Low light Photography, the M8 and D3

[ckchen72]

Hello everyone!

First off I wanted to thank everybody in advance for all the usefuls hints and info from this sight. I've struggled over the past year in regards to the M8 and indoor event photography where the light is low. I shoot with the sunmicron f2's and wonder how much an extra stop or 2 would help. Then I hear that the Nikon D3's can take incredible photos with crazy high iso settings. My question though for anyone with experience with both systems... The Nikon is bigger and clunkier and I assume you can't handhold as well as an M8. I can shoot an M8 at least at 1/30th and get good results. So maybe I save an fstop or 2 there. The dealer also said their best lense for the D3 has a maximum aperutre of 2.8, so I gain another stop there. By that time what I'm shooting on the M9 at ISO 640 I might be shooting at 3200 on the Nikon.

Any thoughts on this. Has the Nikon got it down so you can shoot wedding and not need any flash system?

thanks again!

Calvin

[jackal]

surely another stop in that f1.4 35mm and 50mm gives easily sharp enough results

[vieri]

Hello Calvin,

I own both M8 & D3 (and a D300 too). While is true that due to the lack of mirror slap you can handhold the M8 to slower shutter speed than a D3, and thus gain maybe a stop there, if you shoot anything that moves (people at weddings, concerts, events and so on) and you want them to be sharp vs blurred in your pics that becomes quite in-influent; as well, why limit yourself to f2.8 lenses? You can use f1.4 lenses on the D3 (28 mm, 50 mm, 85 mm AF, 35 mm MF) or f2 lenses (35, 105 DC, 135 DC, 200 mm in AF, 28, 85, 105 & 200 in MF) and get back there; more, you can use VR lenses on the D3 and get some more slow shutter speed advantage. Not to forget that you can use the D3 up to ISO 6400 with very good quality, and 12.800 with some effort (definitely in BW, color is iffy IMHO).

To me, for extreme low light the D3 beats the M8 hands down for color work, and for BW too unless you are into that grainy pushed Tri-X look (which I personally like a lot).

[innerimager]

Calvin- It really depends on how high Iso you see wanting or needing. The D3, incredibly, yields excellent quality images at 6400 iso. Added to that, the auto iso feature in the D3 is smashing. For really low light ambient work, it runs circles around the M8. But for just low light work, where 640 will absolutely do, 1200 maybe, the M8 is great as you know, but I'd get some 1.4 lenses. best...Peter

[rwfreund]

Although a committed M8 shooter, I bought a D3 recently mainly due to high iso needs, long lens, and macro use.
I have a rather old 50mm 1.4D nikkor that despite a touch of element separation works reasonably well.
What I have found is that I get very usable images at iso 3200, and sometimes depending on subject at iso 6400. The mass of the camera actually helps to damp mirror vibration so I have no problem hand holding at 1/30 sec if I take a bit of care.
I will be replacing that lens, since the loss of sharpness at 1.4 is noticeable, but seems to be corrected at f/2.
With the M8's 1/8000 shutter, I can hand hold to about 1/15 under favorable conditions. I am hoping that the lower vibration of the 1/4000 shutter will increase my hit rate.
The D3 also has a delayed release mode which pauses slightly between mirror up and shutter release. I think that this can also be used hand held without too much bother.
Bottom line in my estimation, I can get files with the D3 at 3200 which compare favorably with the M8 at 640. That is about a 2.5 stop advantage which is major for me.
-bob

[hdrmd]

As stated by several others above the D3 is amazing. I love the M8, but with ISO ratings at 6400, auto ISO control, nikon flash, not to mention AI servo autofocus, you are really talking about two different things if you try to compare the two cameras. The M8 is a joy to use, with fast wide angle lenses, and I am used to the rangefinder, but the stories about the D3 are real; the ISO of 3200 is usable. DR

[sliversurger]

Calvin,

Here's a link to an excellent concert photographer who shoots in fast moving low light situations and uses high ISO with his D3. ishootshows.com: Concert Photography he's taken fantastic shots up to ISO 25,000!

Todd is his name and he shares quite a bit of his techniques on his site. A great guy and also willing to answer any questions you have.

