015 Your images look consistently underexposed. Check exposure compensation. Thank you, KeithL. But I set the EV as narmal, EV+0. Need to +0.3~1? sometimes really disaapointed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonyS Posted December 7, 2015 Author Share #6 Posted December 7, 2015 I find it is hard to make M240 just like M9, even use LR. When I use my M9, that's amazing, see these attached photos. Maybe I need to learn more. Anyone else here? Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/254090-m240-so-dark-so-grey/?do=findComment&comment=2944403'>More sharing options...
jaapv Posted December 7, 2015 Share #7 Posted December 7, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Wecome to the forum. I think it is a matter of two things. Firstly look at the way you expose your images, use the histogram. These are all underexposed. Secondly, you will have to have a look at your postprocessing. Use raw, Even some very basic adjustments of these small Internet JPGs give a different result: Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/254090-m240-so-dark-so-grey/?do=findComment&comment=2944404'>More sharing options...
Peter Kilmister Posted December 7, 2015 Share #8 Posted December 7, 2015 I only take DNGs. Some people take DNG and JPEG. It is all down to personal choice. Developing DNGs allows you to do whatever you want; colour, B&W, etc. Peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
keithlaban.co.uk Posted December 7, 2015 Share #9 Posted December 7, 2015 What exposure metering method are you using? Classic or advanced? Spot, Center-Weighted or Multi-Field? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonyS Posted December 7, 2015 Author Share #10 Posted December 7, 2015 What exposure metering method are you using? Classic or advanced? Spot, Center-Weighted or Multi-Field? Classic and Multi- Field. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonyS Posted December 7, 2015 Author Share #11 Posted December 7, 2015 I only take DNGs. Some people take DNG and JPEG. It is all down to personal choice. Developing DNGs allows you to do whatever you want; colour, B&W, etc. Peter Good to know. Thank you ~ I will try it keep two formats. BTW, DNG is really big size! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonyS Posted December 7, 2015 Author Share #12 Posted December 7, 2015 Wecome to the forum. I think it is a matter of two things. Firstly look at the way you expose your images, use the histogram. These are all underexposed. Secondly, you will have to have a look at your postprocessing. Use raw, Even some very basic adjustments of these small Internet JPGs give a different result: post-45595-0-35477900-1449490379.jpg post-45595-0-02312000-1449490380.jpg Thank you. It looks better now. My LR skills need to develp. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
keithlaban.co.uk Posted December 7, 2015 Share #13 Posted December 7, 2015 Do you mean that sometimes you use Classic and sometimes Multi-Field? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted December 7, 2015 Share #14 Posted December 7, 2015 I mostly use classic. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! . Mind you, this was done on small JPGs, using a second-rate laptop with an uncalibrated monitor. Even with the one-stop underexposure of these files (not a bad thing on the last one, it preserved the highlights) raw files properly processed would have been excellent, as they have been properly focused and composed. Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! . Mind you, this was done on small JPGs, using a second-rate laptop with an uncalibrated monitor. Even with the one-stop underexposure of these files (not a bad thing on the last one, it preserved the highlights) raw files properly processed would have been excellent, as they have been properly focused and composed. ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/254090-m240-so-dark-so-grey/?do=findComment&comment=2944413'>More sharing options...
keithlaban.co.uk Posted December 7, 2015 Share #15 Posted December 7, 2015 I too would be disappointed with those out of camera exposures regardless of whether I could process the files to improve the exposure. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmx_2 Posted December 7, 2015 Share #16 Posted December 7, 2015 I tend to use DNG+jpg, but I have no problem with the jpeg from the M240, actually I find them quite well. The reason I shot DNG+jpeg is that if I want to post processing I have more options with the DNG, but for my everyday casual use, the jpeg are absolutely fine.Here is an example directly from the camera: And with a little PP: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted December 7, 2015 Share #17 Posted December 7, 2015 KeithL, on 07 Dec 2015 - 14:01, said:I too would be disappointed with those out of camera exposures regardless of whether I could process the files to improve the exposure. Looking at your website, Keith, I rather doubt that those beautiful photographs are out-of-camera Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Kilmister Posted December 7, 2015 Share #18 Posted December 7, 2015 There are loads of helpful videos on YouTube that will help you learn how to use Lightroom. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Livingston Posted December 7, 2015 Share #19 Posted December 7, 2015 I use Classic almost exclusively. When I first saw your photographs I felt they were all underexposed and it seemed to me you must have been using an averaging metering system. For example, the picture with the chipboard backing is properly exposed, meaning that all the people in the photograph are very underexposed - too much emphasis on the background is making your exposure completely wrong. There are various settings for jpg in the 240 anyway... you can adjust for sharpness, colour and so on, so try different settings in the jpg menu... but these will only get you so far. Use DNG and you can correct for everything. Your M9 files look much too saturated in terms of colour too. If that is the look you like, then fine, but it isn't that real. The M is capable of exceptional colour accuracy. Most of the time it is simply a matter of getting used to it. DNG is absolutely the way to go, otherwise you are left with someone else's idea of the 'look' of your photo's... (thats what jpegs are, in effect) and that kind of defeats the purpose. It took me a while.. and it will have taken others a while too... so don't worry. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pedaes Posted December 7, 2015 Share #20 Posted December 7, 2015 Welcome to Forum. Either RAW or jpeg out of the camera should be better than this set. Try a set of 'bracketed' exposures to see if one gives a better output, and check the settings for this image compared to the standard shot. Try to keep framing for your test exposures the same as I find classic exposure mode very sensitive. Totally relying on post-processing is not the way to go as you will introduce a lot of noise in the shadow areas and introduce other artifacts, and if highlights are 'blown' there is no data to recover (although at the moment your M seems to be underexposing). As has been said by jaapv, the histogram is your friend. Your new M will produce results as good or better than your M9 - so don't be despondant! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.