I Hate M8 Noise

[usccharles]

I love my M8 i do.

love it enough that i have sold all my canon 5d + gazillion lenses and i haven't looked back once.

but you know its been over 6 months now with my M8 and here is what i hate the most: (the only thing i hate too)

why can't this dang $5,000 camera do a better job at noise reduction above 600iso??

my 5D clowned this camera in iso noise perforamce in high iso. CLOWNED it. do i regret selling it? hell no. i would take my M8 out instead of the 5D any day.

BUT..

now days i never shoot 1250 or higher. i just cant stand the noise. i find its better to shoot at 650 (or is it 620?), underexpose, and then post process to correct exposure than shoot at 1250 or above.

so these days, i've been going back to film for anything 800 or above. using my hexar and delta 400 pushed +1 or +2.

to be honest, its not like i shoot color film in the dark and i know my M8 does way better than most color film in the dark, but the point is my 5D did WAY better in color under high iso than the M8 and for having purchased such an expensive camera with all the techno schbang out there these days, i shouldn't have to change to b/w mode everytime i want to shoot above 600 iso on my M8. but i do because iso color noise at 1250 and above sucks on my M8 compared to my old 5D, and when i shoot b/w instead, i much prefer the look my hexar produces with the ilford delta.

I'm really regretting selling my M6TTL now. thought i'd never touch it again after the M8. but now i wish i hadn't sold it. 🙁 because now when i want to go take pictures at night, i would rather take my hexar and my delta 400 than take my M8, which sucks because 75% of my favorite shots are available light shots and i think M8 could and should do alot better than this. canon sure does, atleast with noise that is.

sorry for the ranting. thank you for listening. leica i hope youre listening too and i hope you bring some more (MORE!) noise down on your next firmware update.

flame if you wish 😀

 

[Keith]

I'd agree with that ... I only use my M8 at 1250 in low light if it's in black and white mode. It's still a little noisy like this but I tell myself it looks like film grain ... which it doesn't of course!

Oh well, my only other digital option is my D70s and that's horrendous obove 800 ... maybe I'll get some 1600 Neopan for my M7 after all! 😛

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

now days i never shoot 1250 or higher. i just cant stand the noise. i find its better to shoot at 650 (or is it 620?), underexpose, and then post process to correct exposure than shoot at 1250 or above.

The problem is not with the M8, but how most people don't spend time to get to know their equipment. (and then spread rumours on the Internet with oddly-titled threads which will make people who don't know better take it as fact)

The M8 is very very usable at ISO-1200, and surprisingly usable at ISO-2500. If you're shooting JPEGs, set the saturation, contrast and sharpening all the way down. If you're shooting with DNGs, process accordingly.

Here are a few shots at 1250 and 2500 respectively -- No noise reduction processing whatsoever


M8 + 90mm Summicron f/2 (DNG @ ISO-1250)


M8 + 90mm Summicron f/2 (JPEG @ ISO-2500) --sorry for the camera shake--

 

[usccharles]

The problem is not with the M8, but how most people don't spend time to get to know their equipment. (and then spread rumours on the Internet with oddly-titled threads which will make people who don't know better take it as fact)

The M8 is very very usable at ISO-1200, and surprisingly usable at ISO-2500. If you're shooting JPEGs, set the saturation, contrast and sharpening all the way down. If you're shooting with DNGs, process accordingly.

Here are a few shots at 1250 and 2500 respectively -- No noise reduction processing whatsoever


M8 + 90mm Summicron f/2 (DNG @ ISO-1250)


M8 + 90mm Summicron f/2 (JPEG @ ISO-2500) --sorry for the camera shake--

i meant pictures taken at night. in the dark. your iso 1250 shot doesn't count. it has plenty of light. but i have to say your 2500 shot is gorgeous and i'm really impressed by the lack of noise.

i think these were both taken at 2500. sorry i'm pulling these off my blog so they're small pics. but from my personally experience M8 has alot more noise than my 5D did, especially color noise in the dark. i'm pretty familiar with my equipment too... i think, i hope 🙂

i donno maybe youre right. maybe i'm not handling the equipment right. but i was handling the 5D the same and it performed better for me in these circumstances.