I find the M8 great at shooting low light slow moving objects. But if you need non-flash, low light, average-fast moving objects, better to go with the D3.

btw, rumours abound that nikon will be introducing a D3x within the next 1/2 year. you can read about that on various nikon forums.

[biglouis]

Originally Posted by sliversurger

Calvin,

Here's a link to an excellent concert photographer who shoots in fast moving low light situations and uses high ISO with his D3. ishootshows.com: Concert Photography he's taken fantastic shots up to ISO 25,000!

Terrific link. If I was in the market for a D3 this site is what would sell it to me. Thanks for posting.

LouisB

[ohnri]

In addition to the high iso performance the Nikon has a great flash system that will save you if you are shooting in an unlit basement. Also, the D3 will focus quickly and accurately in light that is so low that I struggle with my M8.

I was just at a wedding last weekend and took many excellent photos at the ceremony and reception with the 24-70/2.8. I never used a flash. I wouldn't have had a chance at getting at least half of those even with the best f/1.4 or f/1.0 glass on my M8.

If you can manage the weight, the D3 will not disappoint you.

Best,

Bill

[chris_livsey]

Originally Posted by rwfreund

The D3 also has a delayed release mode which pauses slightly between mirror up and shutter release.
-bob

I wasn't aware of that. That feature is used in the Hasselblad H2/3 series (maybe software fixable in H1) where the mirror slap is certainly an issue handheld and the few milliseconds delay gives a remarkable improvement there. My V is digitally limited in quality handheld for that reason below 1/125th is iffy so 1/15th Leica is a dream.

From the OP:
"Has the Nikon got it down so you can shoot wedding and not need any flash system? "

That depends on why you are using flash surely. I presume you mean low light church interiors eg but out in the full sun you may still value some fill. Even Jeff Ascough uses flash, on ocassion ( no pun), but you need sharp eyes to study the shadows to see it as the look is "natural".

[scjohn]

I would love to favorably compare my M8 to my D3 in low light. I can't. The D3 image quality advantage at high ISO levels is too much. Unless grain and "artistic blur" is the goal I now use the D3 in low light almost exclusively. This is ironic because low light / bright lenses and the ability to hand hold played a huge role in my decision to buy my first film Leica years ago. The D3 really is astonishing.

[jimmy pro]

Yes, the D3 (and for that matter, the D300, and any current Canon dSLR from the Rebel XTi on up) runs rings around the M8 at all but the lowest 2 ISO's. In the case of the Canon's, that was true right from day one of the M8's life. All the "but the noise is film-like" crap is just excuses. As a company trying to compete in the digital world, Leica is like a rowboat trying to keep up with a fleet of nucular destroyers.

Now then, try sneaking a D3 (or any dSLR for that matter) with a 80 f/1.4 into a show with a "no photography" rule and it becomes clear that the M8 has it's usefulness. A noisy shot is better than no shot. Of course, the M8 makes more racket than an M7 so you still might get thrown out after the first shot, but hey, I'm trying to be positive about the M8 here.....

[markowich]

as all previous posters agreed upon, the D3 beats the M8 in low light photography by a huge margin. as far as i am concerned it does so also at low iso ratings, for most shooting situations, due to the wonderful aufofocus, the superior light metering, most likely better dynamic range..... it is comparing a porsche (D3) to a vintage morgan (M8). clearly, also the morgan has its fans but....
the bad news is that there is very little that leica can do about it. certainly a better sensor in a new M-model would not swing it, the rangefinder ideology has finally reached its end (again, i concede a small remaining market segment for the die-hard i-need-a-small-camera-crowd).
this leaves me very curious about leica's medium range survival strategy.
peter

[Peter D Lux 2]

Originally Posted by jimmy pro

Leica is like a rowboat trying to keep up with a fleet of nucular destroyers.

Finally, I agree with Mr. Pro here.

[Artichoke]

Originally Posted by jimmy pro

snip

Now then, try sneaking a D3 (or any dSLR for that matter) with a 80 f/1.4 into a show with a "no photography" rule and it becomes clear that the M8 has it's usefulness. A noisy shot is better than no shot. Of course, the M8 makes more racket than an M7 so you still might get thrown out after the first shot, but hey, I'm trying to be positive about the M8 here.....

