Jump to content

M240 image of London by Christopher Tribble


k-hawinkler

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Chris,

this is a very interesting picture showing the potential of the new sensor, actually to me it seems that is underexposed, may be by one stop or even more. If you convert it to black and white then it becomes even more obvious. How was it recorded, in auto mode or manually? In principle by using exposure correction by 1, 2 ore even 3 stops effective ISO settings up 51200 coulid be achieved. Have you tried that?

 

Thomas

 

Thomas - I was working in manual mode using the SPOT metering option on the M9. I would have been exposing for the face and letting the rest of the scene go where it needed to - if this meant the blacks were clipping, I wasn't overly concerned - it was a very dark setting! I'm interested that you feel it was under-exposed. If I'd allowed longer exposure the overall values for the shadow would have been wrong for the account of the scene I wanted to give - and highlights would have been badly blown. Below is how it looks on my system (with WB adjusted, but no adjustment to exposure other than the defaults I work with on import). I'v e done a second shot to show the EXIF - interesting that LR picks up the metering mode from the 240

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited by chris_tribble
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thomas - I was working in manual mode using the SPOT metering option on the M9.

 

 

Chris,

 

thanks a lot for your explanation, sorry, the qoute in my question was too short, I was referring to another picture.

 

1. this was taken with a prototype body - later iterations will do a better job I'm sure

2. I understand it Leica view 6400 as a PUSH option on the M240.

 

Will I use it in the future - YES! My experience so far has been that for many REALLY low light situations it works very well, though correct exposure is critical.

 

Would I have used it in the case of the shot of the Houses of Parliament from Waterloo bridge that you comment? NO. It wasn't actually necessary. Under normal circumstances I'd have used 800 or 1600 and a tripod. Even 3200 hand held would have been OK. I was playing with what I could get at 6400 and this is one of the images that Leica chose to post.

 

The original image has a huge tonal range (http://cdn.l-camera-forum.com/leica-...2/l1000857.jpg) so it's not a bad test of the sensor's capacity.

 

 

So in essence, what I was trying to ask, this picture seems to be correspond to a shot at significant lower settings than 6400, but the dark parts are still look very good. That's why I was asking the question whether you have tried playing with exposure correction in order the simulate ISO settings higher than 6400.

 

Thomas

Link to post
Share on other sites

Chris,

 

thanks a lot for your explanation, sorry, the qoute in my question was too short, I was referring to another picture.

 

 

 

So in essence, what I was trying to ask, this picture seems to be correspond to a shot at significant lower settings than 6400, but the dark parts are still look very good. That's why I was asking the question whether you have tried playing with exposure correction in order the simulate ISO settings higher than 6400.

 

Thomas

 

Ah - looking at this one, the original was slightly OVER exposed. Original and the correction I posted below. I hope this clarifies - and YES - the file has tremendous latitude in my experience. HOWEVER - PLEASE REMEMBER THIS WAS SHOT AT ISO 400

 

BTW - someone mentioned that they couldn't get a strong 3D sense from the image - I'm not surprised. Telephoto lenses flatten perspective...

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jono, thanks.

 

Much as I feared, but really didn't want confirmed. Damn, could be a deal breaker.

 

I wonder if this could change with a firmware update?

 

Best

 

Keith

 

HI Keith

I felt the same way - but I have to say that in practice I like the magnifier implementation better than any other camera I've used - it's going back to focus and recompose, but it just works very well. Shooting with the EVF is really not for action shots anyway, and my feeling is that it works better like this (I always find the zoom point is the wrong one on my OMD!).

 

I had some discussion about it with Leica, and I think that it's a real feature of the sensor - not something they can just add to firmware later.

 

The focus peaking is less sizzly than the NEX.

 

All I can say is don't knock it until you've tried it!

 

all the best

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah - looking at this one, the original was slightly OVER exposed. Original and the correction I posted below. I hope this clarifies - and YES - the file has tremendous latitude in my experience. HOWEVER - PLEASE REMEMBER THIS WAS SHOT AT ISO 400

 

..

 

Chris,

 

sorry, now we have complete confusion, I was referring to the picture with the dark sky, the moon and the milenium dome taken at 6400 ASA:

 

http://cdn.l-camera-forum.com/leica-news/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/l1000857.jpg

 

 

Is it taken with the spot mode?

In essence, what I was trying to ask, this picture seems to be correspond to a shot at significant lower settings than 6400, but the dark parts are still look very good. That's why I was asking the question whether you have tried playing with exposure correction in order the simulate ISO settings higher than 6400.

 

Thomas

Link to post
Share on other sites

If one watches the image of St. Paul Cathedral on the APPLE McPro 15" with Retina display, all the nuisances can be percieved. It's not so "flat".

However, by comparing pictures taken by M9 and M-240 (from the work of Mr. Jean Gaumy), those of M-240 obviously more flat than M9, although color rendering is beautiful.

