SL3 software

[Mangoj]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

How does this happen, please?  I take a scenic shot in quite dim light: my Olympus OM-1 with the Leica 8-18 lens takes the shot at f/4. and 1/125 sec, 200 ISO.  My SL3, with the 24-90mm lens takes the same scene at the same time, but takes the shot at f/4.,1/125 sec but 25000 ISO.  And, of course, the picture looks dull, fuzzy and awful with the SL3, but rather atmospheric with the Oly.  Go figure.  I can't.

[LD_50]

Set to manual mode and shoot with the same settings. View the photos and see if exposure is close. 

You may have exposure comp set high or ISO fixed high. Take out all the variables and shoot manual to test. 

Edited June 14 by LD_50

[MuseArt.co.za]

Uhm, that’s not the cameras fault, and why is it taking photos “for you?”…

Take control with manual exposure and take your own shots.

start by taking using the same exposure setting as the ones OM, and then compare the files. You can’t compare an image with 200iso to one with 25000 no matter what took it or why.

[jaapv]

And where does that ISO difference come from?  If you get a good exposure at f 4, 1/125 on ISO 200 it is completely impossible to shoot the same scene at ISO 25.000 and same exposure settings, and get anything but a totally blown-out mess. So I would suggest to start by setting ISO to manual and the camera to aperture priority. Then display the histogram in the EVF and correct by EV compensation to refine your exposure. 

[jaapv]

21 minutes ago, MuseArt.co.za said:

Uhm, that’s not the cameras fault, and why is it taking photos “for you?”…

Take control with manual exposure and take your own shots.

start by taking using the same exposure setting as the ones OM, and then compare the files. You can’t compare an image with 200iso to one with 25000 no matter what took it or why.

The confusion arises from the Internet trumpeting the ISO value as an exposure parameter. It is not. Exposure is the amount of light reaching the sensor by shutter speed and aperture. ISO is the amplification of the sensor output in the camera. 

[MuseArt.co.za]

2 hours ago, jaapv said:

The confusion arises from the Internet trumpeting the ISO value as an exposure parameter. It is not. Exposure is the amount of light reaching the sensor by shutter speed and aperture. ISO is the amplification of the sensor output in the camera. 

I was using the term exposure very loosely, but the person was trying to compare a crop sensor lower megapixel camera with a full frame 60mpx camera, and didn’t even state how he was comparing them, from all that we know he might be shooting in jpg and comparing the images on the back lcds of the cameras, who knows. So my suggestion was to simply expose the “images manually” as opposed to using some auto or priority mode and then comparing them. I’m not trying to make an argument about the relevance of ISO in digital sensors, I am very well aware of what it is thank you.

[Photoworks]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

take off the ND filter from the 29-90mm lens

[TVP]

The OM-1 is my main camera.  I have now added an SL3 as my high res camera when needed for certain scenarios.  I love the Olympus/OM system gear, especially the lenses.  There should be zero difference between the cameras in practical end use aside from what megapixels gain you.  (Aside from just exposure to match due to differences if you are truly trying to match depth of field.) The files should turn out rather similar.  I use mine interchangeably and with strobe in studio, and I've never had an issue.  Usually both cameras are at 400ISO, 1/200 shutter, and aperture is f/4 on the OM1 and F/8 on the leica and then I adjust my strobes up or down two stops and I get virtually identical images.  Actually it's amazing how well the OM-1 stacks up against high res systems.  I've always said, at 20-24mp... it is hard to beat the OM1 with the best lenses on it as a working tool.  They also have a fantastic tether solution.  At 60mp the leica has been amazing for certain key kinds of images like twilight exteriors and extremely details studio work.  It's breathtaking to be able to resolve the way the leica lenses do.  

The leica files are also amazing.  In practice I found the Leica at 1600 ISO is basically the OM1 at 200 ISO and they go up from there in terms of noise profile and general grain look in the image.  Both print extremely well from any standard ISO.  The OM1 can do things hand held that no other camera can compete with though.  Live ND is amazing, and ive been able to handhold 4 second shots and get usably sharp results.  It's pretty wild.  Also hand held brackets in low light with longer shutters and still have file registration is pretty amazing. 

[jaapv]

On 6/14/2025 at 1:24 PM, MuseArt.co.za said:

I was using the term exposure very loosely, but the person was trying to compare a crop sensor lower megapixel camera with a full frame 60mpx camera, and didn’t even state how he was comparing them, from all that we know he might be shooting in jpg and comparing the images on the back lcds of the cameras, who knows. So my suggestion was to simply expose the “images manually” as opposed to using some auto or priority mode and then comparing them. I’m not trying to make an argument about the relevance of ISO in digital sensors, I am very well aware of what it is thank you.

I was not reacting to your post but to the OP.