Interesting video displaying X-H1 approx 1 stop darker than sony A7iii at same iso

Previously we've discussed the "darker" image Fuji vs Canon at identical ISO settings. Max's video compared the exposure difference in video with the X-H1 and Sony A7iii.

Just an interesting video. So in this particular video the Sony at 800 ISO had similar exposure to a Fuji at iso 1250.

https://www.youtube.co​m/watch?v=xZ34wwnDPh0


I observed similar exposure differences when I compared my Canon with Fuji using studio lights in a room with no outside lighting.

Max is quite open minded when he does a comparison of gear regardless of brand.

Not an issue for me but it's still apparent that Fuji's iso seems possibly 3/4 to 1 stop darker than Sony or Canon (my personal testing/observation).

Was waiting for this to pop up here somewhere, as someone who works in the field and shoots both Sony [for video] and Fuji all I can say is this shows how pointless this kind of basic unscientific 'testing' is. Max I don't really think understands the Fuji profiles very well. All the testing I've done show the ISO value to be about the same as the Canon one, nothing like what he is trying to prove here. Anyone what any kind of experience working with cameras well know that what he is suggesting here is misleading, unfortunately there are plenty of people who hang on every word these guys say. Look go do the same in log and come back to me after you grade it.

Here's his next video: https://www.youtube.co​m/watch?v=Xm0g2B0JXt0

He mentions something about the Fuji he thinks is not as good as the Sony, he says you can adjust the Fuji to change the value to make it how he see would be right, then go on testing without making that change and continues to mention that difference, ?? Really. Also Fuji already Kaizen'd the firmware to further improve the video AF, more to come I sure there.

But if you are drawn in, the IBIS looks a lot smoother, a lot. But you see the shudder in the background on both cameras as he pans - wonder what shutter angle he's at... Least he mentions lenses as being part of the AF but then goes on to say Fuji are only producing video lenses now [as that might solve some problem] - Fuji's cine lenses don't have Autofocus... Really.

Kim if he had identical iso, aperture and shutter speed in video how is this unscientific?

Does a film preset skew exposure?

I just saw this vid as a new video. Max sounds reasonable.

Yes he should have shot in Log but not sure if that will effect sooc exposure. Does the film preset cook the files that much?? All I know is that using film preset really can be good enough for many casual applications . Not a big concern but for stills Fuji Raw files I had a darker exposure compared to canon in studio settings.... maybe 2/3 stop which isn’t a big deal.

Exposure is the luminance of any given tone(s) [colour] so of course it does. And who says what ISO is the right one anyway - definitely not you or me or Max, more than lightly it's the International Organization for Standardisation who allow various [five in total but three in all modern cameras] methods to measure that value, different make use different ones is all. If you went to film school and learnt the math about settings and exposure you soon get all this.

I really do love all these internet people who claim, avidly, that you should only shoot raw images and then go on about video and settings when shooting some profile or another and not raw, says a lot to me. I saw little to no difference in my own testing with Canon and Fuji - using the same lens in the same light. Plus the amount of backpedaling and complements he pays Fuji in the next video was funny, he must have been feeling the hurt.

AlanU wrote in post #18599812
Previously we've discussed the "darker" image Fuji vs Canon at identical ISO settings. Max's video compared the exposure difference in video with the X-H1 and Sony A7iii.

Just an interesting video. So in this particular video the Sony at 800 ISO had similar exposure to a Fuji at iso 1250.

https://www.youtube.co​m/watch?v=xZ34wwnDPh0


I observed similar exposure differences when I compared my Canon with Fuji using studio lights in a room with no outside lighting.

Max is quite open minded when he does a comparison of gear regardless of brand.

Not an issue for me but it's still apparent that Fuji's iso seems possibly 3/4 to 1 stop darker than Sony or Canon (my personal testing/observation).

Lol at this whole post.

Osa713 wrote in post #18600150
Lol at this whole post.

How so? Provoke research for some photogs that shoot more than one camera system?? Posting a video was not intending to raise hairs.

Since I shoot multiple systems I'm aware of the differences. I was just surprised that there was a difference of about 1 stop between Sony and Fuji. I saw about 2/3 to 1 stop with my Canon and Fuji files.

Not a real issue as there is no hard rule between the manufacturers following a "standard". A loyal fuji shooter would never know the difference.

Please help me understand.....So if Sony is approx iso 800 and Fuji is iso 1250 with identical exposure. Does this skew the impression that fuji shoots cleaner images at high iso? This is something that can be interpreted no?

Kim in the exposure triangle the only variable Max is changing is the "ISO" (presumptuous to think he's manipulating SS or aperture in such a simple experiment). I don't get how film school and theory will change the actual video results on this youtube feed by this simple test. Can a two different lenses have that much of an effect in results?

Lol at the idea someone made an unscientific video about one stop difference. I like some of Max’s videos but this one seems like he is reaching for content.

Getting lost in the technical details is not my thing, I feel like it doesn’t improve my photography and there are a tons of other things that I would watch videos on but whatever.

And you didn’t raise any hairs, I laughed at your post.

AlanU wrote in post #18600016
Does a film preset skew exposure?

Yes it can, that is where the following relates to...

Two Hot Shoes wrote in post #18600023
Exposure is the luminance of any given tone(s) [colour] so of course it does.

The theory would simply help you understand these things a bit better. Plus different cameras will convert the raw sensor data to the video preset that is compressing the file so you can view it. None of these cameras shoot raw for video so there will always be a trade off in colour/brightness. Look at how the DR settings on your Fuji work, despite how you set your settings your JPEG will be a different exposure to your raw at times.

I never even hinted that Max has different settings on the cameras. I would only presume that he would not have made such a simple mistake. It's much more than lenses that have an effect on exposure in a digital camera, the software and hardware also play a part as I outlined above. It's late here and I've a client meeting first thing but if you are curious you could look up how exposure is calculated and how that is implemented in a camera if you are interested, most people would find the math boring though.

Funny this, only recently I was asked to help out with a metering issue and given a few raw files from an X-T1 and a 5D3, once I equalised the images they looked exactly the same exposure & the histograms matched for the most part. Applying the math they then had [would have had] the same settings, One was darker exposed the the exif data showed the stop difference. When I made up for that stop of under exposure they where the same in looks and settings. This was also my experience when I tested Fuji and Canon, all but makes no difference in ISO settings.

Here's a fun one from a YouTuber I've seen you reference on a few occasions. I have mixed opinions on Tony as well as just about any photography based channel, but this is funny how relevant it is to the topic at hand and just generally your constant stance on image quality between different cameras/lenses.

https://www.youtube.co​m/watch?v=MM7hAv86odw