M8 Noise

jano said:
Doesn't that take away from wanting a color image?
Click to expand...

I'd rather have a B&W M8, because it seems to me you could create a B&W only sensor that would do 3x the dynamic range, many times the resolution, etc with a sensor that doesn't waste space on RGB.
 
jaapv said:
Snapperj, I don't know what effect you used in your first post, but in the Aquasoft layout it is just a blank field until I highlight it....
Click to expand...

jaap, not to sure what you mean by Aquasoft layout. Are you saying you can not see the text of my post?
 
SnapperJ said:
jaap, not to sure what you mean by Aquasoft layout. Are you saying you can not see the text of my post?
Click to expand...

That is correct. White on white.... This forum has several styles from which one can choose. I happen to have the one that has a white background. Normally it switches the text to change automatically, but not when the poster chooses his own colour letter. Yellow and light green etc. are bad enough, but at least one can see there is something there and highlight it. But in this case I got a blank field and only discovered much later that you had actually written something:eek:
 
jaapv said:
That is correct. White on white.... This forum has several styles from which one can choose. I happen to have the one that has a white background. Normally it switches the text to change automatically, but not when the poster chooses his own colour letter. Yellow and light green etc. are bad enough, but at least one can see there is something there and highlight it. But in this case I got a blank field and only discovered much later that you had actually written something:eek:
Click to expand...

Jaap, i am sorry. I not change things again.
 
I predict that within a week of the first-wave of M8s being delivered, the debate will shift to whether images shot on the camera at 1250 and above look more film-like (and therefore 'better') without noise reduction applied in post-processing.

As others have said, noise has become an absolute non-issue.I actually think a lot of people will shoot at 640 and 1250 by choice just to add a bit of texture to their images. Isn't progress crazy?
 
devils-advocate said:
I predict that within a week of the first-wave of M8s being delivered, the debate will shift to whether images shot on the camera at 1250 and above look more film-like (and therefore 'better') without noise reduction applied in post-processing.

As others have said, noise has become an absolute non-issue.I actually think a lot of people will shoot at 640 and 1250 by choice just to add a bit of texture to their images. Isn't progress crazy?
Click to expand...

I will be trying the high speeds for sure and yes I do like grain, in some type of photos it can make an image better.
 
grantray said:
I have to say, I wish Sean would put up some more high ISO examples. Perhaps that's selfish, but I would really like to get a better idea of what the sensor is capable of at higher speeds. Okay, so maybe I'm just impatient...

-grant
Click to expand...

Hi Grant,

That's possible. What speeds were you hoping to see more of? Did you see the ISO 1250 picture that was added with multiple crops from the 100% file? I'll add a 640 (800 actual) with crops soon.

Cheers,

Sean
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Noise Differences at same ISO

Noise Differences at same ISO

The 100% (no noise reduction) samples are only jpeg's and it could of course be the nature of the images or the raw conversion but I see a lot more noise at 1250 iso in the Outbackphoto image than the Luminouslandscape one.

I downloaded both into Photoshop for comparison and Reichmann's, Raw converter Capture One LE or Camera Raw 3.6, looks much better to me than Steinmueller's, Raw converter Lightzone. Even if you pull up the central slider in Levels to 1.40 to lighten the dark board in Reichmann's shot it still seems a bit better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom