Fuji Dynamic range and hilight/shadow tone settings on X30

[Westender]

1. Dynamic range can be set to auto, 100, 200, or 400. Can someone help me understand (with a simple example) when and why I would use this variable setting? I've never had a camera with this variable setting.

2. Tone settings: for Shadows does a + setting make the shadows lighter or darker . . and for hilights does a + setting make the hilight lighter or darker.

Shooting scenario . . hiking in a forest on a sunny day, bright sky patches and shaded forested areas (high contrast) in the scene to be shot. Want to avoid blown out sky while at the same time catching as much detail as possible in the shaded areas.

 

[Adam Bonn]

You might get different opinions on this one!

I'll try and be brief, but it can get complicated!

The DR modes IMO best serve the jpegs from the camera, raw is effected by the DR settings, and IMO negatively, although perhaps less so on the latest (Xt2/XP2) cameras

DR100 = off
DR200 = 1 stop
DR400 = 2 stop

The DR expansion modes work by under exposing the shot (by 1 or 2 stops) then, FOR THE CAMERA'S SOOC Jpeg applying shadow/mid tone brightening after the shot is taken.

The complication is that you end up with a raw files that's 1 or 2 stops under exposed

This is further complicated by how your raw convertor of choice decides to handle a underexposed raw file... for example, it might decide to brighten it... which is the very antithesis of why you selected (say) DR400 in the first place

The max DR of your camera is base ISO, in terms of raw data, shooting at ISO 800 (which is needed for DR400 and ISO 400 for DR200) is truncating DR in your raw file

The newer Fujis, use a 100% "ISOless sensor" so theorectically, shooting a RAF at ISO800 then reducing the exposure in post by -2 EV, then lifting shadows to taste would work the same as shooting base ISO

But for me, I just shoot base ISO when ever I can!

If your primary concern is the SOOC jpegs, then DR expansion is actually very useful, enabling you to perform in camera, the type of tone mapping that RAW shooters do on their computer.

But you don't get any real control over how much tone mapping (pick either one or two stops)

The pre-XT2/XP2 cameras are not 100% ISOless, so there MIGHT be a small noise and resolution penalty to pay with pushing pre-ADC data in post.

If you're a jpeg shooter then I'd manually choose which DR mode, don't use auto

The scenario you describe, sounds like DR400 would be best... but I'm not there too see

Shadow tones

Minus values make the shadows lighter (positive values darker)

Highlight tones

Minus values make the highlights darker (positive values lighter)

Erm... that wasn't very brief was it?

 

[Lightmancer]

What he said.

The only thing I would add to Adam's quite comprehensive run-through is that I am primarily an SooC JPG shooter and I tend to leave DR at 100 on all cameras at all times. I do shoot raw+JPG and if I need to, even though I have Lightroom, I develop raw files using the in-camera converter.

 

[Westender]

You might get different opinions on this one!

I'll try and be brief, but it can get complicated!

The DR modes IMO best serve the jpegs from the camera, raw is effected by the DR settings, and IMO negatively, although perhaps less so on the latest (Xt2/XP2) cameras

DR100 = off
DR200 = 1 stop
DR400 = 2 stop

The DR expansion modes work by under exposing the shot (by 1 or 2 stops) then, FOR THE CAMERA'S SOOC Jpeg applying shadow/mid tone brightening after the shot is taken.

The complication is that you end up with a raw files that's 1 or 2 stops under exposed

This is further complicated by how your raw convertor of choice decides to handle a underexposed raw file... for example, it might decide to brighten it... which is the very antithesis of why you selected (say) DR400 in the first place

The max DR of your camera is base ISO, in terms of raw data, shooting at ISO 800 (which is needed for DR400 and ISO 400 for DR200) is truncating DR in your raw file

The newer Fujis, use a 100% "ISOless sensor" so theorectically, shooting a RAF at ISO800 then reducing the exposure in post by -2 EV, then lifting shadows to taste would work the same as shooting base ISO

But for me, I just shoot base ISO when ever I can!

If your primary concern is the SOOC jpegs, then DR expansion is actually very useful, enabling you to perform in camera, the type of tone mapping that RAW shooters do on their computer.

But you don't get any real control over how much tone mapping (pick either one or two stops)

The pre-XT2/XP2 cameras are not 100% ISOless, so there MIGHT be a small noise and resolution penalty to pay with pushing pre-ADC data in post.

If you're a jpeg shooter then I'd manually choose which DR mode, don't use auto

The scenario you describe, sounds like DR400 would be best... but I'm not there too see

Shadow tones

Minus values make the shadows lighter (positive values darker)

Highlight tones

Minus values make the highlights darker (positive values lighter)

Erm... that wasn't very brief was it?

LOL . . Not very brief but great answer Adam, thanks very much!

 

[Westender]

What he said.

The only thing I would add to Adam's quite comprehensive run-through is that I am primarily an SooC JPG shooter and I tend to leave DR at 100 on all cameras at all times. I do shoot raw+JPG and if I need to, even though I have Lightroom, I develop raw files using the in-camera converter.

Thanks Bill . . ok I found the RAW converter feature and tried a couple RAW shots and edits and saved the results . . seems to work fine. I'm a SOOC JPEG shooter too but usually end up doing some post-processing on the jpegs anyway . . so I guess I'm not really a SOOC shooter . . and perhaps I should just shoot RAW and post -process either in camera or out (I use Paintshop Pro X7). Question . . why do you use the in camera feature instead of Lightroom . . wouldn't it be better to see a larger version of the image on your computer screen when doing e developing?

 

[Adam Bonn]

LOL . . Not very brief but great answer Adam, thanks very much!

No problem

A couple of things missing from my answer...

You mention contrast, but high DR scenes full of detail can actually look a little flat... just sayin..

If you use the EV wheel on the camera, and dial it back until you're happy that the histogram isn't clipping highlights

Then the value from the wheel, eg -1 stop EV, will tell you how much DR headroom you need (in this case 1 stop) and you can chose you DR mode appropriately

 

[tonyturley]

I have never fully understood the best way to use the EXP COMP dial. If I get into a situation where I feel the meter isn't giving the best reading, I typically just adjust the shutter speed. I don't use the histogram at all. I get good results most of the time, but sometimes I feel my images could be better.

 

[flysurfer]

I have never fully understood the best way to use the EXP COMP dial.

It has no use in manual mode, so adjusting the shutter speed and/or aperture in mode M is basically doing what the compensation dial does in one of the AE modes.

 

[tonyturley]

It has no use in manual mode, so adjusting the shutter speed and/or aperture in mode M is basically doing what the compensation dial does in one of the AE modes.

Ah, got it. Thanks.

 

[Westender]

No problem

A couple of things missing from my answer...

You mention contrast, but high DR scenes full of detail can actually look a little flat... just sayin..

If you use the EV wheel on the camera, and dial it back until you're happy that the histogram isn't clipping highlights

Then the value from the wheel, eg -1 stop EV, will tell you how much DR headroom you need (in this case 1 stop) and you can chose you DR mode appropriately

Ah cleaver . . would have been forever before I figured that one out . . TY

 

[bartjeej]

Good explanation, apart from 2 paragraphs:

The max DR of your camera is base ISO, in terms of raw data, shooting at ISO 800 (which is needed for DR400 and ISO 400 for DR200) is truncating DR in your raw file

The newer Fujis, use a 100% "ISOless sensor" so theorectically, shooting a RAF at ISO800 then reducing the exposure in post by -2 EV, then lifting shadows to taste would work the same as shooting base ISO

Using DR200 or DR400 doesn't actually raise the sensor sensitivity to ISO 400 / 800; the camera just labels it as such.

What these DR modes attempt to do, is reduce the exposure to protect the highlights, and then boost the shadows to give them the correct brightness.

If the camera were to raise the actual sensor sensitivity to ISO 800 (increasing the exposure by 2 stops), it would need to reduce the exposure by 4 stops (using shutter speed or aperture) in order to protect the highlights - that would ofcourse be counterproductive.

So what the camera does instead, is keep the sensitivity at 200, and reduce the exposure (using shutter speed or aperture) by 2 stops. This reduces the image brightness by 2 stops, hopefully enough to protect the highlights. It then boosts the shadows by 2 stops, to bring those back to the correct brightness.

Since that shadow boosting creates extra noise in the shadow areas, the camera basically does some "expectation management" and changes the ISO label to 800, to make sure that users aren't disappointed by the amount of noise they see in the shadows. However, the sensor itself was still at ISO 200 for the shot, and the raw file should be the same as a regular ISO 200 shot with the exposure compensation dialed to -2.

Shooting a raw image at ISO 800 with -2 exposure compensation is just a waste of image quality, and might force you to use sub-optimal shutter speed or aperture to boot.

 

[Adam Bonn]

Good explanation, apart from 2 paragraphs:


Using DR200 or DR400 doesn't actually raise the sensor sensitivity to ISO 400 / 800; the camera just labels it as such.

What these DR modes attempt to do, is reduce the exposure to protect the highlights, and then boost the shadows to give them the correct brightness.

If the camera were to raise the actual sensor sensitivity to ISO 800 (increasing the exposure by 2 stops), it would need to reduce the exposure by 4 stops (using shutter speed or aperture) in order to protect the highlights - that would ofcourse be counterproductive.

So what the camera does instead, is keep the sensitivity at 200, and reduce the exposure (using shutter speed or aperture) by 2 stops. This reduces the image brightness by 2 stops, hopefully enough to protect the highlights. It then boosts the shadows by 2 stops, to bring those back to the correct brightness.

Since that shadow boosting creates extra noise in the shadow areas, the camera basically does some "expectation management" and changes the ISO label to 800, to make sure that users aren't disappointed by the amount of noise they see in the shadows. However, the sensor itself was still at ISO 200 for the shot, and the raw file should be the same as a regular ISO 200 shot with the exposure compensation dialed to -2.

Shooting a raw image at ISO 800 with -2 exposure compensation is just a waste of image quality, and might force you to use sub-optimal shutter speed or aperture to boot.

Hi,

Thanks for the kind words.

You haven't really got it quite right though.

The first thing to consider is how ISO actually works.

In a certain sense, no camera is actually capable of changing its ISO value.

Let's stick with Fuji values.

Your Fuji is (in a certain sense) ALWAYS set to ISO 200, even when you select 6400 or 12800

What happens when you raise the ISO value:

Is that the camera UNDERexposes the shot by the number of stops that apply to the value you've set with the ISO (400 = 1 stop / 800 = 2 stops / 1600 = 3 stops etc)

What happens then, is that the camera then artificially brightens (amplifies) the shot

It's like dragging the exposure slider in Lightroom (or whatever) - exactly the same principle - you get a GLOBAL brightening of the image

When you use the DR modes

The camera under exposes the shot by one (DR200) or two (DR400) stops, then applies a amplification push to the shadows/midtones

This is similar to raising the shadow slider in Lightroom, you're brightening the image, but NOT globally, just the shadows

The "problem" with using the DR modes is that this shadow push is absent from the RAF, it's only applied to the jpegs

So when you set (say) DR400 you get a jpeg with ISO200 highlights, but ISO 800 shadows

But you also get a RAF that has 2 stops less dynamic range - because the camera has underexposed it 2 stops GLOBALLY

To further complicate matters... different raw software handles the info that DR expansion was used in different ways, so the results of using DR can vary between raw convertors

Another complication is the "ISOless" (hate that term) sensor

If a sensor is truly ISOless, then yes - you can restore the lost data

But the pre X-Trans III sensors are NOT 100% ISOless, so when you attempt to restore luminance with a DR affected RAF, you end up amplifying pre-ADC SNR. Granted it's a small price to pay, but a price nevertheless.

RE your last paragraph:

Shooting a raw image at ISO 800 with -2 exposure compensation is just a waste of image quality, and might force you to use sub-optimal shutter speed or aperture to boot.

This is topsy turvy !!

If you think it through, shooting DR400/ISO800 with -2 stops of EV is actually negating the DR400 mode (on the raf anyway - you'll get some sort of weird high key jpeg ) - because you're restoring the exposure value to the base ISO of 200, the same is true if you shoot ISO800 with no DR400 mode.

And in the preceding paragraph, you've contradicted the later paragraph a bit

Since that shadow boosting creates extra noise in the shadow areas, the camera basically does some "expectation management" and changes the ISO label to 800, to make sure that users aren't disappointed by the amount of noise they see in the shadows. However, the sensor itself was still at ISO 200 for the shot, and the raw file should be the same as a regular ISO 200 shot with the exposure compensation dialed to -2.

