comparison

Ok, bear with me while I do some explaining. The process I followed was to set the Fuji to "Acros+R filter" and the Ricoh to "HiBw" for shooting. There was no exposure compensation set, ISO was set similarly to auto on both cameras and metering set to spot. I didn't move between each shot...

Got one of those swell sunsets today, so grabbed what was available in the vinicity and popped out on the deck: Shot with the E-M5MkIII and the 12-45 Pro Shot with the E-M10MkIV and a 14-42EZ Shot with the Pen E-PL7 and another 14-42EZ. All pictures have gotten the LR one button auto...

Is Windows 10 and 11 as stable as Mac Os?

First 3 worth posting from the new-to-me Z7 II at one of my typical locations. Thinking I might go back, shoot again, and take comparison shots with my Olympus gear.

I'm using the current Vision 2020 - Take 2 (AKA Vision 2022) to try and do some direct comparisons between the PL25mm and P20mm as I consider picking up the new Olympus 20mm f/1.4 Pro. I also have the P14mm so I might add a couple from that as well. I'm going to try and shoot both from the...

So I had time to have a little play today with the two cameras and the "Angel of Lens Testing" - this is a memorial statue in the Holy Trinity churchyard in Guildford. Both cameras were set identically - aperture priority at f2.8, Vivid, with focus on the face of the statue. I focused and...

Just had to find out what all the fuss was about the Olympus 12-100 f4 Pro lens, so I rented one to compare with my Lumix 12-60 f3.5-5.6 and my Lumix 45-175 f4-5.6. Now, both my Lumix lenses possess extremely good IQ, but I didn't expect them to be as good, if not better than the Oly 12-100...

RX 10 IV at 600: OLy 75-300: M1, Oly 14-150 II: At 1200 (2x digital zoom): Rx10: M1 with 75-300: Cheers, Jock

So far it’s not too huge to keep me from wanting. The price tag may be though. https://www.fujirumors.com/fujinon-xf-50mm-f-1-0-accurate-size-comparison-with-xf-56mm-f-1-2-and-xf-50mm-f-2/

This comparison is based on only one photo shot on each camera as I'm crazy busy these days, as much as I could to make a fair comparison regarding the 3D pop, the vibe, the micro contrast or tonality as some may call it, I believed the lower density, bigger pixels helps to make more vibrant...

If I want an infrared image to be B&W I always process from RAW. However, I set my IR camera to RAW + jpg and use a B&W camera preset. The only reason for this is that the viewfinder is easier to see in B&W than the mostly red IR version. The sooc images below are just for interest.

The 5 RAW images in the previous post are processed as follows: 1. In Adobe Camera Raw apply a pre-prepared camera profile which is based on a custom IR white balance. 2. In ACR use the eyedropper to set local WB from a neutral area. 3. In PS use the Channel Mixer to swap the Red and Blue...

As I've mentioned I own a full spectrum converted infrared camera so it 'sees' most of the ultraviolet and infrared range of light (deliberately blocked in a normal camera) as well as the visible spectrum. You can limit this to parts of the visible + infrared spectrum by using external filters...

This was an interesting read comparing all the major camera systems pricing for a kit a professional photographer would put together. https://petapixel.com/2019/03/08/how-much-a-full-pro-camera-and-lens-set-costs-for-each-brand/

Yes, the E-P3 is small, but not riduculously so and the kit zoom is nicely balances the body.