 

[jaapv]

Matter of taste- I don't like the Canon trade-off in smoothness to reduce noise, I find the CCD "look" of for instance Nikon and Leica preferable,especially the Leica variant. Noise can of course always be removed. The result is very close to the 5Dthen.

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

i meant pictures taken at night. in the dark. your iso 1250 shot doesn't count.

Your thread doesn't say "I hate M8 noise at night in the dark". 😛

OK, then, how's this? It was incredibly dim in there, and the only light came from lots of kitschy fixtures.


M8 + 50mm Summilux pre-asph (JPEG @ ISO-1250)

Just take some time experimenting all the features of the M8, settings, etc. And you're right, dully lit (or hardly lit) shadows can be a pain.

 

[usccharles]

Your thread doesn't say "I hate M8 noise at night in the dark". 😛

OK, then, how's this? It was incredibly dim in there, and the only light came from lots of kitschy fixtures.


M8 + 50mm Summilux pre-asph (JPEG @ ISO-1250)

Just take some time experimenting all the features of the M8, settings, etc. And you're right, dully lit (or hardly lit) shadows can be a pain.

mr. gabriel, you have given me new hope with you examples!

i will go experiment more. really impressed with the noise performance in all your photos. 😱

 

[Olsen]

I love my M8 i do.

love it enough that i have sold all my canon 5d + gazillion lenses and i haven't looked back once.

but you know its been over 6 months now with my M8 and here is what i hate the most: (the only thing i hate too)

why can't this dang $5,000 camera do a better job at noise reduction above 600iso??

my 5D clowned this camera in iso noise perforamce in high iso. CLOWNED it. do i regret selling it? hell no. i would take my M8 out instead of the 5D any day.

BUT..

now days i never shoot 1250 or higher. i just cant stand the noise. i find its better to shoot at 650 (or is it 620?), underexpose, and then post process to correct exposure than shoot at 1250 or above.

so these days, i've been going back to film for anything 800 or above. using my hexar and delta 400 pushed +1 or +2.

to be honest, its not like i shoot color film in the dark and i know my M8 does way better than most color film in the dark, but the point is my 5D did WAY better in color under high iso than the M8 and for having purchased such an expensive camera with all the techno schbang out there these days, i shouldn't have to change to b/w mode everytime i want to shoot above 600 iso on my M8. but i do because iso color noise at 1250 and above sucks on my M8 compared to my old 5D, and when i shoot b/w instead, i much prefer the look my hexar produces with the ilford delta.

I'm really regretting selling my M6TTL now. thought i'd never touch it again after the M8. but now i wish i hadn't sold it. 🙁 because now when i want to go take pictures at night, i would rather take my hexar and my delta 400 than take my M8, which sucks because 75% of my favorite shots are available light shots and i think M8 could and should do alot better than this. canon sure does, atleast with noise that is.

sorry for the ranting. thank you for listening. leica i hope youre listening too and i hope you bring some more (MORE!) noise down on your next firmware update.

flame if you wish 😀

I agree with you. How you could go ahead and trade in the best camera on the market regarding noice with the least attractive in this respect is beond me.

Two details do not meet my expectations regarding M8; the noice on anything higher than 160 ISO and the poor jpg quality. All the other issues, crop factor, color fringe etc. I can live with.

 

[POINT OF VIEW]

One more option.

One more option.

One other option is, flash. These shots were taken at ISO160. The flash is a 20 year old Metz. It is not a M8 dedicated flash. It would be interesting to see examples of a Leica flash attached to the M8. Bill
http://www.pbase.com/leicalight/galleries

 

[HAnkg]

I find the noise at 640 underexposed 1 or 1 1/3 stops to be fine. That gives you the equivalent of about ISO 1600 on a Canon. With color film I could only have dreamed of a ISO 1600 film of this quality. I really dislike the output from programs like noise ninja and the look of very high ISO Canon files. I prefer some noise over the over processed smoothed look as long as it's film like. Combine that with fast Leica lenses that are exemplary wide open and I'd say the M8 is a very credible low light platform.

 

[J J Kapsberger]

...I prefer some noise over the over processed smoothed look as long as it's film like...

Same here. But don't forget that Noise Ninja allows you to vary the strength of noise reduction. Careful use of Noise Ninja can allow one to get rid of excessive noise yet still retain a bit of noise for a pleasing texture.