The camera performs no "expectation management" - the camera doesn't lie and tell people it's ISO800 so that they don't get annoyed that the shot is noisy, it tells people it's ISO800, because it has pushed the shadows by 2 stops - just like 'real' (sic) ISO800

You're correct to say that "the raw file should be the same as a regular ISO 200 shot with the exposure compensation dialed to -2"

But this isn't exactly the same as DR400, this is the user deciding to underexpose by 2 stops, so that s/he can recover shadows/midtones to her/his taste in post, this is IMHO, a far better way to work because then you have the option to do as you please with the full quota of DR that base ISO offers, instead of starting with a file that's already truncated 2 stops by use of DR400 (or one stop with DR200)

Like I said... It theoretically matters less on the ISOless sensor because all amplification is conducted post ADC. But the ISOless sensor is a new addition to the Fuji world and the X cameras pre the XP/XT2 don't have this sensor.

Cheers!

 

[flysurfer]

The X30 works exactly like the X-Pro2 and X-T2 when it comes to DR and JPEG settings auch Shadow Tone and Highlight Tone. So you can read a lot about it in my respective books which are available in electronic versions. Links are in my signature, always enter XPERT40 for a 40% discount.

DR is a common topic, that's why I spend at least a dozen pages on it in every book. I also remember mentioning it in articles on ISOless photography, such as this one: ISOless Photography With the Fujifilm X-Series Not to mention my basic article on DR expansion from January 2013: How to Expand Dynamic Range - Fuji Rumors I also covered DR in my preview of the X-Pro2: First Look Review: Fujifilm X-Pro2 and I revisited it along with JPEG settings in my preview of the X-T2: First Look Review: Fujifilm X-T2

 

[bartjeej]

Hi,

Thanks for the kind words.

You haven't really got it quite right though.

The first thing to consider is how ISO actually works.

In a certain sense, no camera is actually capable of changing its ISO value.

Let's stick with Fuji values.

Your Fuji is (in a certain sense) ALWAYS set to ISO 200, even when you select 6400 or 12800

What happens when you raise the ISO value:

Is that the camera UNDERexposes the shot by the number of stops that apply to the value you've set with the ISO (400 = 1 stop / 800 = 2 stops / 1600 = 3 stops etc)

What happens then, is that the camera then artificially brightens (amplifies) the shot

It's like dragging the exposure slider in Lightroom (or whatever) - exactly the same principle - you get a GLOBAL brightening of the image

When you use the DR modes

The camera under exposes the shot by one (DR200) or two (DR400) stops, then applies a amplification push to the shadows/midtones

This is similar to raising the shadow slider in Lightroom, you're brightening the image, but NOT globally, just the shadows

The "problem" with using the DR modes is that this shadow push is absent from the RAF, it's only applied to the jpegs

So when you set (say) DR400 you get a jpeg with ISO200 highlights, but ISO 800 shadows

But you also get a RAF that has 2 stops less dynamic range - because the camera has underexposed it 2 stops GLOBALLY

To further complicate matters... different raw software handles the info that DR expansion was used in different ways, so the results of using DR can vary between raw convertors

Another complication is the "ISOless" (hate that term) sensor

If a sensor is truly ISOless, then yes - you can restore the lost data

But the pre X-Trans III sensors are NOT 100% ISOless, so when you attempt to restore luminance with a DR affected RAF, you end up amplifying pre-ADC SNR. Granted it's a small price to pay, but a price nevertheless.

Agree so far...

RE your last paragraph:

Shooting a raw image at ISO 800 with -2 exposure compensation is just a waste of image quality, and might force you to use sub-optimal shutter speed or aperture to boot.

This is topsy turvy !!

If you think it through, shooting DR400/ISO800 with -2 stops of EV is actually negating the DR400 mode (on the raf anyway - you'll get some sort of weird high key jpeg ) - because you're restoring the exposure value to the base ISO of 200, the same is true if you shoot ISO800 with no DR400 mode.

