lemalk
Rebel Without Applause
You're correct, jappv - I meant to type "underexposed." THAT's the M8's achilles heel. And yes - the photographer is definitely the one responsible for the exposure. But I was stating that this camera doesn't have much headroom at this ISOs for underexposure.
jaapv - I'll try and pay more attention to the histogram - but as it stands, this action shot at 1/15 or 1/8 and 2500 (it was shot at 1/30) would've been tough. But who knows - maybe it would've worked.
What would you do in that case? And how is the M9 in terms of headroom at 2500?
noimmunity
scratch my niche
This seems to be the only way to avoid banding, but in real life situations it means that high ISO is used best under even lighting conditions. It does poorly with areas like galleries, bars and coffee dens lit by halogen point light sources in a sea of darkness, for instance.
ampguy
Veteran
The key is the lens
The key is the lens
These were all taken in near darkness here at ISO 2500.
You need a lens with good microcontrast designed for low light, low banding. Some CV's for example, don't have it.
The key is the lens
These were all taken in near darkness here at ISO 2500.
You need a lens with good microcontrast designed for low light, low banding. Some CV's for example, don't have it.
popeye
Established
ampguy
Veteran
well
well
Got a new Dyson Animal and/or stepless coffee grinder for trade?
well
Got a new Dyson Animal and/or stepless coffee grinder for trade?
Interested in loaning out said lens?
popeye
Established
Got a new Dyson Animal and/or stepless coffee grinder for trade?
Is that all it takes these days?
noimmunity
scratch my niche
YYes, some of the photos in that collection are surprising to me.
So, what lenses do you recommend, besides the 35 lux asph? I'm not sure but in my experience the 35 noktons will band, but the ZM C Sonnar seems less inclined. Yet the Leica crons all band, too.
ampguy
Veteran
pre-asph
pre-asph
These were all taken with a late pre-asph 35 lux. Other good lenses for low light are the CV 40/1.4, 50/1.4 E43 pre-asph v2 lux, the Noctilux E60/f1, 75/1.4 lux. That's about it.
pre-asph
These were all taken with a late pre-asph 35 lux. Other good lenses for low light are the CV 40/1.4, 50/1.4 E43 pre-asph v2 lux, the Noctilux E60/f1, 75/1.4 lux. That's about it.
Last edited:
lemalk
Rebel Without Applause
Isn't banding a limitation of the sensor, not the lens?
And in terms of micro-contrast (not really familiar with that term, to be honest) wouldn't most fast-lenses do the job?
This sounds like marketing-speak to me, to be honest.
The 15mm Heliar at 4.5 is definitely no speed demon, but I can't see how that would translate into poor low-light performance if the exposure is adequate. Maybe I'm wrong?
And in terms of micro-contrast (not really familiar with that term, to be honest) wouldn't most fast-lenses do the job?
This sounds like marketing-speak to me, to be honest.
The 15mm Heliar at 4.5 is definitely no speed demon, but I can't see how that would translate into poor low-light performance if the exposure is adequate. Maybe I'm wrong?
bene
Established
1/125 f1.2 iso 2500
1/125 f1.2 iso 2500
1/125 f1.2 iso 2500
popeye
Established
Here's some more to help keep this thread going...
35/1.4, minimal adjustments (straightened and changed camera profile in LR).
35/1.4, convert to B/W in LR only.
35/1.4, minimal adjustments (straightened and changed camera profile in LR).
35/1.4, convert to B/W in LR only.
tmfabian
I met a man once...
m8+50 summilux 2500 iso
Last edited:
ampguy
Veteran
popeye
Established
35 Nokton/2500iso
sc_rufctr
Leica nuts
__--
Well-known
sc_rufctr
Leica nuts
I'm falling in love with this look. Great shots!
Ben Z
Veteran
Nice, Mitch. I have to chuckle to myself when I see people say the M8 is "useless above ISO640".
umcelinho
Marcelo
I think the whole "M8's high iso is terrible, awful etc" thing is overrated. Still, I see a lot of difference from one shot to another, probably being due to how people expose them, with my R-D1 I think I get much cleaner iso1600 shots when I expose for the shadows and not for the whole scene. If that is done with the M8 there should also be a significant quality difference, that might explain how there are shots with iso 2500 that look like 640 and some that look like they were taken with a P&S..