 

[Joe Mondello]

so these days, i've been going back to film for anything 800 or above. using my hexar and delta 400 pushed +1 or +2.

Phil Askey's review of the M8 on DPReview shows that he tests the M8's 640 ISO as being actually 800 ISO.

I find the M8 very usable at 640 (tested 800) but really can't take the 1250 (tested 1600) or 2500 (tested 3200) except in rare circumstances.

For me the biggest difference between the M8 and the 5D is the M8's superior ability to be handheld at slower shutter speeds, use faster, smaller glass and therefore not need to push the ISO up so high.

While the 5D is the current High ISO champ, the leaked high ISO images out of the new Nikon D3 look VERY impressive, but the same caveats remain . . . big bulky camera, big heavy fast lenses and camera shake due to mirror slap.

 

[cmogi10]

Strangely enough, I find the M8's noise very usable, as opposed to my DSLR which I find unbearable. It could be in my head though.

 

[baycrest]

Not too thrilled---

Not too thrilled---

😀

I find the noise at 640 underexposed 1 or 1 1/3 stops to be fine. That gives you the equivalent of about ISO 1600 on a Canon. With color film I could only have dreamed of a ISO 1600 film of this quality. I really dislike the output from programs like noise ninja and the look of very high ISO Canon files. I prefer some noise over the over processed smoothed look as long as it's film like. Combine that with fast Leica lenses that are exemplary wide open and I'd say the M8 is a very credible low light platform.

---either. I'd been avoiding the low light occasions since I got the M8 a month ago. Thanks for the advice, I'll go give it a try. See how it goes

Rob

 

[charjohncarter]

Do you think anybody else's noise is better? I don't.

 

[leicashot]

I am greatful to have a Digital M, and will persist with the noise until the next thing comes along.....comparisons should not be made to an SLR (such as my 1Ds II), which is the same as comparing it to a Phase 1 40+ MP camera....comparisons should be kept to the format.

 

[harmsr]

Try overexposing by 1/3 to 2/3 of a stop and then pulling it back when doing the RAW processing.

The ISO 640 (800 real) of the M8 is world's better than my D200.

If you expose well and process the RAW in C1, I find the 1250 quite useable for night shots. I do only use the 2500 in a little more light when I need the shutter speed for some more action. Then again, I rarely used 800 speed film. The majority of film work was with 100-400 speed films.

If you do the profiling procedure in Noise Ninja, you can really get some great shots out of the higher ISOs.

Best,

Ray

 

[aizan]

Your thread doesn't say "I hate M8 noise at night in the dark". 😛

OK, then, how's this? It was incredibly dim in there, and the only light came from lots of kitschy fixtures.


M8 + 50mm Summilux pre-asph (JPEG @ ISO-1250)

Just take some time experimenting all the features of the M8, settings, etc. And you're right, dully lit (or hardly lit) shadows can be a pain.

hehehe, looks like an alien from star trek. come on, to my knowledge kodak has never made a low noise at high iso sensor. nothing i've seen from the m8 disproves this.

 

[usccharles]

I am greatful to have a Digital M, and will persist with the noise until the next thing comes along.....comparisons should not be made to an SLR (such as my 1Ds II), which is the same as comparing it to a Phase 1 40+ MP camera....comparisons should be kept to the format.

so... then my only comparison is what? RD-1? well in that sense the M8 has by far the best digital rangefinder sensor in the world. period.

which is true... i guess.

wow, that actually does make me feel better 😛

 

[Dan States]

I agree with the above that my M8 is way better at 640-1250 than my D200 at the same settings. I tend to judge noise by the results in print, not on screen and in that medium I think the M8 is miles ahead.

I do notice that in Capture 1LE turning off sharpening AND all noise reduction seems to leave me with a much more natural and "film like" print. Seems to me that we are spending a lot of time looking at 100% crops on screen, versus focusing on the ultimate outcome in print. As back in the days of film printing, a negative that looked great under a 25x scope may still print poorly at normal ratios...It's all about proper gradation and being "sharp enough" for the size you intend to print. Being able to avoid excessive artificial sharpening adds a whole new level of quality to the digital print.

Best wishes
Dan States