If the regular exposure is ISO200, f/2, 1/100 shutter speed,
An ISO800 / DR400 shot would be ISO800, f/2, 1/400 shutter speed, meaning only 1/4 of the photons reach the sensor. That's the price you pay for protecting those highlights.
An ISO800 / DR400 with -2 exposure compensation would be ISO800, f/2, 1/1600 shutter speed, meaning only 1/16 of the photons reach the sensor. That's going to be a fundamentally different image quality. So no, I don't agree that an ISO800 with -2 EC is only negating the DR400 mode. In fact, it would take an ISO800 with +2 EC to negate the DR400 mode, for the raf file.

And in the preceding paragraph, you've contradicted the later paragraph a bit

Since that shadow boosting creates extra noise in the shadow areas, the camera basically does some "expectation management" and changes the ISO label to 800, to make sure that users aren't disappointed by the amount of noise they see in the shadows. However, the sensor itself was still at ISO 200 for the shot, and the raw file should be the same as a regular ISO 200 shot with the exposure compensation dialed to -2.

As far as I can see, there's no contradiction here. Shooting at ISO200 with -2 EC makes sense.
Shooting at ISO800 with 0 EC makes sense.
Shooting at ISO800 with -2 EC makes no sense, as you're throwing away photons for no good reason.

 

[Adam Bonn]

I wouldn't shoot at 800 with -2 EV. Personally I try to keep my camera at 200 as much as possible

If you replicate the base ISO SS/A parameters with DR400/ISO800 you will get the same RAF exposure as a BASE ISO shot, if you do this with regular ISO800 you will not (because the DR modes cut out pre/post ADC amplification)

DR400 is ISO800 there is no expectation management where the camera labels ISO200 as 800

Conversely, if you import a ISO200 shot into LR and push it 5 stops, then LR says it's base ISO, but you've made it into the SNR pattern of a 6400 shot, but LR will still label it as 200, because that's what it was shot at.

Similarly, a DR400 shot IS ISO800, it has been underexposed 2 stops.. but it WAS shot at 800

Rico's articles on the subject are worth your time, also my own site features an article on this subject where I show the underexposure on the rafs by using Photo Ninja which can be set to ignore the meta data burnt into the raw file

I might not have explained myself very well here, there or anywhere but I'm comfortable with my understanding of this feature.

 

[Westender]

You might get different opinions on this one!

I'll try and be brief, but it can get complicated!

The DR modes IMO best serve the jpegs from the camera, raw is effected by the DR settings, and IMO negatively, although perhaps less so on the latest (Xt2/XP2) cameras

DR100 = off
DR200 = 1 stop
DR400 = 2 stop

The DR expansion modes work by under exposing the shot (by 1 or 2 stops) then, FOR THE CAMERA'S SOOC Jpeg applying shadow/mid tone brightening after the shot is taken.

The complication is that you end up with a raw files that's 1 or 2 stops under exposed

This is further complicated by how your raw convertor of choice decides to handle a underexposed raw file... for example, it might decide to brighten it... which is the very antithesis of why you selected (say) DR400 in the first place

The max DR of your camera is base ISO, in terms of raw data, shooting at ISO 800 (which is needed for DR400 and ISO 400 for DR200) is truncating DR in your raw file

The newer Fujis, use a 100% "ISOless sensor" so theorectically, shooting a RAF at ISO800 then reducing the exposure in post by -2 EV, then lifting shadows to taste would work the same as shooting base ISO

But for me, I just shoot base ISO when ever I can!

If your primary concern is the SOOC jpegs, then DR expansion is actually very useful, enabling you to perform in camera, the type of tone mapping that RAW shooters do on their computer.

But you don't get any real control over how much tone mapping (pick either one or two stops)

The pre-XT2/XP2 cameras are not 100% ISOless, so there MIGHT be a small noise and resolution penalty to pay with pushing pre-ADC data in post.

If you're a jpeg shooter then I'd manually choose which DR mode, don't use auto

The scenario you describe, sounds like DR400 would be best... but I'm not there too see

Shadow tones

Minus values make the shadows lighter (positive values darker)

Highlight tones

Minus values make the highlights darker (positive values lighter)

Erm... that wasn't very brief was it?

