Jump to content

Low light performance - 006 vs. 007


Deliberate1

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Friends,

I would appreciate hearing fro those of you who have migrated form the 006 to the 007 and can shed some light, so to speak, on the enhanced low light performance of the CMOS iteration. I came to my 006 from an M9 and find that the two share similar low light limits. With the S, I find that I can shoot confidently at 400. If there are no dark shadow, I can go to 800, especially if I am going to convert to B&W, or if the image will not make a large print. The fact that I have slower Zeiss glass (120mm @f4; 35mm @f3.5) creates ever greater limitations. 

I use the S as a walk around, and on tripod when the circumstances permit. But it would very nice to have a greater reach into hand-held low light situations. I have looked at the Q and the Sony's but would much prefer to avoid yet another system, especially if it involves a fixed lens. Perhaps the SL with the S adapter would be an option, but I do not know how capable it is in low light.

With respect and sympathies to those of you who bought an 007, if it proves to be significantly more capable in low light, I will gladly use my 006 until the price of the used 007 reach the level where I bought my current S.

Obliged for any insights and images that you care to share.

David

Link to post
Share on other sites

Friends,

The fact that I have slower Zeiss glass (120mm @f4; 35mm @f3.5) creates ever greater limitations. Perhaps the SL with the S adapter would be an option, but I do not know how capable it is in low light.

With respect and sympathies to those of you who bought an 007, if it proves to be significantly more capable in low light, I will gladly use my 006 until the price of the used 007 reach the level where I bought my current S.

Obliged for any insights and images that you care to share.

David

 

 

 

Hey David, in general I hear the 007 is a stop better this is also my opinion, but the dynamic range is also a bit better, meaning I can push the shadows a bit better on 007 files compared to the 006 files. 

 

I use the Contax 645 Zeiss lenses on my S camera as well which works amazing, the SL you speak of does allow S lenses to be used with the 'Leica TL Adapter S' on it but not the adapters (Leica S Adapter-C and Leica S Adapter-H) so you Zeiss lenses won't work on the SL with the stacked adapters.

 

Also the SL of course is Fullframe and not medium format making them different lenses and rather bulky with slow apertures for 'just' full frame usage. 

 

The 007 surely is better but I love the 006 files more. Medium format has always had low light limitations which is still true today, although Phase One and Hasselblad are making good improvements! 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey David, in general I hear the 007 is a stop better this is also my opinion, but the dynamic range is also a bit better, meaning I can push the shadows a bit better on 007 files compared to the 006 files. 

 

 

 

Jip, thanks for yours. One more stop and a bit more DR sounds good but not inspirational. Not to rekindle the CMOS vs CCD fire, but I too just love the look of the 006 files, just as I do with the M9. As I am fond of saying, the M9 and S006 are  perfect cameras for perfect conditions. But it becomes frustrating when you just can not properly capture an image that is outside the technical limits of the camera. 

The Zeiss lenses are splendid, as are the Leica equivalents. To get that extra stop between the 006 and 007 I suppose i could buy the Leica 35mm @ 2.5 (vs Zeiss 3.5) and/or the 120mm @2.5 (vs Zeiss 4). But I am hesitant to do so given the the mechanical failures that are an all too common source of frustration among their owners. And then there is the cash consideration.

I have seen, on line, some amazing files from the Sony FF (A7s) cameras shot at 50,000 ISO, if I remember correctly. One of those bodies paired with my 50mm Summilux ASPH may not give me a file equivalent to the 006, but at least the image would be mine.

David

Edited by Deliberate1
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Deliberate1....For me, I use the S 007 for low light and Auto ISO with S lenses.  I usually get excellent images.   My smaller walk around is a M246 with either a Summilux 28mm or 50mm lens.  Again, I use Auto ISO and get superb low light images.  r/ Mark

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel it is about 2 stop difference.

S006 especially doesn't like under exposure no matter at what ISO. The merit of S2/S006 is really good IQ with right exposure at low ISO. S007 is a lot easy to deal with high ISO or occasionally under exposure, typical CMOS you would expect.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I went from the S2 to the S (Typ 007) with just a couple of hundred frames with a loan 006. In my experience without formal testing the noise performance is improved by at least a stop or more. Perhaps comparable to moving from the M9 to the M (Typ 240). However there is quite a bit more to the differences in the S range than that specific feature though. Personal priorities, preference and your style of photography and the subject of course all change the equation too though I think.

