Post your ISO 2500 Photos

[Gabriel M.A.]

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.

Cyclists in this area also seem to suffer from "everybody else is an idiot" syndrome, and they get in the way of cars, pedestrians. I once pointed out to one where the bike lane is (the ones that remain, because our Incredibly Smart Governor who got dropped as a VP contender for McCain won't pay for infrastructure, unless bridges fall) he told me to "shut up", and ran into a woman as he was looking at me.

A lot of "sense of entitlement" on some of them, making the rest look bad.

 

[gdi]

This thead has done a lot for the reputation of the M8 IMO. One of the main complaints about this camera from the time of it's release was the non usability of the higher ISO settings which obviously isn't correct if you browse through the images here. Obviously good 2500 ISO shots are not a 'gimee' and require careful exposure and competent post processing skills but the capability is there which goes against the assumptions made in a lot of prevous threads.

Kudos to Thomas for giving people who are considering the M8 but are put off by some of it's issues the chance to see what it's capable of! This thread has been a shot in the arm in this regard, it's certainly made me look at my M8 in a slightly different light!

While I have become more comfortable with 2500 and use it quite often, it pays to understand the power of downsizing to reduce noise. These images at the posted sizes appear almost noise free, but at full size it is apparent and much more difficult to control in color.

And yes, at common print sizes the noise is tolerable but there is a threshold at which it becomes detrimental. It would be interesting to see some 100% crops of color shots, with shadows, in order to compare the advantages of different techniques.

Here is a full crop from raw with no noise reduction (in processing, or Noise ninja,etc.) or sharpening. Suggestions for improvement?

 

[gdi]

Whoooa, the resized looks great, but that Noise Ninja does some serious damage! I would compare it with no NR and see which looks better at full crop - it may look better with the noise.

 

[gdi]

The second is probably the M8 with Noise Ninja?

 

[Ray Nalley]

These "the M8 high ISO performance mops the floor with any other digital camera" threads are getting silly. It just ain't so. The M8 is a good camera, but tales of its image quality are becoming apocryphal in the annuls of digital photo lure.

 

[gdi]

These "the M8 high ISO performance mops the floor with any other digital camera" threads are getting silly.

Gotta link? I'd like to read that one myself!

 

[tmfabian]

These "the M8 high ISO performance mops the floor with any other digital camera" threads are getting silly. It just ain't so. The M8 is a good camera, but tales of its image quality are becoming apocryphal in the annuls of digital photo lure.

I don't think anyone is saying that it mops the floor with any other camera...all I ever tried to do was dispel all the horse *** floating around that it sucks with high ISO.

The point that the M8 is a good camera that's perfectly capable of providing decent high ISO is all I'm trying to convey. There are a ton of reports that it's completely unusable or that camera A makes camera B completely obsolete and I finally just got sick of it all and snapped after reading kambers review, which is why I started this thread. The concept that this camera is completely unusable beyond 640 ISO calls into serious question the competence of anyone who makes that claim.

Listen...it's not perfect, but it's a darn good camera that has received a terrible reputation for no reason.

 

[gdi]

I don't think anyone is saying that it mops the floor with any other camera...all I ever tried to do was dispel all the horse *** floating around that it sucks with high ISO.

The point that the M8 is a good camera that's perfectly capable of providing decent high ISO is all I'm trying to convey. There are a ton of reports that it's completely unusable or that camera A makes camera B completely obsolete and I finally just got sick of it all and snapped after reading kambers review, which is why I started this thread. The concept that this camera is completely unusable beyond 640 ISO calls into serious question the competence of anyone who makes that claim.

Listen...it's not perfect, but it's a darn good camera that has received a terrible reputation for no reason.

You mean he was criticizing THIS thread? The one he's been posting to for a week?

Odd.

 

[gdi]

???
i was talking about the review that has been linked to a dozen times on this forum...it made me snap, not on it's own, but in addition to countless other negative reviews of the high ISO performance of the camera

I was joking about Nalley's complaint about a thread proclaiming the M8 the greatest at high ISO.

Yeah, that's why I generally keep away from noise reduction programs...I'm still working out/fine tuning the settings, until now i've only used the color noise reduction settings in lightroom, so if anyone has any tips with noise ninja I'm all ears.

edit😱ops figured out what the problem was with that image....I had sharpening set to high in camera and also accidentally set sharpening to 75 in lightroom...wow, i'm not doing that again.

I try not to use it either - I have Neat Image, but I find I am very wary of over doing it, so I end up using just a little now and then. I usually just print and see how it looks first.

I'm sure most people can figure out what is going in the thread - the M8 has been overly criticized for poor 2500 performance. I did it too, before I read and worked a bit at getting the exposure right. I see this thread as being a way to compare results and hopefully share techniques to maximize the utility of the camera - not to claim it as the best at anything....

 

[tmfabian]

I was joking about Nalley's complaint about a thread proclaiming the M8 the greatest at high ISO.

ahh...haha...sorry, i must be going a little insane, i'm in the middle of doing a months worth of laundry (i've moved twice in the past month, so i've been screwed on getting simple things done lately.)

about printing first...I absolutely agree with you, it's really insane how much we get tricked into thinking an image is overly noisy on these high resolution monitors these days...since in most cases where the image looked terrible on my monitor they looked perfectly fine in print.

Back to folding laundry...🙁

 

[tmfabian]

alright, i've decided to give noiseninja and any other noise reduction program the screw off maneuver in light of recent attempts. I'm much happier with lightroom and a simple color noise reduction...plus it speeds things up eliminating a step.

 

[ali_baba]

ill toss this one up in here as well, im quite impressed with the results.

 

[tmfabian]

The only thing I accomplished today was to get stinking drunk off a bunch of wine, so I went for a walk and managed to actually snap off a picture with no hand shake.

 

[feenej]

Cool! So you splurged on an M8 and now are testing it with ISO 2500 to look like film, eh? 😉

Haha. Nope. Maybe an M2 or M3 in December though. Maybe not.

 

[tmfabian]

sleep deprivation + oreos for breakfast + weird circular lightbulb thingy =

sleep deprivation + weird door thing =

 

[dcsang]

uh huh...
This is from the "Glo Bowl" at the local bowlerama - me and the girlfriend and another couple were there last night - I think the M8 @ ISO2500 performed quite well considering it was extremely low light (they use black light for the "glo")

a crop of a Voigtlander 28mm f2.0 Ultron image - @ f2.0 - 1/15 - ISO2500
If you want to see the full size, head to my Flickr page - link in my sig

Dave

 

[tmfabian]

 

[Steve Ash]

Thomas,

I am so happy to see the thread to be continued.

Regards
Steve

 

[ruslan]

With Summicron-C

 

[tmfabian]