Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Revisiting LLO and Loving it !

S

Stewart Read

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 26, 2011
Messages
164
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Hi All

I have been experimenting with LLO OLPF - leaving it on the camera all the time and I am loving the results.

I am thinking LLO is my default OLPF unless I specifically need that extra highlight protection. I have had excellent results with STH too, but find the LLO is great for most of what I am doing. Did some dusk shots with LLO and they were 'silky' and very clean. Amazing.

Looking forward to receiving my Standard OLPF when they ship.
 
Me too! I feel much more comfortable knowing that you can expose for ISO 1600 and it still looks great without noise reduction.

One thing I have been wondering though, I know the skin tone OLPF is supposed to protect the highlights, but actually I don't see any physical reason why it would do that. Isn't what it is doing just boosting the mid tones with a curve so equal ISO's at different OLPF's look similar in brightness? And wouldn't that mean that if you expose the LLO for a stop higher ISO (let's say 1600 instead of 800, or similarly add one more stop ND filter) that you get similar highlight protection as the ST OLPF?

Please correct me if I'm wrong!
 
I've done my own testing, although looking at noise tests on YouTube is pointless because YouTube makes everything looks smooth and destroys detail.

I will probably end up leaving the LLO on, although I've been keeping the STH on up to this point. Swapping is just too annoying to constantly do on DSMC1.

I think the term "Skin Tone - Highlight" is misleading. The Skin Tones are slightly green instead of slightly orange (LLO). And the Highlights are apparently protected because of the reduced amount of light coming through the OLPF, which is logical, assuming the camera is just boosting the gamma curve (0.66 stops?) harder to get to certain ISOs. The roll-off difference appears very very slightly better on STH at the same clipping points.

I read "STH" as "Green, 0.66 stops noiser, No Orbs, No Red Dots"
I read "LLO" as "Orange, 0.66 stops cleaner, Orbs, Red Dots"

The green vs orange debate is pointless because BOTH OLPFs need adjusting for accurate color. I prefer a 0.66 stops cleaner image. I don't mind the orbs although I'd rather not see them. I haven't been forced into a shooting condition in which I had to use small apertures while pointing into flashlight/sun type sources, to get red dots.

Therefore, it's looking like LLO for me.
 
Aren't the orbs and red dots appearing when going up closer to and over apertures of T11? Who shoot something over that? There's very little stuff I know of that's shot under such circumstances.

I'm more interested in the standard OLPF. I don't mind much of the noise or the "orb" problems on the other OLPFs but I do mind the STH sharpness distortion that I pointed out in red discussions.
 
Great thing is everyone has their own preference - no right or wrong !
 
I guess we'll find out in 24 hours .... But (speculation) if the LLO on the Weapon Dragon has an extra stop of highlight DR ... does its highlight 'rentention' equate to the STH on Epic Dragon?

If the Weapon reduces the CMOS smear - we might end up with LLO Weapon ticking a number of people's boxes (if they can live with the orbs).

AJ
 
Ignacio Aguilar said:
P.S. As far as I know the LLO is 1.3 stops cleaner than STH, not 0.66 or 2/3 of a stop.
Click to expand...
I'm on my phone, so I haven't checked your vid yet, but I've analyzed the noise in my own testing and concluded it was 0.66 stops, even though word on the forum was 1-1.3 or something like that. Did you compare side by side?
 
I like using the skintone olpf for most things, use the low light olpf for night time exteriors or night scenes with available light has worked out pretty good, it's not that big of a deal to swap.. I too am looking forward to the "standard" olpf seems like a nice blending of the 2
 
Akin A said:
I'm on my phone, so I haven't checked your vid yet, but I've analyzed the noise in my own testing and concluded it was 0.66 stops, even though word on the forum was 1-1.3 or something like that. Did you compare side by side?
Click to expand...

I haven't performed a scientific test, but I'd say there's about 1 stop difference in noise.
 
I shoot at 2000 iso without problem with LLO, I wouldn't pass 800 when shooting STO for the same noise results (well not quite the same results as there are the red dots showing up with STO).
I've never shot a lens over T11. Even T11 is to high in my taste, I would go up to T8. So I'm not the orb type of guy. ;-)
But CMO smear is the biggest problem with LLO, I've seen it once.

Pat
 
I think you could expose an image so that a highlight is just clipping on one olpf, note the T stop, swich olpfs and repeat. The difference in T stops should tell you the difference in transmission between the two OLPFs. Since the sensor behind the OLPF is the same, the noise floor should move the same amount as the blow out, i.e. if it blows out at 320 ISO on skin tone and 800 iso on low light, the noise floor is also 1 1/3 stops lower with the low light olpf as well.

But, the channels might not balance the same since the skin tone cuts IR more aggressively, which I think explains the chroma noise being more red.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top