Which do-it-all zoom lens?

[Markuswelder]

Here's a few more, taken at night. You can still see detail inside of buildings, read the signage on the shopfront banners etc. Much nicer looking to my eye than just blown out patches of white. But that's just me. They're far from technically perfect, but I'm happy that they look pretty much like what I actually saw.

• Panasonic - DC-S5
• 28.0-70.0 mm f/2.8
• 70.0 mm
• ƒ/2.8
• 1/400 sec
• Center-Weighted Average
• Auto exposure
• -0.7
• ISO 1600

• Panasonic - DC-S5
• 28 - 70mm F2.8 DG DN | Contemporary 021
• 28.0 mm
• ƒ/4
• 1/30 sec
• Pattern
• Auto exposure
• ISO 800

• Panasonic - DC-S5
• LUMIX S 18/F1.8
• 18.0 mm
• ƒ/2
• 1/15 sec
• Center-Weighted Average
• Auto exposure
• -0.7
• ISO 100

 

[Markuswelder]

I don't ALWAYS shoot under exposed, I look at the conditions and adjust exposure accordingly. Here's a few I've over exposed by up to 1 1/3 stops, because the lighting was pretty flat & even. Read the conditions, adjust exposure to suit what I want to capture.

• Panasonic - DC-S5
• 18.0 mm
• ƒ/10
• 1/125 sec
• Pattern
• Auto exposure
• 1
• ISO 100

• Panasonic - DC-S5
• LUMIX S 18/F1.8
• 18.0 mm
• ƒ/10
• 1/160 sec
• Pattern
• Auto exposure
• 1.3
• ISO 100

Out with my buddies (Excuse the soft, blurry looking patches here and there, was a bit of spray flying around getting all over my camera & lens. As well as me)

• Panasonic - DC-S5
• 18.0 mm
• ƒ/10
• 1/160 sec
• Pattern
• Auto exposure
• 1
• ISO 100

 

[Pete_W]

Yes, the S5 really does produce very flexible raw images and high iso is not a problem.

 

[Babylonia]

[ EDIT ] While I was preparing this post, a few new posts came along.
So some of the information in the newly posted images above seems to tie in with my explanation below.

Even in daylight I generally shoot 1/3-2/3 stop under exposed, just to protect the highlights a bit

I do recognise the idea of having more latitude in the highlights. By adding this correction, it do meet this idea more as for "JPG" output.
However using the RAW file output, by processing you do have much more latitude, to bring back the detail in highlights.

In cases of such big contrasts / dynamic range within a one exposure image, you absolutely have to discover the borders of the sensor possibilities
by what is possible to cover the full wide range, done by just one exposure.

So my way of exposure an image is "more to the right" - including the latitude of "RAW" data of an image already as a starting point.
So you do have more latitude "overall" as a base already to get better "blacks" / shadow detail - up to the utmost highlights.

More of this technique:

Exposing to the right - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Exposing to the Right Explained

Exposing to the right, or ETTR, is an approach to photography that is as helpful as it is controversial. On one hand, exposing to the right is yet another technique to remember while shooting, and it can potentially ruin your exposure if utilized incorrectly.

photographylife.com

Helpful in relation to it, histogram JPG versus RAW data:


Years back I was also intending to "under exposure" a little as a base setting. (Mostly my start was -1/3 EV ).
But often met problems at those shadow areas. By changing my workflow to "more to the right".
My overall quality has become better. (And of-course the most benefit by better sensor quality in first place and quality of software).

Today "mostly" I just start by "no" exposure compensation.
But of course there are also images where you do need some exposure compensation.

E.g. this example, I did use a +1/3 EV compensation.
Still (at about the borders) just "enough" highlight details of the daylight "outside" through the windows.

However not used a zoom lens:
Lumix S1R - Sigma 35mm F2 DG DN | Contemporary
1/50 sec - F 2.0 - ISO 1000

Most old "Beer house" - inn - cafe within the Netherlands. Since 1478
https://www.waagdoesburg.nl/en/

• Panasonic - DC-S1R
• Sigma 35mm F2 DG DN | C (L-Mount)
• 35.0 mm
• ƒ/2
• 1/50 sec
• Pattern
• Manual exposure
• 0.3
• ISO 1000

-

 

[Pete_W]

I like that beer house shot!

 

[Markuswelder]

[ EDIT ] While I was preparing this post, a few new posts came along.
So some of the information in the newly posted images above seems to tie in with my explanation below.


I do recognise the idea of having more latitude in the highlights. By adding this correction, it do meet this idea more as for "JPG" output.
However using the RAW file output, by processing you do have much more latitude, to bring back the detail in highlights.

In cases of such big contrasts / dynamic range within a one exposure image, you absolutely have to discover the borders of the sensor possibilities
by what is possible to cover the full wide range, done by just one exposure.

So my way of exposure an image is "more to the right" - including the latitude of "RAW" data of an image already as a starting point.
So you do have more latitude "overall" as a base already to get better "blacks" / shadow detail - up to the utmost highlights.

More of this technique:

Exposing to the right - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Exposing to the Right Explained

Exposing to the right, or ETTR, is an approach to photography that is as helpful as it is controversial. On one hand, exposing to the right is yet another technique to remember while shooting, and it can potentially ruin your exposure if utilized incorrectly.

photographylife.com

Helpful in relation to it, histogram JPG versus RAW data:


Years back I was also intending to "under exposure" a little as a base setting. (Mostly my start was -1/3 EV ).
But often met problems at those shadow areas. By changing my workflow to "more to the right".
My overall quality has become better. (And of-course the most benefit by better sensor quality in first place and quality of software).

Today "mostly" I just start by "no" exposure compensation.
But of course there are also images where you do need some exposure compensation.

E.g. this example, I did use a +1/3 EV compensation.
Still (at about the borders) just "enough" highlight details of the daylight "outside" through the windows.

However not used a zoom lens:
Lumix S1R - Sigma 35mm F2 DG DN | Contemporary
1/50 sec - F 2.0 - ISO 1000

Most old "Beer house" - inn - cafe within the Netherlands. Since 1478
https://www.waagdoesburg.nl/en/

View attachment 11628

-

Now go outside, at night, take some shots of moving subjects in the dark, with bright-ish backlight, and show us how you get on.

 

[Babylonia]

Now go outside, at night, take some shots of moving subjects in the dark, with bright-ish backlight, and show us how you get on.

Depends from the situation, and the intention what to achieve, by the subject.
Probably full manual exposure settings, and some test shots.

• Panasonic - DC-S1R
• 50mm F1.4 DG DN | Art 023
• 50.0 mm
• ƒ/4
• 1/8 sec
• Pattern
• Manual exposure
• 0.3
• ISO 800

-

 

[Markuswelder]

Huge difference. Your subject is a blurred silhouette at walking speed, a lot of mine are nicely focused, zipping past at 30km/hr, requiring F2.8 + higher shutter speed (I've not posted more here because it's a complete PITA to do so). The only way I'm getting that is raising the ISO, which in turn reduces Dynamic range. To minimise that, I underexpose by 2/3 of a stop, pull back the highlights and raise the shadows in post.
And that's all I'm going to say on the matter. I've tried it all, I use what works for me. I'm walking around, shooting auto ISO, minimum shutter speed, there's simply no time to fiddle around with test shots and shooting manual mode.

 

[Markuswelder]

I do like an Ultrawide for travel purposes Great fun to use, and that's what it's all about. Just got to be careful you don't get your toes run over

• Panasonic - DC-S5
• 18.0 mm
• ƒ/2.5
• 1/2500 sec
• Center-Weighted Average
• Auto exposure
• ISO 100

• Panasonic - DC-S5
• 18.0 mm
• ƒ/2.5
• 1/2500 sec
• Center-Weighted Average
• Auto exposure
• ISO 100

 

[RuleOfThirds]

Huge difference. Your subject is a blurred silhouette at walking speed, a lot of mine are nicely focused, zipping past at 30km/hr, requiring F2.8 + higher shutter speed (I've not posted more here because it's a complete PITA to do so). The only way I'm getting that is raising the ISO, which in turn reduces Dynamic range. To minimise that, I underexpose by 2/3 of a stop, pull back the highlights and raise the shadows in post.
And that's all I'm going to say on the matter. I've tried it all, I use what works for me. I'm walking around, shooting auto ISO, minimum shutter speed, there's simply no time to fiddle around with test shots and shooting manual mode.

There is also a camera metering mode “expose for the highlights”. Together with a +0.3 and shutter mode at 1/125 or 1/250 + auto ISO can get the most out the dynamic range I guess without fiddling. +1/3 or +2/3 is recoverable highlight with raw.

 

[Markuswelder]

There is also a camera metering mode “expose for the highlights”. Together with a +0.3 and shutter mode at 1/125 or 1/250 + auto ISO can get the most out the dynamic range I guess without fiddling. +1/3 or +2/3 is recoverable highlight with raw.

I'll keep saying it. It depends on the scene lighting. If you look at some of the other photos I posted, you'll see that I've added up to 1 & 1/3 stops of exposure compensation. Without blowing out highlights. Different lighting & all you'd have was a big white mess. You can't make a hard and fast rule to say you must overexpose by a certain amount. You simply can't. I've got my Zebras set at 105%, I use standard picture style as a compromise (natural gives closest results to unmolested raw data, but then the jpegs require a stack of work to be of any use) I over (or under) expose until the Zebras are flashing just a bit (depending on the scene), so I reckon I'm getting as much as I can out of the sensor. Through practical experience. Not theory, or listening to what some propellor head rattles on about trying to get Youtube hits. Trial and error. This is not my first rodeo. I've experimented with this on my Panasonic cameras going right back to my GX8, which I bought at release

 

[Babylonia]

Huge difference. Your subject is a blurred silhouette at walking speed, a lot of mine are nicely focused, zipping past at 30km/hr, requiring F2.8 + higher shutter speed...

Yes by this example, by purpose a blurred silhouette of a walking person.
(A visitor at an exhibition not to be recognised. However she had no problem with it when I spoke to her).
The person is not the main subject. (Check the bizarre subject itself).

You was asking for a "moving subject" in the dark, with bright-ish backlight. By coincidence I had such an example made in past.
Maybe not the example what your are looking for. But "that's me"

I "could" have chosen for a far more high ISO speed, several steps wider aperture opening, (three steps spare, to open to F1.4)
to increase the shutter speed, for a more "freezing" moving person. But that was not my goal by taking that particular picture.

Everybody do have another goal, insight and motivation in doing photography.
If there is any movement in the scene, I somehow want to reflect that movement also in the image itself.
So -if a moving person (or car) is the main subject,- I would rather choose "to track" a camera with a somewhat slower shutter speed
into the movement of the person (car), and blur the background in that movement. Then "freezing" the total image.

And yes, I agree that it comes down to practice and lots of "mileage" more than just theory.
-