Built In ND filter Versus Screw On Variable Filetr

[MarkChap]

When considering buying the new Olympus E-M1 MkIII, one thing I searched for and couldn't really find was direct comparison images between the built in (electronic) ND filter of the Olympus E-M1 MkIII, E-M1X and regular ND filter
So after purchase I had the chance to do just that

The process was about a direct comparison of same subject, same day, same time
These images are not edited, the process was not about how well images could be processed so please don't make it about that. There is a slight WB shift in some of teh images, but again nothing that is worth losing sleep over

Shot with Olympus OM-D E-M1 MkIII - Olympus 12-100mm f4.0 Pro Lens - Screw on ND filter was a cheapie E-Bay Job

http://mchap.com/linked/2020/test/1-2second.jpg

http://mchap.com/linked/2020/test/1second.jpg

http://mchap.com/linked/2020/test/2second.jpg

[Glenda]

I do like the idea of having such a feature in camera, one less thing to carry and weight is definitely why I'm going to move to mirrorless. Looking at the falls the blur achieved by both methods seems similar but I think the filter has controlled highlights on the rocks a little better. I'm assuming the colour in the water is more natural in the without filter images, but as I prefer warm images I prefer the warmer tones in the surrounds in the with filter images but this would be easily achieved in PP. I did buy the EM 10 mark ii a while ago and find myself enjoying lots of the features in the Olympus, especially since I learned that I can change how the lens zooms to match the direction of my Nikon. I was leaning more towards the 5 mark iii but had to go to Bundy a month ago so had a look at the 5 mark iii and 1 mark ii with the 12-40 pro attached (a lens I already own) and the EM1 definitely felt more balanced in my hand. Now to save my money and wait for another good special :nod:

[Burma]

Thanks for this. I’m about to upgrade to this camera from the first EM1 and was very interested in this feature so I appreciate this comparison. It’s extraordinary that there is so little difference apart from, as you say, white balance.

[tandeejay]

When using the in-camera LiveND option, are you able to photograph in RAW? (that is, is it a function that applies a process to the raw to give a filtered jpg version? or is it something applied in the optics so that the raw image contains the filtered info?)

[MarkChap]

It is electronic, not optical, so can be applied to any lens you have on the camera

You get a single .ORF raw file


When using the in-camera LiveND option, are you able to photograph in RAW? (that is, is it a function that applies a process to the raw to give a filtered jpg version? or is it something applied in the optics so that the raw image contains the filtered info?)

[arthurking83]

I recently had a quick peek about this feature .. it piqued my interest! :p

Seems multiple images are taken, processed and a single raw file is output.
IQ in the images shown Mark, look very good for a multi shot blended image.

I assumed that the softwareyness of the idea behind the feature may have been something like extended lower ISO values.
In those lower than native ISO settings, what the camera makers actually do is capture the image at the base ISO, then apply an exposure compensation appropriate to the lo ISO requirement.

eg. say lowest native ISO on camera is 200, and the camera has a Lo1 setting that is -1 EV below that, the reason it's not called ISO100 is that it's not technically ISO100.
At this Lo1 ISO setting, camera is overexposed at ISO200 by +1Ev, and then in camera -1Ev is applied to give a psuedo ISO100 appropriate exposure.

So I was assuming that some nasty negative gain on ISO/exposure type operation may have been going on in camera to get a non hardware ND effect.
Multi shot seems like an interesting idea for it tho.

[MarkChap]

Arthur,
I think, but of course don't quote me, that have modified teh software application of their High Resolution Image process, I think Sony call it Pixel Shift, which effectively uses a slightly different part of teh sensor to take and combine several images to get one much higher resolution image,
The m4/3 is a 20 mp sensor, High Res image produces and equivalent 80 mp image, and works wonders for static subjects, it does however produce a similar effect to the ND option on moving, or partly moving scenes, although at a much higher resolution,

Olympus also have a feature called Live Composite, which is mainly used at longer shutter speeds, Star Trails, which basically captures a base image once, and then only records new light on the sensor, so you can have a 30 second base/foreground image, combined in a 3 hour star trail image, in camera

I think they have used/combined both of these technologies for Live ND

It is called Live ND and you can actually see the effect in the screen before you take the image