Adam . . my brain wants to associate the shadow/hilights tones settings with the DR settings. I.E. if DR400 under exposes globally by 2 stops and then boosts low and mid tones by 2 stops while leaving the hilights tones under exposed by 2 stops . . my brain wants me to believe I could achieve the same result by simply leaving the DR setting at DR100 and setting the hilights tones setting to -2. Test shots don't seem to support this . . so I must have a misunderstanding of how the tones settings work relative to the DR setting??? Appreciate your insight here. Thnx.

 

[Adam Bonn]

Adam . . my brain wants to associate the shadow/hilights tones settings with the DR settings. I.E. if DR400 under exposes globally by 2 stops and then boosts low and mid tones by 2 stops while leaving the hilights tones under exposed by 2 stops . . my brain wants me to believe I could achieve the same result by simply leaving the DR setting at DR100 and setting the hilights tones setting to -2. Test shots don't seem to support this . . so I must have a misunderstanding of how the tones settings work relative to the DR setting??? Appreciate your insight here. Thnx.

Conceptually that's accurate as the HL tones will make the highlights darker

It's just that the 2 whole stops 'gained' (sic) from using the DR modes is a lot, and minus two on the HL tone settings is not that much at all, so it's not nearly as noticeable as the DR modes

 

[Westender]

Thanks again Adam.

After some test shots (and observing what the shooting menu allows and doesn't allow with the X30) to specifically evaluate the effects of using DR100/200/400 and or HT/ST -2,-1,0,+1,+2 my real life testing found the following . . for the X30.

DR100 requires an ISO of 100 or higher. ISO 100 appears to be the base ISO for the X30.
DR200 requires an ISO of 200 or higher.
DR400 requires an ISO of 400 or higher.
HT and ST can be set to any level desired regardless of ISO or DR setting.

From same subject matter test shots (street scene with heavy evergreen tree background) taken one after another, changing 'only' ISO/DR from 100/100, 200/200, 400/400 I found very little observable change to the hilights (Adam refer'd to this) but for the darker and shadow areas ISO/DR 200 produced the lightest tones, while 100 appeared darker, and 400 produced the darkest shadow tones (while probably preserving hilights tones but that was hard to observe).
*** Edit: these results seemed odd, so today I did another set of test shots with a different scene and this time the DR settings effect on highlights was easily seen as they darkened from DR100-400. See test images below.

*** Focus/Exposure was on the dark green shrub.
- First image taken at ISO/DR100, HT & ST 0, note highlights burnt out on rocks and fence.
- Image two ISO/DR100 (same as 1st image), but HT -2, ST -1, note saved detail on rocks and fence.
** Note: images 1 & 2 were taken a half hour later than 3,4&5, note difference in shadows, might account for slight difference in exposures.
- Image three, same settings as image #2, included to show time of shot continuity with images 4&5. Excellent detail retained on rocks and fence (due to contrast I believe) but white on house completely blown out on histogram.
- Image four ISO/DR200, HT -2, ST -1, good highlight detail on rocks and fence, white on house darker than image #3 and less blown out on histogram.
- Image five, ISO/DR400, HT -2, ST -1, shows less detail on rocks & fence (due to less contrast I believe), white on house darkest with no blown out highlights showing on the histogram.

Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

A second set of the same subject matter, leaving ISO/DR at 100 and changing 'only' the HT and ST settings produced an observable, linear and predictable change to each image . . with hilights brightest at +2 progressing to darkest at -2, and shadows darkest at +2 progressing to lightest at -2.

Based on this testing, for my default set up I've decided to go with . . ISO/DR 100, HT -2, ST -1. I do a lot of outdoor shooting with bright skies and lots of forest shadow areas . . and my thinking is that this will produce the cleanest (ISO100) file, preserve hilights areas, and draw out detail from shadow areas.
*** Edit: I plan to stay with these default settings and shift the ISO/DR setting depending how severe the highlights appear to be.

*** The bottom line . . these settings can make a significant difference in jpeg files. While most of this can be done in post, I'm basically a jpeg shooter and like to get as close to a final image for my eye SOOC. I've used more of my time than I planned to on this, and maybe yours . . but I just wanted to understand these controls and how I could use them to my advantage .

Thanks to everyone for contributing to this thread . . I learned a lot . . and hope someone finds my little summary here helpful.