Jump to content

Histogram strangeness

stolzy

By stolzy
in Fuji X-T2 / Fuji X-T20

 Share

Recommended Posts

stolzy Rookie

stolzy

Posted
Posted

I'm trying to shoot with ISO at native level and do the necessary amplification in post.
However, in many shooting situations this makes the viewfinder image too dark to compose.  To counter this I set 'Preview Exp' to off.  Now I can see the scene fine, but the histogram doesn't respond to changes in exposure.  It responds to changes in the scene, but not to changes in exposure.

Anyone have a clue?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Doug Pardee Enthusiast

Doug Pardee

Posted
Posted

Fuji derives the live-histogram from the viewfinder data. By turning off Preview Exp. in M Mode, the viewfinder and the histogram no longer reflect the (predicted) captured image. This isn't a problem with the usual usage of that option, which is flash photography, because the live-histogram isn't particularly useful in flash photography anyway.

There's little advantage in using too low an ISO. All that you gain is some highlight headroom, and you can achieve that with DR200 or DR400 without messing up your workflow so much. Doing amplification in post will increase posterization of gradients. And if you're shooting at ISO 200 when you should've been at 800 or above, you're going to have higher noise due to the dual conversion gain (quantum-to-analog) structure of the X-T2 sensor.

For best results, shoot at the highest ISO setting that gives you adequate highlight headroom (for a given shutter speed/aperture setting).

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
stolzy Rookie

stolzy

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Thanks for the reply.  On reflection it was a daft question since using the native ISO in low light conditions makes the histogram something of an irrelevance.

I like the idea of just using the native ISO and gaining all the available highlight headroom because you can't get back a blown highlight.  The camera DR is not relevant since I'm only shooting in RAW.  My own investigations suggest that amplifying in post is indistinguishable from increasing ISO in terms of noise and shadow gradation.  Which is only to be expected since the sensitivity of the sensor isn't changed by increasing the ISO just the in-camera amplification.

I like the highlight headroom and I like being able to choose a shutter seed free from the requirement to get the exposure 'correct' in the camera.

Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • thelostkiwi
      Looking for Full Frame lenses to adapt to GFX

      By thelostkiwi · Posted

      I also use a Nikon to GFX Fringer and it works very well.  24mm f/1.8 vignettes so best used on 35mm mode.  50mm f/1.8 covers the entire frame very well with no issues and is a superb little lens. 105mm Sigma vignettes slightly but is perfectly usable. 300 f/4 likewise the 105.  I have a 70-200 f/20+.8 incoming to test so will report back but I'm expecting a little vignetting.  Even in 35mm mode the image is still 60MP and if you're prepared to manually crop and correct you can get 80-90 MP images.  I also have a C/Y to GFX adapter.  The 24mm Sigma Superwide vignettes strongly. Ditto 28-80 Zeiss Sonnar. 80-200 f/4 Sonnar is perfectly usable. All work fine as 35mm mode lenses.  I also have an M42 adapter which I tried with the Carl Zeiss Jena 135mm f/3.5 with good results. 
    • Trevor R
      Image correction with GF20-35

      By Trevor R · Posted

      Thank you. I will research it.
    • jerryy
      Image correction with GF20-35

      By jerryy · Posted

      Ahh, the infamous brick wall photos… 😀 According to internet lore, if the dng converter does not properly apply the corrections, you can have it apply custom profiles that should work for you. How to do that is waaaaaay outside of this comment’s scope, but there are plenty of sites listed in the search engines that step you through the processes. Best wishes.
    • Trevor R
      Image correction with GF20-35

      By Trevor R · Posted

      Jerry Thank you very much. That is extremely helpful. It seems that the camera and the lens have the latest firmware update, so it appears that the corrections should be applied automatically. The lens arrived this afternoon and I took some quick test shots, in which the correct lens information appeared in the EXIF files, so that sounds good. I used Adobe DNG converter to convert the Raw (RAF) files, and then opened the DNG files and saved them in PSD format. However, with a beautiful, clear, cloudless blue sky, there were no lines near the edges to check if distortion had been corrected. Another day I plan to photograph a brick wall. Thank you for your help.
    • jerryy
      Image correction with GF20-35

      By jerryy · Posted

      Typically you need to make sure the lens is compatible with the camera, i.e. check the lens compatibility charts for your camera, then make sure the respective firmwares are updated so older issues are resolved. After that, each lens has a manufacturer’s profile which will be embedded into the raw file meta data for the images captured using that lens. From there, it is up to the raw conversion software to apply the lens correction to the image. Different converters do that differently, some automatically, some only if a setting is turned on. For in-camera jpegs, the on-board converter does the corrections automatically, assuming the camera recognizes the lens, it applies a generic profile otherwise. I do not know if that can be turned off or not.
×
×
  • Create New...