Perhaps also relevant is whatever the price difference between the two bodies for you too. For myself I am thrilled with the increased capabilities of the newest S with that noise performance not often used in my work. When I have I found ISO 640 at f/2.8 very good indeed.

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/247391-studio-portraits-s-cameras/ #10

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I cary a Leica X (Typ 113) around which has amazing performance considering it's size weight and price.

 

Before I carried an M240 around but I didn't find the S vs M240 with Summilux lenses size and weight wise difference big enough.

 

Now I carry an Leica X-E for real compact and light and Leica X (Typ 113) when I want a bit more light, easily shoot it at ISO 800 and F1,7.

 

Of course for some this doesn't come close enough with the Leica S files but for me it does, the S is for work and deliberate photography, the X is for everything else. I love both!

 

And when you come back to the S you're overwhelmed again by it's quality, even though the X files always amaze me as well. It's a WIN WIN situation for me! Keeps me happy with both systems!

 

For people who know what I like to photograph and how take a look at the following two URLS:

 

Leica X (Typ 113): https://www.flickr.com/photos/jipvankuijk/albums/72157671486466850

Leica X-E (Typ 102): https://www.flickr.com/photos/jipvankuijk/albums/72157671246889431

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

Deliberate1....For me, I use the S 007 for low light and Auto ISO with S lenses.  I usually get excellent images.   My smaller walk around is a M246 with either a Summilux 28mm or 50mm lens.  Again, I use Auto ISO and get superb low light images.  r/ Mark

May I ask, what do you use as the high ISO limit with the S vs the Auto ISO with the M246?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I use my S2-P for portraits, landscape and abstracts. My 'other' camera for reportage, etcetera is the wonderful Sony RX1M2.

Is that what I know as the RX1 rii? I have looked very carefully at that camera and it looks amazing on paper - a true contender for the Q but in 35mm. It has exemplary low light skills, even at ISO 50,000 and, extraordinarily, at 102,000. The comparison between this camera and the Q makes for very interesting reading ( http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2015/12/18/the-sony-rx1r-mark-ii-review-by-steve-huff/)

I have read that the 42mp sensor can make it more challenging to get optimal results because it reveals the best and worst of your shooting technique. Have you found this to be true? This camera is a strong contender for me. But I still would prefer the flexibility of the a7s which has been described as a low light monster. Interestingly, it has "only" 12mp, but I understand that the images compare well with the a7rii with the 42mp sensor. The ability to use my 50 Lux and 90 Elmarit M (with adapter) in very low light situations with the a7s would broaden the shooting envelope for me - exponentially. May I ask why you decided to go the RX route rather than the a7 one. Much obliged.

David

Edited by Deliberate1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure, no problem, I guess in the end for me, it's an emotional thing. I fell in love with the S system the moment it was announced at PK '08. The same goes for the original RX1 at PK '12. I couldn't afford it at the time, because of big investments I did in S glass, and when the RX1R ii came out I just couldn't resist anymore.

 

After getting used to an S, it's a revelation to work with the Sony, so small and light and agile! IQ is outstanding.

 

Shooting technique:

 

The excellent lens and the 42,2 MP sensor leave a lot of room to crop/zoom in. I'm more of a 50mm-100mm FOV person myself actually, but the 35mm is fine, most of the time. I didn't get the Q because of this, resolution (too little) and 28mm (too wide) and I just did not fall in live with it

 

I use it for spontanious 'snaps' and as a sketchbook for interesting light conditions. For people/action I use it on 5 fps, auto ISO, manual exposure. Always with the shutter on 1/250 and then depending on available light put the aperture on f2.8 or f5.6-f8.0 and let the auto ISO do the rest. For still life I use the same exposure settings and auto-bracket +\_ 3 stops.

 

This way, there is always an acceptable file that I can work with, without having to 'think' while shooting. I leave that for when I do more contemplative work with my S. This way, I try to practice two different forms of photography.

 

Maybe it's a bit like the great loves in ones life, love at first sight is often an indication things will work out fine. For me, these two cameras have.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Peter,

Obliged for your thoughts. 

One thing that particularly attracts me to the Sony's for street work is the tilting screen. I well remember with disappointment and frustration how people would scatter when I would lift my Rollei 6008 to my eye. With the 90mm Schneider, it looked like a bazooka - a term coined by an Israeli soldier as I was shooting in Jerusalem. On my next trip, I attached the waist finder and could shoot nearly invisibly. I see the same value from the tilting screen on the Sony and holding it at chest level. 

