jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
Pretty good, Summicron 35asph, 1/3rd (so slightly soft), no noisereduction in postprocessing...
robklurfield
eclipse
that night sky has a nice fine grain for this high iso. it does look rather cold today.
gb hill
Veteran
Nice! but I sure would be upset that it doesn't come near the quality of what I've seen from a Canon G11.
Makten
-
I'd really like to see something from a G11 @ ISO 2500 that is better.
Edit: Oh, and at 1/3 second shutter speed.
enochRoot
a chymist of some repute
no disrespect meant, but this looks like a photo my sony cybershot could take. i'm not seeing leica quality here at all. sorry!
gavinlg
Veteran
I so badly doubt that, and that's not taking a stab at you or anything, but I have a close friend with a g11, and it's only really useable up to about 800 in my opinion. Anything over that is either totally devoid of detail in jpeg or noisy as hell in RAW. Plus the lens is sllooooow.
Last edited:
punkromance
Poor art student
From an aesthetic point of view I'd say it looks fine, but from a technical point of view I'd say it's a lot noisier than a file I'd expect a FF camera to be producing.
I might just be a bit spoilt though. My D700 wouldn't look like that until way over 6400.
I might just be a bit spoilt though. My D700 wouldn't look like that until way over 6400.
gavinlg
Veteran
It's shot at iso 2500 (which is actually equivalent to 3200 in real world terms) presumably with the lens wide open at f2, at 1/3rd of a second shutter speed.
If it was perfectly clean and sharp it wouldn't even look like it was dark at all, I think the picture portrays the mood accurately.
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
enochRoot
a chymist of some repute
Talking about the ISO-2500 quality, not the merits of the scene itself.
precisely what i was talking about.
I was surprised to see that the M8 has a feature which does a frame-to-frame subtraction for high-ISO, an exposure is made with the shutter closed and subtracted from the image being processed. The idea is to subtract out noise.
Does anyone actually use this feature? Does anyone have with/without shots? It was common practice in signal processing decades ago.
As far as ISO 2500 and other high-sensitivity settings, many variables come into play. One is the shutter speed which also controls sensor integration time. SO: 1/3rd second at ISO 2500 is not going to give the same noise figure as a 1/30th second exposure.
It's a good reference photo, and looks a lot better than Kodacolor-800 under similar lighting conditions.
Does anyone actually use this feature? Does anyone have with/without shots? It was common practice in signal processing decades ago.
As far as ISO 2500 and other high-sensitivity settings, many variables come into play. One is the shutter speed which also controls sensor integration time. SO: 1/3rd second at ISO 2500 is not going to give the same noise figure as a 1/30th second exposure.
It's a good reference photo, and looks a lot better than Kodacolor-800 under similar lighting conditions.
250swb
Well-known
Most modern digital cameras run Noise Reduction, but this is based on the length of exposure time (it kicks in at, say, over one second) not on ISO speed. You make and exposure and its three seconds, so the camera makes a blank exposure for three more seconds and filters out the inherent noise you get from sensors at long exposures by comparing the two images. This happens irrespective of ISO rating.
Steve
Richard Marks
Rexel
Looks like quite a bit of colour noise in the trees above the hedge on the right hand side of the picture and in the brick work of the building on the left.
It is not at all bad, but for a camera that has just been launched, it is goign to seem very lack lustre when the next wave of entry level DSLR's come out. Needless to say its no where near the current leading pro DSLR's. Yes I know its a ragefinder and that there is no competition, but the debate here is about noise.
Richard
It is not at all bad, but for a camera that has just been launched, it is goign to seem very lack lustre when the next wave of entry level DSLR's come out. Needless to say its no where near the current leading pro DSLR's. Yes I know its a ragefinder and that there is no competition, but the debate here is about noise.
Richard
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
jarski
Veteran
would be interesting to know/see how noise reduction software works with files from full frame sensor.
when I try reduce noise files from my G9, its desperate attempt. result is still very noisy after the process.
when I try reduce noise files from my G9, its desperate attempt. result is still very noisy after the process.
ulrikft
Established
Those who think a G9, g10 or g11 produces this clean files need a reality check, ok? The M9 is very close to the d700 in this area..
Well, I'm not going to buy a D700 or D3 until my D1x at work stops operating.
It would be interesting to see a side-by-side comparison.
Compared with fast film under the same circumstances, this shot looks good.
And it is interesting to learn about the signal processing techniques that are being incorporated into commercial off-the-shelf cameras.
It would be interesting to see a side-by-side comparison.
Compared with fast film under the same circumstances, this shot looks good.
And it is interesting to learn about the signal processing techniques that are being incorporated into commercial off-the-shelf cameras.
Richard Marks
Rexel
Just for your interest
D700 at ISO 6400. Capture 1 no noise reduction. 14-24 1/60 f5.6 This is of course a soon to be replaced 2 year old sensor. The D3s has raised the bar again from here. The M9 is OK for now but will feel very limited comared to the next wave of sensors. Unfortunately at the speed with which leica change anything and the costs of money ionvolved, if you buy an M9 now you need to be happy with the noise for at least the next 3 years. I am still unconvinced but of course would love to see a demo version in my dealer in order to make an objective evaluation.
D700 at ISO 6400. Capture 1 no noise reduction. 14-24 1/60 f5.6 This is of course a soon to be replaced 2 year old sensor. The D3s has raised the bar again from here. The M9 is OK for now but will feel very limited comared to the next wave of sensors. Unfortunately at the speed with which leica change anything and the costs of money ionvolved, if you buy an M9 now you need to be happy with the noise for at least the next 3 years. I am still unconvinced but of course would love to see a demo version in my dealer in order to make an objective evaluation.
Last edited:
I keep my D1x set at ISO 125. Anything above that is noisy. ISO 400 is a waste. On the D1, I use ISO 200 and never moved it off of that setting. The 1997 Nikon E3's lowest setting is ISO800 and goes to 3200, but it uses reduction optics so it is really an "optical equivalent". Of course, Fast lenses also give an equivalent advantage.
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
Except that there has been an enormous amount of noisereduction -inside the camera. The sensor has very little to nothing to do with it.Just for your interest
D700 at ISO 6400. Capture 1 no noise reduction. 14-25 1/60 f5.6 This is of course a soon to be replaced 2 year old sensor. The D3s has raised the bar again from here.