whatmicah
Member
So while I was at PhotoPLUS this week I had a chance to check out the M8 for the first time (I live on an island!). The rep was telling me that the camera performs really well up to about 800 ISO, but I was wondering if anyone had any samples from higher ISO, and what you thought about the cameras performance from 800 and up...
-m
-m
johnastovall
Light Hunter - RIP 2010
Ben Z
Veteran
I've read that the ISO adjustment on a digital camera just ups the gain, like turning up the volume on a radio, and has the same effect of increasing noise along with volume. Someone suggested an alternate way, that is to just underexpose however many stops instead, and then correct the exposure in post processing (raw conversion I believe). The point was that the M8 is so good at picking up shadow detail that it is recoverable even if underexposed several stops. I tried it just once, with mixed results, but probably because I'm not very skilled at doing it. Would be curious to hear from someone who really knows how to do it, if it looks better than shooting @ high ISO and then fussing around with Noise Ninja and others.
furcafe
Veteran
I mostly use my M8 @ ISO 640 & up:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/furcafe/tags/leicam82006/
IME, M8 files do seem to hold quite a bit of detail in the shadows, but there's no free lunch. I've set my M8 to underexpose by 1/3rd of a stop & that seems to work OK for me most of the time, but sometimes a greater or lesser underexposure seems to work better.
Per my introductory sentence, I shoot in some pretty dark & challenging conditions & can often compare my files w/friends who are shooting the same events w/their 5D's, 20D's, D200's, etc. As far as noise is concerned, I would say that in my experience, the M8 is overall on par w/the D200 & the 20D (& mostly better than the Epson R-D1), but noticeably more noisy than the 5D, particularly @ ISO 1250 & higher. I think a lot depends on the type & temperature of the lighting, as each manufacturer's sensors seem to respond differently, but the bottom line for me is that the M8 does not really compete w/the full-frame Canons (&, from what I've seen, the new full-frame Nikon). If your standard of comparison is not full-frame Canon dSLRs, but rather high-speed C41 film, then the M8 is better (like most digitals) & it's 1 of the main reasons why I have 1. FWIW, I only shoot raw & generally use Noise Ninja @ moderate settings for any files shot @ 640 & above. I do wish the M8's auto white balance was better (like that on the R-D1) as that can definitely help w/on-the-fly adjustments.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/furcafe/tags/leicam82006/
IME, M8 files do seem to hold quite a bit of detail in the shadows, but there's no free lunch. I've set my M8 to underexpose by 1/3rd of a stop & that seems to work OK for me most of the time, but sometimes a greater or lesser underexposure seems to work better.
Per my introductory sentence, I shoot in some pretty dark & challenging conditions & can often compare my files w/friends who are shooting the same events w/their 5D's, 20D's, D200's, etc. As far as noise is concerned, I would say that in my experience, the M8 is overall on par w/the D200 & the 20D (& mostly better than the Epson R-D1), but noticeably more noisy than the 5D, particularly @ ISO 1250 & higher. I think a lot depends on the type & temperature of the lighting, as each manufacturer's sensors seem to respond differently, but the bottom line for me is that the M8 does not really compete w/the full-frame Canons (&, from what I've seen, the new full-frame Nikon). If your standard of comparison is not full-frame Canon dSLRs, but rather high-speed C41 film, then the M8 is better (like most digitals) & it's 1 of the main reasons why I have 1. FWIW, I only shoot raw & generally use Noise Ninja @ moderate settings for any files shot @ 640 & above. I do wish the M8's auto white balance was better (like that on the R-D1) as that can definitely help w/on-the-fly adjustments.
whatmicah said:
whatmicah
Member
furcafe,
the one with the little bit of banding/fringing looks like it was shot in pharmacy bar in dc.. am i right?
-micah
the one with the little bit of banding/fringing looks like it was shot in pharmacy bar in dc.. am i right?
-micah
furcafe
Veteran
Probably. Just look @ my tags.
whatmicah said:furcafe,
the one with the little bit of banding/fringing looks like it was shot in pharmacy bar in dc.. am i right?
-micah
boilerdoc2
Well-known
The M8 actually shines at the high ISOs e.g. 1250, 2500. It is a h--- of a lot better than C41 film at high ISO. The noise has been described as 'film-like' compared to the plasticky quality of high ISO Canon files. To each his own but do not be afraid to shoot at the higher ISOs. I especially like the 640 setting and with Leica fast lenses rarely need more. Photos look like Tri-X when converted to B&W.
Steve
Steve
whatmicah
Member
Yeah, I am sure it is pretty good (and different). But it would be nice to see some examples. Especially in mixed artificial light.
I am thinking to get the M8 in black with a 28 2.8 Elmarit as a starter kit. I was really impressed with the camera at PhotoPLUS. Although the guy demoing the camera did take a picture of me in my black t-shirt and it came out purple! Guess he forgot to put on the filter!
-m
I am thinking to get the M8 in black with a 28 2.8 Elmarit as a starter kit. I was really impressed with the camera at PhotoPLUS. Although the guy demoing the camera did take a picture of me in my black t-shirt and it came out purple! Guess he forgot to put on the filter!
-m
picturetraveler
Newbie
Hi everyone,
I 've been shooting mostly on 1250 iso on an assignment in India mostly full opening in nearly dark conditions...You have noise in the pics...but I was told by the M8 production leader that the raw file develloped in Capture one the noise should be minimalised. Anyway ...I am sure the Canon MarkII Mark III and Eos 5 would perform better (have a MarkII)...but it would not fit in the little bag I was traveling in...and does not have a noctilux available...
I am very satisfied with the results I am getting...and I haven't much done to filter- out the noise...curious...check out
http://www.flickr.com/photos/picture_traveler/
I also have a Ricoh Gr D for those very fast Af shots...and that works super.
Regards from Gent Belgium
Marc De Clercq
I 've been shooting mostly on 1250 iso on an assignment in India mostly full opening in nearly dark conditions...You have noise in the pics...but I was told by the M8 production leader that the raw file develloped in Capture one the noise should be minimalised. Anyway ...I am sure the Canon MarkII Mark III and Eos 5 would perform better (have a MarkII)...but it would not fit in the little bag I was traveling in...and does not have a noctilux available...
I am very satisfied with the results I am getting...and I haven't much done to filter- out the noise...curious...check out
http://www.flickr.com/photos/picture_traveler/
I also have a Ricoh Gr D for those very fast Af shots...and that works super.
Regards from Gent Belgium
Marc De Clercq
gdi
Veteran
I find 1250+ something to avoid for color. B&W are passable, but it looks like noise, not film grain. IMO, high ISO is simply not the camera's strong point.