Thanks again. Still torn between the RX1 rii with the fixed 35mm and the lens flexibility of the a7r or s. No bad choices. Just choices.

David

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Low light performance of the S is limited more by the slow lenses (compared to the M). I know that F2.5 is fast for a MF lens, but that's almost a couple of stops less than a M Summilux. I photograph concerts with a S(006) with either a 70 or 120 wide open. It's a lot more challenging than my friends toting canikons in the pit. It is doable, but you learn to use it like a film camera in the 70s with 400 or max 800 speed film.

 

Here's one from last Sunday with the 80s "Madchester" band, Happy Mondays - S(006) and 120CS

 

Charlie

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!

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Deliberate1....To answer your question that you asked me at post #7,  I use Auto ISO at 3200 with the S007 (on rare occasions 6400) and Auto ISO 6400 with the M246.  Depending on the subject and available light, my resulting images have been excellent to superb most of the time.  When I had my M-P 240, I used it in the same manner...again excellent results.  I can not say the same when I had my S006 and could not use it in this manner for low light images.   r/ Mark

Edited by LeicaR10
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Deliberate1....To answer your question that you asked me at post #7,  I use Auto ISO at 3200 with the S007 (on rare occasions 6400) and Auto ISO 6400 with the M246.  Depending on the subject and available light, my resulting images have been excellent to superb most of the time.  When I had my M-P 240, I used it in the same manner...again excellent results.  I can not say the same when I had my S006 and could not use it in this manner for low light images.   r/ Mark

Remarkably broader range than my comfort zone with either the 006 or M9 which both top out at 800 under the best of circumstances.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Deliberate1  After reading your original post, I most highly recommend you try out the S007 and a SL with the S adapter.  Depending on your low light subjects and investment in the S system, you might find the SL with the S adapter a more economical way to go.  I have seen images taken by a friend of mine who just got the S adapter for his SL a few weeks ago.  The results are superb.  Plus the SL sensor is excellent in low light.  I was so impressed with his images, I have given serious thought about selling my S007, buying a SL body and S and M adapters.  I am sure you are well aware you can use M, R and S system lenses and I would think you would be most pleased with the low light results.  In addition, the SL cost is far more palatable if and when a SL upgrade is offered.  I see you didn't mention owning any S lenses, but you can certainly buy previously owned ones from a reputable dealer for about 1/2 price and Leica has a warranty for any defects on the AF motors on S lenses regardless of owner and age of the lens.  I do know Leica is working hard on a mirrorless S, but when that will be available, I was not told.  I can not imagine the S008 camera being the same cost as a Hassy X1D. In addition, the S lenses are superb.  Leica owners IMO, have a tendency to be gear heads...me included...and want the latest tools available rather than concentrating on enjoying that moment in time and making excellent images.  If you need/want a low light imaging tool, then a Leica SL most likely would be a better way to go for various reasons.  Again, just my opinion based on my experience.  r/ Mark

 

PS  Leica dealers have a Leica SL 24 hour test drive ongoing at most stores.  Perhaps they will do the same for a S007 too.

Edited by LeicaR10
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey David, in general I hear the 007 is a stop better this is also my opinion, but the dynamic range is also a bit better, meaning I can push the shadows a bit better on 007 files compared to the 006 files. 

 

I use the Contax 645 Zeiss lenses on my S camera as well which works amazing, the SL you speak of does allow S lenses to be used with the 'Leica TL Adapter S' on it but not the adapters (Leica S Adapter-C and Leica S Adapter-H) so you Zeiss lenses won't work on the SL with the stacked adapters.

 

Also the SL of course is Fullframe and not medium format making them different lenses and rather bulky with slow apertures for 'just' full frame usage. 

 

The 007 surely is better but I love the 006 files more. Medium format has always had low light limitations which is still true today, although Phase One and Hasselblad are making good improvements! 

 

 

Something isn't making sense here... to me. Just to confirm, to you the 007 offers just a 1 stop advantage to the 006?  My experience with the 006 is that 800 requires good light.  Thin light creates disappointment.  Usually best to push the ISO up a stop, over expose by a stop, and pull back a stop in LR.  In contrast, shots I see posted (such as Red Dot Forum) show pretty darn good performance even at 3200, and good shadow recovery.  That argues for 2 stops plus dynamic range. So which is it?

 

I sure hope the experience is (nearly) 2 stops and better behavior with thin light.

 

If I sound a little anxious on the question it's because I just ordered a 007 to replace my stolen S-E.

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...