I used my M8 at a classic music recital (violin/piano) and audience members sitting nearby said they did not hear me shooting ...they were surprised
I use a 1/2 body leather case which I think dampens some of the noise ...while noisier than film Ms, the M8 is a relatively quiet camera

[mat_mcdermott]

Originally Posted by Artichoke

I used my M8 at a classic music recital (violin/piano) and audience members sitting nearby said they did not hear me shooting ...they were surprised
I use a 1/2 body leather case which I think dampens some of the noise ...while noisier than film Ms, the M8 is a relatively quiet camera

While never having to shoot in such quiet circumstances, I have to agree that in practice the M8 is not a particular loud camera. I've never found it to be a problem. The thing is that most DSLRs aren't that loud anymore either (except when the motor drive kicks in--at press conferences it sounds like a room full of sewing machines sometimes) and one of the classic advantages of the M system isn't so unique anymore.

[charlesphoto99]

I actually find that due to the outstanding ergonomics of the D3 I can actually handhold it as low if not lower shutter speeds than the M8. The mirror is very well damped and the shutter release smoother than (my) M8. That said, my M8 at low shutter speeds has been improved by use of the Thumbs Up attachment. I was having a lot harder time at low shutter speeds than my M7 before the addition of that.

The D3 is truly amazing at high iso's. One really doesn't have to worry so much about owning the best super fast lenses anymore. A 24mm f2.8 AFD, 35mm f/2 AFD, 50mm f/1.8 AFD and 85mm f/1.8 AFD and a 135mm DC f/2 can all be had on the used market for about the price of an entry level Leica M lens (or one top line Nikon zoom).

The M8 is a great camera but in my opinion is not so great for event type photography (ie stage type lighting). With the D3 there's no excuse - it always shoots where you need it to shoot.

I recently did a studio headshot for a magazine cover. At one point I turned off my stobes and shot only with the 100 watt modeling lamps at iso 1100. They chose one of those, no questions aksed. I think only I or another photographer could have spotted the difference (other than depth of field) between those and the iso 200 ones.

[caparobertsan]

Great Nikon D3 shots!!! Well of course Nikon or Canon can produce great images effortlessly Japanese camera had beaten German one 50 years ago!
BUT I am sure with Leica M8 we can still produce great image as good as D3. But much more difficult + need noise reduce software`s help, too.

I think Pro would naturally use Nikon or Canon for Jobs. And they would own Leicas but use them on weekend only.

I think Leica M8 users are very odd and unique twisted people. We want to take picture with Leica M8 regardless of many problems.

I love My M8!

[Riccis]

OK, this thread needs some images (specially from the M8)...

Yes, as previous posters have mentioned, the high ISO capabilities of the D3 are amazing, but the M8 is not as bad as people say.

While the D3 does give you the ability to shoot at ISO 25,000 with a 1.4 Nikon lens, in those instances where the light is so bad that your shutter speeds are 1/20s, your images are going to be cr*p anyway and I'd rather use a flash regardless of the tool I may be wielding at the moment. Please don't take my comments the wrong way and turn the thread into a big argument as I am not knocking the D3 (like I said it is a great camera I also own but only gets used for macro work on baby portraits).

As always, below is some of my work (fresh from this Saturday's amazing wedding). They were all shot with the M8 and Noctilux, ISO 640, f/1 @1/30s... Please keep in mind that these were shot at the after party (past midnight) and these folks have been having a blast at the open bar and dancing for a while (hint, hint, no static images here). Of course, by no means I am implying they are perfect or everybody's cup of tea, just showing how I use the M8 to pay the bills.









Cheers,

[Kittyphoto]

I think D3 is a great camera. D3 noise is amazing still good even at iso3200. But M8 is better in color quality. D3 pictures looks flat to me when comparing to M8. I think new DSLR use CMOS to get less noise and power consumption and use new logic board process files. Still I prefer files from CCD like M8 and most Digital Back. IMHO

kitty