It's been nice ... but I think we're through!

Keith

Keith

The best camera is one that still works!
Local time
7:29 AM
Joined
May 5, 2006
Messages
19,244
Location
Australia
View My Gallery
The only real use my M8 has been getting lately has been shooting dimly lit gallery openings occasionally for the Creative Industries Faculty at the Queensland University Of Technology. The latest one was a nightmare of people, black spaces and brightly lit projection screens and monitors and the M8 did not cope very well at all. Dark noisy shadows at 640 ISO or blown out highlights from the screens and monitors and really only about fifty usable shots from the three hundred I took was the final analysis of a difficult shoot!

Where to now because I'm running out of tolerance for the camera's ability, or lack of I should say, to deal with these conditions. Yes sure it's unobtrusive in this environment and everyone knows that a rangefinder can be focused in light that you can barely read your shutter speed dial in but the end result is not good in these extreme light scenarios ... of which there will be more!

Maybe I need to consider a second hand 5D and a couple of fast primes ... or maybe give digital a miss totally and use 800 or 1600 colour film and benefit from the increased dynamic range it will give me and just let the education department wear the extra cost if they will?

And no ... I can't use a flash! 🙁
 
Keith, If you mainly use your M8 for the kind of work you describe, I think you're better off with a 5D(II). Reasons (in decreasing order of importance): better high iso, full frame, lenses with IS, no IR filters and CHEAPER.
 
HuubL said:
Keith, If you mainly use your M8 for the kind of work you describe, I think you're better off with a 5D(II). Reasons (in decreasing order of importance): better high iso, full frame, lenses with IS, no IR filters and CHEAPER.
Click to expand...


My problem here will be lack of budget for a 5D II which is why I though of the earlier model ... which I hear is still pretty damned good to 1600 ISO. If I switch to something else for these gigs I'm currently limited finacially to what I can get for my M8 as a sale or possible exchange!
 
Keith said:
My problem here will be lack of budget for a 5D II which is why I though of the earlier model ... which I hear is still pretty damned good to 1600 ISO. If I switch to something else for these gigs I'm currently limited finacially to what I can get for my M8 as a sale or possible exchange!
Click to expand...

Nikon D700 prices have come down a little and in general it's cheaper than the 5DII.

I have the D700 and the darn thing can see in the dark. Seriously, I was amazed, when I saw the first RAW files. The metering system is also far superior to my old 5D, which I sold to finance the D700. Dynamic range is excellent for a digital (almost 9 stops) and the thing is built like a tank (also weathersealed).

You can also get some highspeed manual focus Nikkors cheaply, maybe even go for the Zeiss ZF 1.4/50mm. That is one of the main reasons why I got the Nikon and sold the Canon. I'm used to shooting manual focus lenses from Leicas and this was a seamless and painless transition. It's great to be able to scale focus at high iso with full matrix metering.
 
Last edited:
jaapv said:
You don't need a Canon - you need a Fuji S5Pro.....
Click to expand...
Perhaps better (marginally) dynamic range, but not full-frame!

Keith, you probably can buy a new 5DII for what you get back for the M8... body for body, of course. If you don't already have some Canon glass, that would need some extra investment though.
 
The new Nikon D700 and Canon 5D mark II run much the same price here I notice and that's not far off $4000.00 AUD just for a body! 😱

I don't want to be too hard on the M8 here because it's a great camera but in the described conditions it's not cutting it and the balancing act between getting some shadow detail but not blowing out all the screens and monitors is taxing my patience ... and abilities! It's really important in the results I present to the Uni that the screen contents are clear and visible ... the patrons and surrounds can be shadowy but the end result needs to satisfy the artists involved and the department ... and they want to see what's being shown.

I really don't use the M8 for much else these days as I'm pretty committed to film for most of my photography and only dust the Leica off for these occasional paid gigs as they must be in colour and as much as not all of them have such extreme conditions, a lot do! The other issue I have is the white balance performance, in these circumstances it's all over the place ... I've tried just setting it to tungsten and sorting it all out later in PS but that hasn't been successful either to be honest!
 
Last edited:
The 5D will work great for what you want to do. I have both the 5D and 5D MkII and while the MKII is an incredible camera, the original is a camera I still use as often as the new one. It's a good camera, Keith, especially at the prices you can find on them now. Slap the ST-E2 in the hot shoe and it will autofocus perfectly in total darkness at the distances you are working in the gallery.
 
Keith,

I just reread your original post and realised what you are trying to achieve. There is will be big difference in the light coming from the monitors and screens and surrounding room. And if the screens and monitors are the most important part of the finished image then you need to meter for them, not the surrounding ambient lighting.

Try using a spot meter on the screens and monitors, then open a stop or two to bring them above middle-gray. I am guessing if you did this, you could even pull the ISO on the M8 back to 400ISO which would help your noise in the shadows.

I still recommend that you take along an OM body with the 50/1.2 and if the grain of the Fuji 1600 is a worry, then use Fuji 800 or Porta 800, which has a huge latitude and nicely controlled grain. With film you will shoot less, but once you dial in your exposure with a experimental roll and good meter, you will have many more keepers.

I would not throw the M8 out yet, but I would not be afraid to give film a try either...
 
Last edited:
I'm relieved, Keith. When I read the thread title I thought maybe you were leaving RFF.

Maybe do what Lynn suggests AND take the M8 and meter for the screen as well. If the OM/Fuji works well, then a good OM-4 might be a consideration, as it has great spot metering.

I also think the Nikon desrves some thought. See Mike Johnston's comments on his blog. As mentioned, good older Nikon glass is easy to get.
 
Last edited:
Keith, wait for the new Pentax dSLR that is due for official release on the 21st. The rumours (here) have it very highly placed in the pecking order, and you would have access to their lovely prime FA lenses that worked with either a film body or the cropped dSLR sensor. 31/1.8 Limited (auto focus), 35/2 AL (auto focus), 50/1.4 (auto focus), 50/1.2 (manual focus), 77/1.8 Limited (auto focus). If Pentax have sorted out the high-iso noise issue it could be a real contender!
 
Even a D90 or D300 or 50D (or whatever comes next) would give you a couple of stops over the M8.

I can't believe that there is any high ISO film that will out perform a current digital SLR at the same ISO. You use fast color film for the way it degrades, not in the sense of capturing "more" information.
 
Frank,

I was wondering about that. I think Keith also has concerns about fast primes that he can afford and not having to worry about crop factor ... Not to mention easier focusing with a "full frame" sensor body.
 
Frank Petronio said:
I can't believe that there is any high ISO film that will out perform a current digital SLR at the same ISO. You use fast color film for the way it degrades, not in the sense of capturing "more" information.
Click to expand...

I was merely suggesting an alternate method that did not require buying a new camera, as I know Keith already owns and uses an OM-series and a Zuiko 50/1.2. As I stated before... I have never used an M8, but I have used a Nikon D70 and D300 extensively, and Fuji Press 1600 will beat both of them hands down at ISO1600 and the D300 is no match for the Fuji Natura 1600 when both are used at ISO3200. Now the D3 is another story... but the D3 is neither quiet or unobstrusive while an OM-series camera will rival a Leica M in that department.

But it would seem to me that some of the problems that Keith is reporting could solved with more careful metering. Even with the forgiving latitude of color negative film, if you are metering for the shadows, you will blow out point-sources of light which is what monitors and screens can be.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom