Whats Your Favourite ISO Setting with the M8?

Whats Your Favourite ISO Setting with the M8?

  • 160

    Votes: 139 46.8%

  • 320

    Votes: 93 31.3%

  • 640

    Votes: 54 18.2%

  • 1250

    Votes: 9 3.0%

  • 2500

    Votes: 2 0.7%
  • Total voters
    297
N

naos

23 Skidoo
Local time
8:38 AM
Joined
Oct 7, 2006
Messages
152
I choose 640. When shooting colour, it has the most film-like grain (noise). Plus it gives me a high enough ISO to be able to shoot handheld practically anywhere indoors.
 
160 whenever possible since it resolves the finest detail (hair, etc.).

640 indoors a lot and 1250 only when absolutely necessary. I add grain in post with Alienskin, but I like starting out with the most possible detail in the picture.
 
The M8 is too noisy, for my taste.
ISO 640 destroys too much detail, and the color and contrast also are affected.
I hope Leica will improve the firmware for reducing the noise in the DNG files.
 
I'm a street documentary photographer shooting hand held and 90 percent of the time converting my images later to B+W.
I find that 640 works great for that purpose, yielding the most film-like look after post-processing. judge for yourself:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/aglimpseoftheworld/467244979/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/aglimpseoftheworld/458867696/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/aglimpseoftheworld/460044174/

When I am shooting with color in mind, I try for lower ISOs, depending on the lighting. I find that M8 color looks markedly better at lower ISOs.
 
Whichever the shot needs. For very clean mid-format lookalike 160, when the light goes up to 2500, as general setting for B&W 640 or 1250 to add some "grain" , IR needs 320 to get reasonable shutter times etc...... I find the amount of noise very low, especially considering that Leica leaves the noise reduction to the user.
 
Simply as low as possible.
I want to get the best possible image quality and if i feel like adding grain or something like that I get better results in postprocessing.

Hans
 
B&W at 640 has a very nice look to it imo, but maybe I'm not such a dab hand at post-processing...:(
 
I use 320 most of the time,but occasionally I will go for 640 or 1250. I get the best results using 160 or 320 with - exposure compensation and then processing with pse or c1 which results in no noise to very little noise. Got this hint from Doug Herr, who uses this with his DMR for high iso exposures.
 
HansRoggen said:
Hi Jaap,

A little off topic, but you should give Alien Skin's Exposure a try if you're looking for film-like results

Hans
Click to expand...

I know it - quite nice but sometimes a bit overdone. (for instance the Tri-X)
 
160 outdoors/daylight...it's a must with the Noct even with a 2 stop ND filter and 1/8000 max shutter.

640 indoors.

The most interesting observation that I've made after nearly 1000 shots is that the noise appears to be much worse on the camera LCD than on your computer monitor - but the noise is very film-like.

Also, I find that ISO 2500 isn't grainy enough for certain applications :)
 
hofrench@mac.co said:
I'm a street documentary photographer shooting hand held and 90 percent of the time converting my images later to B+W.
I find that 640 works great for that purpose, yielding the most film-like look after post-processing. judge for yourself:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/aglimpseoftheworld/467244979/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/aglimpseoftheworld/458867696/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/aglimpseoftheworld/460044174/

When I am shooting with color in mind, I try for lower ISOs, depending on the lighting. I find that M8 color looks markedly better at lower ISOs.
Click to expand...

Those are beautiful pictures. Really good stuff.

Ian
 
I use 320 to get a good shutter speed. I am about to experiment with 640 for BW to see the grain effect. If the grain in BW isn't film-like, I will revert to 320. Don't like grain with color.

Helene
 
Double Negative said:
By default, obviously 160 for the cleanest image. But more and more I'm enjoying 320 or even 640 as I find the noise very grain like. I'll use 1,250 as well, but tend to avoid it unless necessary. Forget 2,500... That's a last resort. :p
Click to expand...

I agree with this. I use my M8 up to 640 - which I find comparable to 800 on my Canon 1Ds III on a regular basis. - As I use my 1Ds III up to 800 regularly. Sometimes also 1000. The last Christmas I used my Canon extensively at 1600 - which was not up to my expectations. Could be used but...
 
BerndReini said:
160 whenever possible since it resolves the finest detail (hair, etc.).

640 indoors a lot and 1250 only when absolutely necessary.
Click to expand...

Ditto. Actually, I don't have qualms about using 1250; it's 2500 that I shoot only when absolutely necessary, and I do not shoot ISO 2500 in RAW, but JPEG mode; it is the most grainless, painfree way of shooting at ISO 2500 (I have Firmware 2.002)
 
Double Negative said:
Interesting - my other camera is a Canon 1D Mark IIn. Since getting the M8 and shooting with the Zeiss lenses, I've been less and less impressed by my L primes (which I previously thought were very nice). I think the biggest problem is the AA sensor softening. I've been considering the 1DS3 or even alternatives (digital MF). How are you liking the two systems yourself?
Click to expand...

Compared to M8 the 1Ds III is first of all heavy and prominant. There is no way to be discrete with a 1Ds III. It strong sides is it's resolution and it's low noice on high ISO. 800 is just excellent, 1000 is OK. The weak point of the Canon EOS system is some of the lenses. Particularly the zooms. But a few lenses excells. Like the 35 mm 1,4L and the 200 mm 2,8L II.

I use my 1Ds III for birdphotography with teles. But I also find the E-TTL system of Canon very easy to use with several flashes. Then i use a wide angle zoom. None of which is of any excellent quality. So, if I am in a hurry and have a private indoor occation coming up, I use the 1Ds III.

I reckon the M8 & WATE as one of the very best wide digital angle combinations on the market.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom