High ISO M9/E

[menthel]

After a slightly surreal conversation with my wife it would seem that buying an M9 or E is on the cards. What I want to know is how is the high ISO performance? Do you have examples you could share? I know my lenses will be faster that my current DSLR (canon 7d) ones (mostly) and that I can use slower shutter speeds having shot at iso 1600 with my M6.

All input gratefully taken!

 

[benmacphoto]

Here is a shot from a friends M9 at 2500 ISO.
When properly exposed it produces good images.

 

[menthel]

Here is a shot from a friends M9 at 2500 ISO.
When properly exposed it produces good images.

Thanks for that. Anyone got any large, colour examples?

 

[Pioneer]

Ok, here is one at 1600. I don't usually try going higher than this though it probably can. Remember, there is so much more to life than high ISO performance. The M9 images are very nice at high or low ISO, but the fact that you can use such awesome lenses in such a small, handy, full-frame package is the real advantage of the M9. I have had mine for a little over three months and I am seriously considering selling my 5D, and I never thought I would do that.

 

[Ronald M]

Small size, superior lenses, and full fame is what it is all about.

If you want high ISO, close up or tele abilities, there are better cameras .

 

[icebear]

M9, ISO1600 :

 

[menthel]

Thanks all. I am well aware that it is what it is and want the rf experience and to use my lenses I have currently with it, otherwise I would just grab a 6D and be done with it. I do often shoot at higher iso's at present because of the nature of what I shoot when using my canon 7d. The 7d will stay because I love wildlife photography as well and obviously the M wouldn't cope too well with that!

It is just about real life examples to settle the mind before I go and try one, fall in love and splash the cash! 🙂

 

[theno23]

I haven't used any current Canons, but the M9 is *way* behind Nikon cameras at high ISO. If you're expecting something comparable you will be very disappointed IMHO.

You can get good results, but it's very hard to get right, and the latitude is extremely low.

In my experience the combination of high ISO, and relatively slow exposures is especially bad.

That said, at low ISO settings, even with fairly long exposures the quality is incredible.

If you're worried about high ISO, you should definitely wait for reviews of the new M - Leica have reported that high ISO performance much better, but we don't know how much yet: http://www.eoshd.com/content/9060/t...an-interview-with-leicas-jesko-von-oeynhausen

- Steve

 

[maitani]

I have no problems going up to 1600 with the M9, where I hesitate to go over 640 at the M8, both are great cameras, the M9 it's not a D3 or so, but if you use fast glass, you can handle anything with it, and dng raw's clean up superbly even at max iso (2500)

if you're after better hi iso, wait for the the new M, if you want above avarage hi-iso and that unique CCD 'magic,' there's nothing better than an M9 imo.

the Monochrome is a true hi-iso monster, a but it's 'monochrome'

best regards

 

[douglasf13]

Judging high ISO between cameras is difficult unless you shoot them in the same light/identical scene. I could probably make the M9 look cleaner at ISO 1600 than the D3, if I shot the M9 outside and the D3 in a closet.

Either way, if you output images from the M9 and 7D at the same size, you shouldn't see a major low light advantage with the 7D. If you use Lightroom, its NR works well with the M9. I've used the A900, NEX-5N, NEX-7 and X100 prior to the M9, and, when output or printed to the same size, I don't see the M9 at much disadvantage in low light.

You'd probably have to look at the 5DIII, D800, A99 to see much of an advantage at high ISO over the M9, and, according to DxO Mark, you're still only talking about around a stop and a half advantage.

 

[sevres_babylone]

I have an M9 which I use extensively for band photography in dim clubs. ISO 1600 is fine. Before going digital I used to shoot NPZ or Kodak's 800 films pushed one stop and shot at ISO 1250. ISO 1600 on the M9 is much better than either of those alternatives. (Note these were films 8 years ago, and doesn't take into account of newer films). I do use ISO 2500 when necessary, but don't believe the files are as good as I've seen from the Canon 5D and similar Nikons.

 

[bob338]

This is from my M9 with a Pre-ASPH 50mm Summilux at f1.4, ISO 2500 at 1/125th in the dark. I opened the exposure a little(1.13) bit in LR, de-saturated(-.13) and used Auto WB.
Not the best picture in the world, but definitely usable for me.


L1048653.jpg by lenses*for*sale, on Flickr

 

[jsrockit]

Cute picture Robert. However it shows me why I never used the M9 at 2500. I can see banding even in a small online photo. With cameras like todays DSLRs and even many mirrorless cameras, this scene would have been handled (without major effort) without any banding. I guess what happens is that the M9 is capable of decent high ISO in certain situations (i.e. ideal situations). CMOS based modern cameras handle many varieties of situations and can even handle underexposure at high ISOs. It takes a lot for many of the newer cameras to show banding. That said, the Sigma DP2m will show banding at 800 sometimes.

 

[menthel]

Thanks all. I actually went and played with an M9 today at red dot cameras in London (very helpful they were too!). 2500 is usable and Lightroom does deal with some of the noise, although as expected colours are muted and DR lost. However, up to 1600 the images are wonderful. I love the look of the images and the feel of the camera. The images have from my 50mm f1.5 have a similar feel in colour as they do in B&W with acros, smooth and detailed but with such a wonderful look and separation from the background. Decisions, decisions!


M9 test-27 by menthel, on Flickr

 

[menthel]

Well, I went and bought one, couldn't resist!

 

[swoop]

I'm sure I have plenty but I know for sure every photo in this blog post was taken at ISO 2500 with my M9. Noise reduction applied in Lightroom, resized to 640.

http://www.ken-m.com/b-sides/september-11th-2012.html

The M9 isn't the best high ISO camera. But 2500 is there when you need it and its not terrible. Noise reduction helps a lot especially the automated reduction applied by Lightroom. If you just opened up an image on your desktop it would look a lot worse. Also the rear LCD seriously uglifies your photos so its no indication of how the final image will look.

 

[umcelinho]

haven't owned an M9 or M-E, but having tried one and taken some sample shots at the shop at iso 1600 and above, I noticed image quality improves considerably if the color noise setting is around 25. iso 1600 is at par with the R-D1's, I think... which is good enough. above 1600 is profit, anyway, i rarely shoot above that even in low light: 1/30 at 1600 and f/1.4 is good enough for night time street lights. i'm still waiting for the M to come out and read some reviews, see some sample shots, but after these shots I took I felt the M9/M-E has a high iso performance that suits my needs already, just waiting for prices to drop or, if the M has a superb image quality that puts the M9 to shame, get one.

 

[rHytHm]

High iso isn't quite as good as the 7D imo but gurantee you'll love the camera.

 

[douglasf13]

There's also the whole thing about various SD cards causing banding in the M9 to consider.

 

[menthel]

Thanks all. I will keep an eye out as I use the camera.