Guest malland Posted July 12, 2007 Share #1 Posted July 12, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Shooting in RAW at ISO 800 with the D-Lux 3 usually doesn't have as good results as those from the Ricoh GR-D. In the following thread Maggie Osterberg is experimenting by shooting with the D-Lux 3 at ISO 200 with EV –2.0 and then pushing two stops by increasing exposure two stops in her raw developer. The results are promising. She is also going to try to shoot at ISO 400 and push 1 stop. I cannot try this now because I'm traveling and won't have access to my D-Lux 3 until I get back to Bangkok, but it would also be interesting to shoot at ISO 400 and push 2 two stops to get ISO 1600 because the latter speed is virtually unusable on the D-Lux 3 even in RAW. Have a look at the following thread for Maggie's first efforts (you need to start reading half-way down the thread): Flickr: Discussing D-Lux 3 and Ricoh GR-D vs Leica M6/Tri-X in Leica D-LUX 3 And here is a picture shot with the D-Lux 3 in RAW at ISO 800: —Mitch/Potomac, MD Flickr: Photos from Mitch Alland Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 12, 2007 Posted July 12, 2007 Hi Guest malland, Take a look here D-Lux 3 at ISO 800 by "pushing" ISO 200 two stops. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
rob_x2004 Posted July 12, 2007 Share #2 Posted July 12, 2007 Thought it would be a sensible option based on what you get out of the 80ISO (eighty) of the previous model. What are you looking to achieve? Usable shutter speed or are you looking for file to give you this grainly thing post processing that you talk about on your flickR Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest malland Posted July 12, 2007 Share #3 Posted July 12, 2007 ...What are you looking to achieve? Usable shutter speed or are you looking for file to give you this grainly thing post processing that you talk about on your flickRTrying to get usable shutter speed, in this case. Also, as ISO 1600 is virtually unusable, pushing ISO 400 might be a good solution. —Mitch/Potomac, MD Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob_x2004 Posted July 12, 2007 Share #4 Posted July 12, 2007 One thing, I know you cant on hte move, but for single images I will usually go back to manual mode, work off the display a bit. EV whatever readings then become superfluous. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ckthual Posted July 12, 2007 Share #5 Posted July 12, 2007 I'll try that ! Thanks for sharing... :-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ckthual Posted July 13, 2007 Share #6 Posted July 13, 2007 Hey Mitch that was a great idea you dug here ! I made a test at 1600iso / 400iso -2EV, I think it might interest you. The noise is nicer and you don't get that strange texture you usually see at 1600iso. See the results here : 1600 iso : 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! 400 iso -2EV : Thanks for sharing ! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! 400 iso -2EV : Thanks for sharing ! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/28797-d-lux-3-at-iso-800-by-pushing-iso-200-two-stops/?do=findComment&comment=305199'>More sharing options...
Guest malland Posted July 14, 2007 Share #7 Posted July 14, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hey Mitch that was a great idea you dug here !I made a test at 1600iso / 400iso -2EV, I think it might interest you. The noise is nicer and you don't get that strange texture you usually see at 1600iso. See the results here : 1600 iso : 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! 400 iso -2EV : Thanks for sharing ! Thanks. It actually makes ISO 1600 on the D-:ux 3 usuable! —Mitch/Potomac, MD Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stnami Posted July 14, 2007 Share #8 Posted July 14, 2007 ........... works well at 800iso on the GRD, thanks for the tip Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest malland Posted July 14, 2007 Share #9 Posted July 14, 2007 ........... works well at 800iso on the GRD, thanks for the tipIf you have the time could you post an example of ISO 800 pushed to 1600 or to 3200, either here, or maybe in the following thread: http://www.flickr.com/groups/32483649@N00/discuss/72157600328321649/ —Mitch/Potomac, MD Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stnami Posted July 14, 2007 Share #10 Posted July 14, 2007 800 at -2 ...................slight tweeks contrast as jpeg in LAB second one slight noise ninja last one RAW converted to jpeg no tweeking 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/28797-d-lux-3-at-iso-800-by-pushing-iso-200-two-stops/?do=findComment&comment=305642'>More sharing options...
Guest malland Posted July 14, 2007 Share #11 Posted July 14, 2007 Thanks. 800 at -2 ...................slight tweeks contrast as jpeg in LABActually, ISO 800 pushed two stops: that's ISO 3200 — fantasctic for a GR-D. I prefer the one without the Noise Ninja, don't you? —Mitch/Potomac, MD. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stnami Posted July 14, 2007 Share #12 Posted July 14, 2007 Mitch the subject must have some contrast, tried it with a flat wall and light ...pretty useless Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sebastian Posted July 15, 2007 Share #13 Posted July 15, 2007 This has to be the best thread since the early days of getting the best out of your Digilux 1. A true breakthrough in digital photography. I can't wait to try pushing my D-Lux 3... It had never occurred to me to try it. Dave Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stnami Posted July 16, 2007 Share #14 Posted July 16, 2007 I also tried the same with a D2, an Oly and a Canon and none of the results were as positive/dramatic as with small sensor cameras............... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest malland Posted July 16, 2007 Share #15 Posted July 16, 2007 Is that because at the highest ISOs the small-sensor cameras produce so much noise? —Mitch/Potomac, MD http://www.flickr.com/photos/10268776@N00/ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stnami Posted July 16, 2007 Share #16 Posted July 16, 2007 ...I don't know enough technical mumbo jumbo, but pushing ISO 200 with EV –2.0 on the canon didn't make the image greater in detail than shooting at 800 The results from the GRD are quite different Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maggie_O Posted July 16, 2007 Share #17 Posted July 16, 2007 Actually, ISO 800 pushed two stops: that's ISO 3200 — fantasctic for a GR-D. I prefer the one without the Noise Ninja, don't you? —Mitch/Potomac, MD. Those are pretty impressive results. I'm in agreement with Mitch, but I could see going with the Noise Ninja version for a client who wanted a softer look. BTW, what is "Noise Ninja?" A plug-in? Stand alone RAW processor? I've been using whatever Adobe puts in PS CS3. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest malland Posted July 17, 2007 Share #18 Posted July 17, 2007 Maggie: Noise Ninja is a noise reduction plugin for Photoshop. —Mitch/Potomac, MD Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
guy_bennett Posted July 17, 2007 Share #19 Posted July 17, 2007 Any ideas about whether this would give the same results with the Lumix? Anyone tried it? Sorry if this appears heretical in this forum. I'm considering one of these two cameras and am not sure whether I find the price difference justifiable. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stnami Posted July 17, 2007 Share #20 Posted July 17, 2007 Results were not as prounounced with the D2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.