Post your ISO 2500 Photos

Because of this thread 'm really liking iso 2500 with a compensation -1 or -1 1/3.
 

Attachments

  • glance.jpg
    glance.jpg
    21.1 KB · Views: 0
Ray Nalley said:
I think the thread is interesting because it shows how meaningless ISO numbers are to digital files and how malleable RAW files manipulated with ACR really are. Throw in a little Noiseware (or your favorite noise reduction software) and digital is just way more versatile than that roll of Tri-X.
Click to expand...

Anything is meaningless when argued as such (like saying "healthy living" is meaningless because you'll end up dead anyway). Or meaningful, when argued as such (like saying "meaningless" is "meaningless" when you've already assigned meaning to how "meaningless" it is)

Then there's the "who cares" bunch, who like a certain president of a certain economically "slowed-down" country, will not be persuaded by facts, no matter how glaringly they stare at their face.
 
from my walk to get chinese.

L1000167.jpg



L1000174.jpg
 
Last edited:
are you using those lightroom presets you posted earlier in the thread still?
and you over expose by what stop?

thanks
 
thomas - nice shots, impressive as usual, especially for iso 2500 and especially for M8 jpegs. Curious, what lens are you using?
 
I dunno what this is...but I can't sleep and I cleaned my sensor and was just checking to make sure there were no smudges and serious flare from those evil sensor swabs.

Has anyone else ever ended up with bad streaking from sensor swabs?

L1000259.jpg
 
Another color shot - this time with C1, all Noise reduction was off. No sharpening and the focus at F1.2 was on the horse's eye...

ISO2500001_2.jpg
 
A combination shot...testing to make sure focus was right but it was also at 2500 iso.
I dropped my m8 from standing position after some dipsh*t on a bike tried to zip by me on the FREAKING SIDEWALK and clipped me. Focus was on the numbers...so hooray no misalignment and oddly no external damage to the camera.

L1000021-1.jpg
 
Thomas is a professional. Just wondered if he has done any commercial work at ISO 2500 with the M8 and how it was received by clients?
 
tmfabian said:
A combination shot...testing to make sure focus was right but it was also at 2500 iso.
I dropped my m8 from standing position after some dipsh*t on a bike tried to zip by me on the FREAKING SIDEWALK and clipped me. Focus was on the numbers...so hooray no misalignment and oddly no external damage to the camera.
Click to expand...

It's a tough cookie, this camera. I've had some run-ins with hard surfaces, and no problems, 'til I fell on the rocks by the ocean. Ugh–that was bad news. But Leica fixed it, no problem.

Anyway, I think that the sidewalks in Boston are a mighty dangerous place. Anywhere in the city, actually, where you have two or more of: pedestrians, bicycles, or cars. Sometimes I think that the BU/BC students are taking suicide classes, then dressing in dark clothes and jumping out in front of my car at night for their homework.
 
Ray Nalley said:
Thomas is a professional. Just wondered if he has done any commercial work at ISO 2500 with the M8 and how it was received by clients?
Click to expand...

I have oddly used 2500 on quite a few occasions to pay the bills. But as anyone who makes a living off of photography would suggest, it's a last resort with any camera...everyone I know, even those who shoot the D3 tell me they never go above 800 ISO unless it's absolutely necessary.

I personally believe that ISO 2500 on the m8 is sort of like an expanded ISO range setting since the incremental difference in noise between 160-1250 is actually quite small and the jump from 1250 to 2500 is way out of proportion. That being said...I use any ISO from 160-1250 regularly to pay the bills...i just had a shoot a few days ago where the entire thing was done at 1250 and the client already booked me for another...that should say something of 1250 acceptability in the field.

Also, when you look at images on a monitor you see every glob of noise and grain, but when my images are printed by the client... especially for magazines... the grain/noise disappears soo much it really didn't matter what ISO I set the camera to.
 
benkelley said:
It's a tough cookie, this camera. I've had some run-ins with hard surfaces, and no problems, 'til I fell on the rocks by the ocean. Ugh–that was bad news. But Leica fixed it, no problem.

Anyway, I think that the sidewalks in Boston are a mighty dangerous place. Anywhere in the city, actually, where you have two or more of: pedestrians, bicycles, or cars. Sometimes I think that the BU/BC students are taking suicide classes, then dressing in dark clothes and jumping out in front of my car at night for their homework.
Click to expand...

Yeah...it's insane now that schools are back in session...summer was so peaceful.

Yeah, I'm impressed how well the camera held up...I've dropped it a few times since I bought it...but both times it landed on soft ground (first time was in a pile of dog ***, second was onto grass) the concrete thump scared the bejesus out of me...
 
"Also, when you look at images on a monitor you see every glob of noise and grain, but when my images are printed by the client... especially for magazines... the grain/noise disappears soo much it really didn't matter what ISO I set the camera to."

Yeah, screens used even in magazines tend to hide some of the noise. Which always helps.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom