Is the OM-D E-M10 Mark II really brighter then the original E-M10?

Going to put my zoom lens on it, if it's brighter with that too, then I guess the answer is yes.

If it isn't, then the camera might say the wrong aperture for my YI lens. But I did change it to the highest aperture, and it was mostly black, f16 or something, 16 > 1.8.

Might be brighter, hard to tell. If the subject is close, I can use the lowest flash level, at f6.3 or whatever it's at.

Oh and the Tiffen filter doesn't do anything to the image on the new camera, so some auto setting was off with that on, on the old camera. Or the old camera doesn't like that filter.

It's also sharper then the YI lens. So I'll probably mostly use it from now on.

Not really a inside lens, probably intended for outside. Good thing I have a overkill flash. In the kitchen, it looks brighter. There's more light in there though.

You can get bokeh with the zoom lens, even at f6.3. Just move closer. In fact, I'll probably get bokeh all the time now, without trying. If you zoom in, you'll get bokeh too.

The only picture that isn't really better or worse then the YI, is the picture of the pitcher on the counter.

Look at the drive in the background, that's bokeh. Not as strong as the YI, but who cares.

YI 42.5mm
Olympus M. 40-150mm F4.0-5.6 R

Might not of been as close, as I was with the YI, but the YI is 42.5mm, the Olympus was at 40mm. Neither got the text on the stove sharp.

I'd have to take the picture stepped back farther with the YI for a better comparison.

How do you get everything in focus? Maybe with focus bracketing. Don't know if AfterShot Pro can combine em, don't think it can, maybe if there's a plugin to do it. You can use opensource software to do it.

If you don't care about strong bokeh, the Olympus is a better buy. It was $100 when I bought it. That is brand new. I did get the YI used for $100 or so. So it looks like I got two lenses for $200, instead of just the YI.

Tiffen 58mm UV Protection Filter

What does it do to contrast? See below.

Tiffen UV filter
No UV filter

Is that the contrast, or is the one with the filter brighter? Turning the flash down doesn't help much, or at least I don't think it does, did that yesterday.

The Tiffen UV filter was about $6, so I won't be sending it back. It's better then nothing. You can increase the contrast in AfterShot Pro.

The Olympus M. 40-150mm F4.0-5.6 R is a good lens, probably better outside, doesn't always want to focus inside. The Tiffen UV filter is good enough for $6, if you want to spend $20+ for one, be my guest. I did once. But I'm to cheap to do so again. Is Hoya better?

Fuck, I should of bought the Amazon, for the same price. I have one somewhere, the reviews say it doesn't affect the image quality. What lens is it on? Probably one of the manual ones, I don't use.

Hoya isn't cheap, so it's probably better.

I forgot Amazon made em. Didn't own any Tiffen ones though.

You might not need a UV filter. Just search Google for something related to UV filters. Apparently digital cameras already filter UV.

But it sounds like it should make the image darker, not brighter. So decrease the ISO? Or change the exposure? Changing the exposure on the RAW image, makes it mostly match the RAW image without the UV filter. Use Perfectly Clear, and it might match the JPG of the no UV filter. You need more contrast to match the JPG, even the no UV filter RAW doesn't match the JPG.