As a user of M8, I am considering to get a M-240 and will appreciate if Leica improves the firmware of M-240 so that its IQ can be comparable to M8.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

As a user of M8, I am considering to get a M-240 and will appreciate if Leica improves the firmware of M-240 so that its IQ can be comparable to M8.

 

Ah, well, I think we can already assume the IQ of the M-240 exceeds that of the M8, Thomas.

 

Welcome to the forum...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jono / Chris --- with regards to the live magnification being limited to the central area, has Leica explained why? This is a big limitation in terms of off-center compositions, moving around the magnification area to check wide angle focus, etc. This limitation puzzles me, maybe it's one of the "to do" items on their punch list?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jono / Chris --- with regards to the live magnification being limited to the central area, has Leica explained why? This is a big limitation in terms of off-center compositions, moving around the magnification area to check wide angle focus, etc. This limitation puzzles me, maybe it's one of the "to do" items on their punch list?

 

HI John

I asked, and I was told that it was simply not possible with the hardware - don't know why (I might ask sometime). Honest though - it's not an issue, it works so nicely.

 

point camera at what you want to focus on - focus on it

half press shutter zooms out to show whole frame . . . reframe and shoot.

What's even nicer, is that if you keep the shutter half pressed, then it holds the exposure for the zoomed in area rather than the image as a whole.

 

In true Leica fashion it's very simple, without bells and whistles and it simply works.

 

I honestly find it easier than picking an area for focusing - the only time I can see it would be irritating is on a tripod.

 

all the best

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Jono,

 

Thanks. I agree with your description.

However, on tripod is where the missing feature would be really helpful.

Oh well, I can always use the OMD, also for extra reach. :D

 

KH - I do agree, for tripod it's an issue - but I suppose we live in an imperfect world :rolleyes:

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah - looking at this one, the original was slightly OVER exposed. Original and the correction I posted below. I hope this clarifies - and YES - the file has tremendous latitude in my experience. HOWEVER - PLEASE REMEMBER THIS WAS SHOT AT ISO 400

 

BTW - someone mentioned that they couldn't get a strong 3D sense from the image - I'm not surprised. Telephoto lenses flatten perspective...

 

Chris,

 

sorry for the confusion, may I ask my question again. I was referring to the picture with the dark sky, the moon and the milenium dome taken at 6400 ASA:

 

http://cdn.l-camera-forum.com/leica-...2/l1000857.jpg

 

 

Is it taken with the spot mode?

In essence, what I was trying to ask, this picture seems to be correspond to a shot at significant lower settings than 6400, but the dark parts are still look very good. That's why I was asking the question whether you have tried playing with exposure correction in order the simulate ISO settings higher than 6400.

 

Thomas

Link to post
Share on other sites

What an epic!

 

Thomas - you're right - it was way over exposed. re metering, I was in classic mode (centre weighted averaging). I pulled the exposure back over 1.5 stops in the version I posted.

 

Hope this clarifies things!

 

:)

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited by chris_tribble
Link to post
Share on other sites

That's why I was asking the question whether you have tried playing with exposure correction in order the simulate ISO settings higher than 6400.

 

Thomas

 

Thomas, may I ask what do you mean by simulating ISO setting, or achieving high ISO via exposure correction (compensation?) What do you think the exposure compensation does? Do you mean it is kind of amplifying the signal, or what? To my knowledge (for M9 at least) it is simply affecting the shutter speed in A mode.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What an epic!

 

Thomas - you're right - it was way over exposed. re metering, I was in classic mode (centre weighted averaging). I pulled the exposure back over 1.5 stops in the version I posted.

 

Hope this clarifies things!

 

:)

 

Chris, thanks a lot!

 

Thomas

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thomas, may I ask what do you mean by simulating ISO setting, or achieving high ISO via exposure correction (compensation?) What do you think the exposure compensation does? Do you mean it is kind of amplifying the signal, or what? To my knowledge (for M9 at least) it is simply affecting the shutter speed in A mode.

 

As you wrote, exposure compensation affects the shutter speed, if I set ISO to 2500 and use -2 stops exposure compensation it is effective 10000 ISO, for the M9 I tried it it works but the results are not convincing.

 

Thomas

Link to post
Share on other sites

with regards to the live magnification being limited to the central area, has Leica explained why?

The answer was that it is just not possible to process the entire image at the required speed so that one could freely choose the part of the image to be displayed. I have to admit, though, that I don’t fully understand this – I would have thought one could select an arbitrary ‘window’ of sensor pixels for read-out, so regardless of the position of that window the number of pixels to be processed would be the same. Apparently I am overlooking some limitation.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

The answer was that it is just not possible to process the entire image at the required speed so that one could freely choose the part of the image to be displayed. I have to admit, though, that I don’t fully understand this – I would have thought one could select an arbitrary ‘window’ of sensor pixels for read-out, so regardless of the position of that window the number of pixels to be processed would be the same. Apparently I am overlooking some limitation.

 

 

Maybe you do, maybe you don't. :D

That would be interesting to find out though.

 

Also, what's the reason for the 30 Hz EVF rate?

Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...