Post your ISO 2500 Photos

T

tmfabian

I met a man once...
Local time
4:19 PM
Joined
Jun 24, 2007
Messages
672
Location
Naples, FL
View My Gallery
Ok, What started out as me just being curious of the limits you could push the m8 to in terms of high ISO has turned into an obsession of shooting at 2500 ISO...I love it and haven't shot on a lower ISO for this entire week.
Hopefully this thread will spark some truthfulness into the m8's high ISO capabilities rather than the rubbish that's been circulating around.

all shot at ISO 2500, PP in Lightroom.
L1005470.jpg



L1005521.jpg
 
Last edited:
Hello Thomas--

By the way, I really like the first shot. Lots of folks don't seem to have considered, in all their moaning about high iso noise, what pushed HP5 or Tri-X look like--blown out highlights, grain, gritty midtones--wonderful stuff. Here's another: iso 2500 - 1 2/3 ev/ 28mm Summicron @ f2.8. PP includes DXo Tri-X grain emulation.

Cheers,
Norm
 
quadtones said:
Hello Thomas--

By the way, I really like the first shot. Lots of folks don't seem to have considered, in all their moaning about high iso noise, what pushed HP5 or Tri-X look like--blown out highlights, grain, gritty midtones--wonderful stuff. Here's another: iso 2500 - 1 2/3 ev/ 28mm Summicron @ f2.8. PP includes DXo Tri-X grain emulation.

Cheers,
Norm
Click to expand...

Bah, computer crashed while editing my reply to this...something went screwy.

Anywho, Thanks...and yeah I love that gritty grainy look of pushed tri-x...heck lately i've been upping my concentration of rodinal to 1+25 and am less than gentle about agitating to bring out a little extra grit.

I'm curious...are your shots at 2500 with the extra 1+ stops or are you shooting at a lower iso and using the minus compensation to up it to 2500?

If it's the first one...WOW, you're really pushing the limits of the ISO capabilities....and nicely done.
 
Last edited:
Hello Thomas,

At ISO 2500 I get Jackson Pollock on a bad day. Even 1250 is pretty hopeless. I can't come even close to the low noise of your images. I'm a reasonably competent photographer and thus I'm approaching the conclusion there is something wrong with my M8.

I know a bad workman blames his tools, so before I incarcerate my M8 in Solms for the next several months, I'd be really grateful if you'd post one more of your excellent images and provide a full tech spec with it - all camera settings, ambient light conditions and the pp etc.

Then, if I can't reproduce the technical qualities of your image, I will be waving a damp hanky at the DHL ambulance taking my beloved M8 for intensive care in Solms.

Steve'
 
Speenth said:
Hello Thomas,

At ISO 2500 I get Jackson Pollock on a bad day. Even 1250 is pretty hopeless. I can't come even close to the low noise of your images. I'm a reasonably competent photographer and thus I'm approaching the conclusion there is something wrong with my M8.

I know a bad workman blames his tools, so before I incarcerate my M8 in Solms for the next several months, I'd be really grateful if you'd post one more of your excellent images and provide a full tech spec with it - all camera settings, ambient light conditions and the pp etc.

Then, if I can't reproduce the technical qualities of your image, I will be waving a damp hanky at the DHL ambulance taking my beloved M8 for intensive care in Solms.

Steve'
Click to expand...

Hmmm, I wouldn't be too worried. Firstly, these are not very large pictures and I'd be interested to see the results at a decent print size. Secondly, they are black and white so the colour noise has been converted to grain, which you can see clearly in Dunkin Donuts cup. This makes it more pleasing to the eye.

I have also rarely gotten any good results at iso2500 and my M8 is fine. I have got very good and useable results at 1250 but the key is the exposure has to be absolutely spot on.

LouisB
 
Last edited:
louisb said:
Hmmm, I wouldn't be too worried. Firstly, these are not very large pictures and I'd be interested to see the results at a decent print size. Secondly, they are black and white so the colour noise has been converted to grain, which you can see clearly in Dunkin Donuts cup. This makes it more pleasing to the eye.

I have also rarely gotten any good results at iso2500 and my M8 is fine. I have got very good and useable results at 1250 but the key is the exposure has to be absolutely spot on.

LouisB
Click to expand...

Thanks for this, your comments are reassuring, although rather confirm the common complaint about the M8's poor performance at high ISOs.

This is an interesting topic, because it demands a real understanding of the technicalities of the digital imaging system and operation of the (deceptively) simple M8. A great area for experimentation - it would be nice to see other forum members posting their high ISO successes (or failures).

Steve'
 
Hmm.. I'm curious about the statement regarding the exposure being spot on.

Can we not garner some exposure latitude by shooting in DNG?

I'm not saying you can blow your highlights out and still have a good photo but if you're just slightly off, can you not use the fact that you have shot in DNG to "help" you out in such a situation?

Cheers
Dave
 
dcsang said:
Hmm.. I'm curious about the statement regarding the exposure being spot on.

Can we not garner some exposure latitude by shooting in DNG?

I'm not saying you can blow your highlights out and still have a good photo but if you're just slightly off, can you not use the fact that you have shot in DNG to "help" you out in such a situation?

Cheers
Dave
Click to expand...

I'd assume that the situation is similar to my olympus e-3... At max ISO (2500 or 3200 equiv/3200 on the e-3) there is very little latitude without sacrificing the quality of the picture.

On the E-3, at 1600 and 3200, it's really important to get the exposure right on and as such the noise isn't distracting from the image. If it's underexposed I can say bye bye. I don't own an m8 but I'd say that it's the same. From observation, the E-3 and the M8 are very similar at high ISOs
 
quadtones said:
Hello Thomas--

By the way, I really like the first shot. Lots of folks don't seem to have considered, in all their moaning about high iso noise, what pushed HP5 or Tri-X look like--blown out highlights, grain, gritty midtones--wonderful stuff. Here's another: iso 2500 - 1 2/3 ev/ 28mm Summicron @ f2.8. PP includes DXo Tri-X grain emulation.

Cheers,
Norm
Click to expand...

Sadly digital has raised the expectations. That can be good or bad. 🙂
 
louisb said:
Hmmm, I wouldn't be too worried. Firstly, these are not very large pictures and I'd be interested to see the results at a decent print size. Secondly, they are black and white so the colour noise has been converted to grain, which you can see clearly in Dunkin Donuts cup. This makes it more pleasing to the eye.

LouisB
Click to expand...


Yes, You are right that these are small web sized images and they certainly don't give you the same experience as a full sized print but I can assure you that I have printed many of these and from monitor to printer some of the noise disappears further (which to be honest really ticked me off and I'm looking into grain emulators to add some grit back in)
While Color definitely shows nose significantly more than B&W, I have to just point out that this is still by far leaps and bounds above what a High ISO color Film will deliver.

L1005303.jpg
 
Last edited:
leicasniper said:
Another illusory ISO number. Take a spot reading of anything in the image that is actually properly exposed and then tell me what the effective ISO really is.
Click to expand...

Isn't that the case with all digital cameras though (that is, not just the M8)?
It was my understanding that all digital camera ISO values were merely "placeholders" or estimates.

Please correct me if I'm wrong on that.

Dave
 
I remember discussion some time ago about how to expose for high iso but can't seem to find it. Is it as simple as setting a -1 2/3 or so EV compensation?

LouisB mentions exposure must be spot-on. How do you achieve this? I have done this a lot with film-developer speed testing to arrive at an effective speed, which is 250 for my TriX-HC110 combo. Is this process in digital equivalent in that you 'determine' your effective film speed (EI), thus the exposure compensation? If I understand the math, a -1 1/3 exposure compensation places the EI at 6400 for an ISO 2500 setting.
This must be similar to film in that your exposure should be just enough to exposure shadows on the toe of the film curve to record the detail. Is this the same for the digital sensor or are we more concerned with the other end of the curve?

I'd like to experiment this weekend so any tips would be appreciated.
 
By way of comparison, HP5 at about 2500 exposure index. (I can delete this from this thread if you like)
 

Attachments

  • 0.jpg
    0.jpg
    26 KB · Views: 0
feenej said:
By way of comparison, HP5 at about 2500 exposure index. (I can delete this from this thread if you like)
Click to expand...

no no....in fact I would go so far as to ask you to post a larger image of that so that we can see and compare....it certainly doesn't hurt the conversation.
 
I'm by no means an expert in this area, but I agree the ISO has not changed, just the EI (I think). Just as in the case of TriX exposed at 250 does not change its ISO. My interest is how the sensor compares to film. It surly has a 'film-curve' analogous to film, and that curve must have toe and heal where detail is no longer recorded. With digital development of the raw file this curve can be modified significantly but still there has to be limits. The reality is I want a picture which meets my 'requirements'. That includes consideration of grain but for me, more importantly, it means my photo should match my visualization in regard to shadow and highlight detail. If this is recorded at both ends to my satisfaction, I can expand or compress the film curve to produce the desired print. I hate this technical stuff but am fascinated by it and wish I understood it better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom