M8 low light performance.......

[tomasis]

I have difficulty to understand the point with low light perfomance here.. I sometimes push iso 1600 up to 2stops so I get iso 3200-6400 of Rd1 files. Of course those become not that noise free but that is low light perfomance! ACR seem doing good things on color shots and Photoraw - for BW with Tmax fine grain. I'd love to play with M8 files and see what M8 can do for iso 6400-12800 😀 Noise is not big thing for me when I'm commited for all types of BW.Sorry for commenting about Rd1 here but we are in the same place 😉

 

[infocusf8@earthlink.]

From what I see of the RD-1 pics compared to the M8 pics I certainly wouldn't buy into the claim the RD-1 is better. The original is awful and even Noise Ninja didn't improve the pic that well.

 

[etrigan63]

While not a high-ISO shot, here is a 32 sec exposure at f/4 (ISO 160) with my M8 + Zeiss 50mm Planar f/2:

This was taken a 1:30 AM.

 

[Olsen]

Here is a slightly brighter version. Nyhavn, Copenhagen, Denmark. June 2007. Leica M8 + WATE at 18 mm - ISO1250 exposure 1/4 hand held w/support - aparture 4,0

 

[xihalife]

Most of the high ISO photos posted on this thread have a lot of noise, in fact. It is not noticeable in the small web versions posted here though, so if the intent is mostly to post non-cropped photos to web, the quality is acceptable. Just like Olsen's latest photo... it's a nice photo, but surely it would not hurt to have less noise on the sky and the water.

 

[Symeon]

There is another way to push process the DNG file: try a -2 EV underexposure while shooting at 640 ISO or higher. Then correct shadow detail and whatever noise in Capture One. Colour will always have some noise, there is much less in B&W. The M8, after all, remains a manually oriented RF camera, no doubt about it.

 

[jaapv]

Most of the high ISO photos posted on this thread have a lot of noise, in fact. It is not noticeable in the small web versions posted here though, so if the intent is mostly to post non-cropped photos to web, the quality is acceptable. Just like Olsen's latest photo... it's a nice photo, but surely it would not hurt to have less noise on the sky and the water.

Hard to tell. In print noise comes out quite differently - usually less.

 

[Artichoke]

the M8 is no slouch at high ISO

the M8 is no slouch at high ISO

providing the exposure is accurate
here is on taken with a 75 Summilux at ISO 1250 1/45 sec f2 hand held

with a larger version here http://www.pbase.com/artichoke/o__e&page=9

some noise is seen in the shadows, but this is hardly offensive
the M8 may not be as noiseless as some high end DSLRs but I think it delivers superior color rendition at high ISO

 

[Olsen]

Helsinki Harbor, July 2007. M8 and WATE at 18 mm, ISO640, 1/8 sec, aparture 4,0. Hand held with support.

 

[Olsen]

something about the color of those lights......

Agree....

My impression is that my Canon 1Ds II reproduces 'lights' like these (car lights, lamp posts etc.), in night scenes, more realistically than the M8.

 

[gdi]

But the RD-1 is clearly lower in noise at 1600 than the M8 at 1250, but that wouldn't surpise anyone who has used both.

I see some excellent M8 low light shots here but no RD-1 pics to back this claim up. I would e interested in seeing some.

Here is a simple side by side test, which would you say has less noise?

This is a Lightroom screenshot - M8 (left) at ISO 1250, RD-1 at 1600, same lens (summilux 50), same light.

 

[Dan States]

The M8 requires different handling than a DSLR to get maximum high ISO image quality.

The biggest error most users make is to use noise reduction and sharpening in their RAW conversions. Neither is necessary if a good quality lens is used and turning them both off gives a much more natural "film like" image (though with far less grain than high speed film)

In C1 v4 I set sharpening to zero and luminance noise reduction to zero. I set chromanance noise reduction to 75 for shots made at 1250 or 2500 iso but turn it off for 640 and under.

With these settings you can create outstanding files that look great on screen and on paper.

Sharpening on the M8 is typically overkill and only leads to artifacts that then need to be smoothed over with noise reduction.

Best wishes
Dan

 

[Olsen]

The M8 requires different handling than a DSLR to get maximum high ISO image quality.

The biggest error most users make is to use noise reduction and sharpening in their RAW conversions. Neither is necessary if a good quality lens is used and turning them both off gives a much more natural "film like" image (though with far less grain than high speed film)

In C1 v4 I set sharpening to zero and luminance noise reduction to zero. I set chromanance noise reduction to 75 for shots made at 1250 or 2500 iso but turn it off for 640 and under.

With these settings you can create outstanding files that look great on screen and on paper.

Sharpening on the M8 is typically overkill and only leads to artifacts that then need to be smoothed over with noise reduction.

Best wishes
Dan

Is that same procedure in C1 3.7.7?

 

[Dan States]

No, for 3.77 I set the sharpening to Disable and the noise reduction slider to the far left. No pattern noise reduction either (not that it seems to do anything).

Color noise reduction in 3.77 is pretty agressive and it can cause massive blurring and smudging of details in the yellow/brown color palet. For that reason and the much better highlight control I prefer V4.

With the Nikon D200 and any other DSLR I have used sharpening is mandatory because the AA filter combined with a zoom lens gives a pretty soft image straight out of the camera.

The advantage of the M8 in this respect is tremendous. The files require no sharpening to make a perfect print. This means your luminance noise stays looking like film grain. I do leave color noise reduction turned on in V4 for super high ISO, but it's not mandatory.

By the way, many of the cross hatch patterns you see on M8 2500 ISO shots is due to a bad combination of underexposure, exposure compensation in RAW conversion and sharpening of the file. It creates quite a mess!

Best wishes
Dan

 

[Olsen]

Thanks for the advice, Dan. My experience with the M8 is that the files needs no sharpening, - regardless of use. But, I must admit, I havn't tried switching off sharpening in C1 3.7.7. I will try this. Further, it is only on very rare occations I use a ISO setting beond 640.

 

[gdi]

Thanks Dan, your posts motivated me to upgrade to C1 4 and try it out. Making sure I had no sharpening or luminance reduction, did result in a better tolerance of the noise at 1250 (on screen, I have not printed yet).

I also used it as a starting point for the above posted RD-1 shot and found that I could use 0 luminance and about 60 for color reduction, then do light sharpening - about 50/.8/1 and wind up with a better Epson file as well.

The two look very close now - with the obvious deviations - the M8 has a bit more (but now more "acceptable") noise and the RD-1 still has a bit less detail after sharpening. I am sure that both would print nicely at fairly large sizes.

I may start using C1 again for my processing, thanks again!

 

[Olsen]

Here's another ISO1250 shot taken with M8 and WATE. Copenhagen harbour with the brightly lit new Copenhagen Opera in the background. The yacht is M/Y Michaela Rose. Aparture 4,0 - 1/4 sec hand held with support. Absolutely no sharpening or noice reduction applied.

 

[gdi]

Here's another ISO1250 shot taken with M8 and WATE. Copenhagen harbour with the brightly lit new Copenhagen Opera in the background. The yacht is M/Y Michaela Rose. Aparture 4,0 - 1/4 sec hand held with support. Absolutely no sharpening or noice reduction applied.

Yes, downsizing is very a very effective means of noise reduction 🙂

 

[Olsen]

Yes, downsizing is very a very effective means of noise reduction 🙂

Sure,

The attached crop is of 100% in PS of the same ISO1250 shot.

 

[gdi]

Sure,

The attached crop is of 100% in PS of the same ISO1250 shot.

Yes a lot more noise is visible...