Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'high iso'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type

Leica Forum

  • International User Forum
    • Leica M System
    • Leica L-Mount
    • Leica Q3 / Leica Q2 / Leica Q
    • Leica X
    • Leica D-Lux / Digilux / V-Lux / C-Lux
    • Leica R System
    • Leica S System
    • Leica FOTOS App / Leica LUX App
    • Leica Collectors & Historica
    • Photo Forum
    • Leica & General Discussions
    • Leica Forum Discussions
    • LSI Member Forum
    • Events & Member Meetings
  • Deutsches Leica Forum
    • Leica M-System
    • Leica L-Mount
    • Leica Q3 / Leica Q2 / Leica Q
    • Leica X
    • Leica D-Lux / Digilux / V-Lux / C-Lux
    • Leica R System
    • Leica S System
    • Leica FOTOS App / Leica LUX App
    • Leica Sammler & Historica
    • Foto-Forum
    • Leica & Allgemeine Diskussionen
    • Leica Forum Diskussionen
  • Challenges / Wettbewerbe
    • Digi - Lux Challenge
    • Leica X Challenge
    • Leica Mini Challenge
    • Leica One Challenge
    • Barnack Challenge


  • Leica Q
  • Leica M (Typ 240)
  • Leica SL (Typ 601)


  • Leica Q
  • Leica M (Typ 240)
  • Leica M Monochrom (Typ 246)
  • Leica SL (Typ 601)


  • Leica M
    • Leica M Cameras
    • Leica M Lenses
    • Leica M Accessories
    • Leica M Wanted
  • Leica L-Mount
  • Leica S System
  • Leica Q
  • Leica X
  • Leica D-LUX / V-LUX / DIGILUX
  • Historica
    • Leica R System
    • Screwmount Leica
  • Misc

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start




Website URL






Member Title






Your Leica Products / Deine Leica Produkte


Found 25 results

  1. Hallo zusammen, ich hatte vor eineinhalb Wochen das Vergnügen, im Leica Store mit der Q3 herumzuspielen und mit dem Mitarbeiter ein wenig zu quatschen (um auszuloten, ob sich für mich ein Upgrade von der Q2 lohnt 😉). Er teilte mir unter anderem mit, dass bei geringeren Auflösungseinstellungen (36,5 oder 18,6 MP) jeweils eine gewisse Zahl Pixel des Sensors für die Aufnahme zusammengefasst werden. Daraufhin kam mir die Idee, dass sich dadurch ja eventuell die High-ISO-Performance bei den Auflösungen 36,5 oder 18,6 verbessern könnte (ist vielleicht naiv von mir). Der Mitarbeiter verneinte, sagte aber, dass, wenn man geringere Auflösungen einstellt (36,5 oder 18,6 MP) , "sich der Dynamikumfang um bis zu ca. 1-2 Blenden verbessern" würde. Ist natürlich nur eine vage Aussage (was auch an meiner vagen Erinnerungsleistung liegt, die mir meine Frau regelmäßig vorhält), aber um der Sache auf den Grund zu gehen...hier meine Frage: Hat mal einer der Early-Q3-Users getestet, ob durch die Einstellung 36,5 oder 18,6 MP (statt 60 MP) der Dynamikumfang oder generell die Low-Light-Fähigkeiten der Q3 besser werden? Vielen Dank für Eure Antworten/Einschätzungen. P.S.: Übrigens kann ich bestätigen, was jmschuh hier schon geschrieben hat: Das Klappdisplay, welchem ich ziemlich kritisch gegenüberstand, macht einen wirklich soliden Eindruck, welcher meine Bedenken weitestgehend zerstreut hat.
  2. Many of us have already noticed it, but shooting @ iso 25000 is now a non-issue 😊
  3. I obtained a customer-release—not pre-release/beta—M10-R and compared it side-by-side with the M10 Monochrom (hereafter referred to as the M10-M) on a test scene at high ISO values. The firmware version for both was the latest firmware currently available to the public: for the M10-R (upgraded from the initial released firmware that was pre-installed in the new camera), and for the M10-M. Methodology: all shots were taken on a tripod with a 2-second delay to minimize vibration. The same Leica 50 APO lens was used for all tests. The aperture was set to f/5.6 for all tests, at which the resolving power of the 50 APO is about as high as possible among commercially available 35-mm format lenses. The ISO value and shutter speeds were as follows: ISO 6400, 1/60 s ISO 12500, 1/125 s ISO 25000, 1/250 s ISO 50000, 1/500 s ISO 100000 (M10-M only), 1/1000 s To the best of my ability, the M10-R and the M10-M were treated equally. The test shots were taken in one sitting, with the same tripod position 2.2 m from the target, and under the same lighting. The images were focused by rangefinder and confirmed by live view for each camera. The subject distance (2.2 m) was farther from the test scene than my earlier M10-R tests (1.3 m) because I anticipated that the M10-M might have no trouble resolving all the details of the scene from 1.3 m, even at absurdly high ISOs. To keep the test as pure as possible, all the test shots were taken as DNG files, then transferred and opened in Adobe Photoshop 2020 with Camera Raw 12.3 (which has native M10-R support) with no corrections or adjustments to the default image settings, other than clicking “B&W” to convert the M10-R images to monochrome. Therefore, this test does not really answer the question of how the performance between the cameras compares if one were to bring the full power of modern post-processing, noise removal, AI-driven scaling and sharpening, etc. to bear on the images. It also does not exploit the important ability of adjusting the levels of different colors when converting color files to monochrome files—arguably the largest advantage of using the M10-R to generate monochrome photos instead of the M10-M. Instead, the purpose of this test is to compare the acuity and noise level of the two cameras at ISO 6400 to ISO 50000. Overall, both cameras take remarkably good monochrome photos, even at ISO levels such as 12500 that would previously be considered out-of-reach. Here are 100% crops from a small portion of the center region of both cameras (M10-R on the left, M10-M on the right). Click on the image below to view it at 100% to avoid scaling artifacts. I would have no hesitation using ISO 12500 monochrome images from either camera for virtually any application. But of course there are substantial performance differences. Finding #1: The M10-M captures higher acuity levels than the M10-R across the ISO range tested (6400 to 50000). As expected, given the lack of a Bayer color filter array (CFA) and no need to de-mosaic the red-, green-, or blue-filtered pixels, the M10-M offers significantly higher acuity than the M10-R. To my eye, the advantage persists even if you give the M10-R an advantage of one or two stops: compare the sharpness of the fine features of the scene as captured by the M10-M at ISO 25000 vs. the M10-R at ISO 6400, or the M10-R at ISO 25000 to the M10-M at ISO 100000—a remarkable testament to the M10-M’s ability to capture a scene down to the smallest details, even zooming in to 100%. Notice also that at the same ISO level, aperture, and shutter speed (chosen by each camera’s auto-shutter speed setting to be the same at all ISO levels!), the M10-M images are only modestly brighter than the M10-R; I was surprised that the Bayer CFA didn’t dim the M10-R images more strongly. Perhaps the M10-R firmware partially compensates for the loss of light due to the Bayer CFA. Finding #2: The M10-M offers about a 1- to 2-stop advantage in high-ISO noise levels over the M10-R. Compare the M10-M at ISO 50000 to the M10-R at ISO 12500, or the M10-M at ISO 25000 to the M10-R at ISO 6400. The M10-M continues to blow me away with its high-ISO performance. Indeed, Bill Claff’s measurements at https://photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm rank the M10-M’s high ISO performance as fourth among all cameras tested to date, behind the Phase One IQ4, the Phase One IQ3, and the Fuji GFX-100—three current or recent top-of-the-line medium format cameras. Overall, Leica has created in the M10-M and the M10-R two current-generation sister cameras with outstanding overall performance. If acuity or high-ISO performance is more important than color for your particular application, than the M10-M outperforms the M10-R and is among the very best cameras to my knowledge, even joining some medium-format monsters. And if color is needed, either in the final image or to enable creative conversion to black and white images that allows easy sky darkening, face lightening, etc. during post-processing, the M10-R remains an option worthy of its current flagship status among Leica M cameras.
  4. I jsut received an email from the forum advertising Denoise software. I was just curious if anyone has used this product and what their impression is. It is certainly affordable at $35 and I would like to use it on some older files.
  5. It's well documented that the M240 is not able to go past 8 seconds shutter duration when set at ISO 800 and further which makes successful Milky Way type of pictures very difficult (standard being something like 30 seconds at ISO 1600 at f2). Well after some searching today I found a post where a guy had discovered that using the M set on auto ISO and in continuous shoot mode when set on bulb he could get 60 seconds. However even when auto ISO high limit was set at 3600 ISO the exposure turned out at 800 ISO the camera not shifting the the highest ISO in the auto setting. Anyway after some experimentation I found that if I took a shot first in A shutter mode at ISO 1600 and then go back to auto ISO it would still use 1600 since auto ISO uses the last used ISO when set to bulb. So with this I was able to get and exposure of 60 seconds at 1600 ISO when ISO is in auto, shutter set to B and in continuous shot C. Recap Set auto ISO upper limit to 1600 or above Set ISO to 1600 and take a picture Set ISO to auto Set shutter to B Set shoot mode to C Take a shot and hold down the shutter button After 60 secs it will automatically close the shutter Of course in the real world you would use a cable release and make the necessary exposure time, say 30 seconds for the Milky Way at f2 Now I just have to find somewhere to shoot the Milky Way which is not easy when you live in Shanghai :-)
  6. Dear M8 users, as a true fan of my little camera and an avid reader of M8 related discussions and reviews I have stumbled upon negative comments regarding the high ISO performance numerous times. Mostly they go along the lines of "don't go above 160/320/640, as it becomes really unusable", "looks like my webcam", "terrible ISO performance" etc. I think it is time to dedicate a thread showing those horrible images at higher ISO... So that people looking for a M8 know what they can expect (and others might finally stop shooting high ISO images, cause they won't get any good results at all) My rules: - I said HIGH ISO, so no images below 1250 (have a look at the flickr M8 mid to high iso group, haha) - noise reduction (luminance should be mentioned, color is OK) - used raw converter should be mentioned - ISO value readily visible would be really useful - motive doesn't have to be mindblowing, as this thread is really about ISO performance To evaluate the ISO values when pushing in post I suggest the following table: ISO | f-stops above ISO160 1250 | 3.0 1800 | 3.5 2500 | 4.0 3500 | 4.5 5000 | 5.0 I know that there will be some noise and some reduction of dynamic range and it might be problematic to print at 3 by 2 miles, but let's see what you come up with. To start with I show some images that were deliberately underexposed and then pushed in LR 5.7, no luminance noise reduction, color noise as necessary, slight sharpening, own color profile. All images were recorded at base ISO 160 with the 14bit RAW mode. PS: My monitors are crappy, ancient and uncalibrated, so have mercy if the colors are wonky Both don't even show the same colors. I prefer the left one... (Fujitsu Siemens B17-2 x 2)
  7. Here is some comparison I made between Leica M 240 and M9 for a night photo made at ISO 200, 1250 and 3200-2500. Enjoy ! Leica M (type240) vs Leica M9 – Night Landscape Photos Comparison
  8. Okay, Leicaphiles. you've gotten the new firmware update. You've had enough time to feel pretty confident the high ISO performance is improved. I happened to take a series of shots of the same scene directly before and after the update and posted some 100% crops to test this out. Is it a Solms miracle? The L-Camera-Placebo-Effect? Leica M8 June 2011 Firmware – before/after | Leica BOSS You be the judge. (And please... I traded in my camera testing laboratory for a flat screen. This is more reflective of real world shooting than DxO labs... if shots of beer bottles and NyQuil counts as "real world)
  9. I recently made a picture, while I still had the camera in the settings of an earlier eveing shot: at 1250 A. It is 1/8000 and F 4 or so. Overcast, daylight I was midday. I expected the picture to be worthless. But in fact it looks very very good... No grain, sharp, almost a 160 A picture! And here is a 100 % crop from the area I focussed. Tack sharp (as the Summicrom 50 is). Also here I hesitate - don't see more than a hint in the form of the common digital artifacts exept some digital grain in the grays. Is that because it is actually overexposed? (the shutter squeezed out a 1/8000 sec, so might have needed even less). This looks is better than 640 A imho. Has anyone tried overexposing systematically with say +1 EV or more? I would love to see the EXIF info but my Cornerfix version (Mac) does not help me too much on the data. Curious albert
  10. After the product presentation yesterday I spoke briefly with Stefan Daniel, the head of Leica's product management division, about a number of things including the decision to limit the M9 to ISO 2500 and the micro 4/3 format. A transcript is on my blog. Again, thanks to everyone who suggested questions. I couldn't ask everything but I hope you find his answers interesting.
  11. gwpics


    A young lady sits in contemplation at my favourite coffee shop. Leica M240 - 1/125th at f5.6 handheld @ 2,000 iso processed in LR Classic. Gerry
  12. I am slowly managing to get out more now, ands back in my usual coffee shop yesterday. I couldn't resist taking a candid image of this young lady at the counter because of her height. She must have been about 1.8 metres. Leica M240 + 35mm Summarit f2.5 @ 1250 iso. 1/250 @ f2.8 and post-processed in Lightroom Classic. Gerry
  13. Hi. I can't find exactly this problem reported here, so apologies if it's here somewhere. During the lockdown I've been trying different kinds of home-based photography. Yesterday I was playing around with high-speed shots, dropping ice and strawberries into coloured water, that kind of thing. I've just opened the images in LR and in PS and found there is a small line across the images when shooting at ISO higher than 640. Is it some kind of banding? I don't know the ISO level where it starts to appear, I would have to do more tests to determine the tipping point. However, it's not there at 640 and is there at 1600 and above. See three attached images. Same lens and body, ISOs 640, 3200 and 4000. Shutter speed 1/4000 on all three. Apertures from f4 to f6.8. Of course I am assuming it is to do with the ISO, not the f-stop. I was shooting on high speed shutter, so maybe something to do with the heat generated or recycling time? Lens is APO-Summicron-M f2. 90mm. Camera body Leica M10. No flash. Remote cable release for high-speed shutter. Any thoughts appreciated.
  14. I have just acquired a 50mm Summicron-M f2 IV so I took it for a test run (which consisted of one shot) today. This was at 1250 iso 1/125 and f6.8 - Gerry
  15. While I was having coffee at my favourite place this guy was sat running his office over his cup of coffee. "Hi, it's Mike the Magician" he said down the telephone. Sadly the guy at the other end didn't seem to know who he was. I took this candid shot of him with the M240 + 50mm lens at 1600iso. I then processed it through Lightroom Classic. Hope you like it! Gerry
  16. gwpics

    The Blue Handbag

    Taken as a candid shot at my normal coffee haunt today: Leica M240 + 50mm Summicron f2 @ 1600 iso. 1/30 f9.5 handheld. Gerry
  17. I took my regular visit to my favourite city-centre coffee shop and when he served me the guy behind the counter said "Have you taken any good snaps yet today?". I hadn't, but whilst I sat there with my coffee and Danish this scenario appeared in front of me. It is a candid image, and they did not notice me at any time. I used my M240 fitted with the 50mm Zeiss Sonnar f1.5 and I was working at 1,000iso. Exposure was 1/60th @ f6.8. post-processing was in Lightroom Classic. Hope you like it! Gerry
  18. I know that nearly everyone on this forum is more knowledgeable about Leica cameras than myself. I have a Q2 on order. Several reviewers have reported high ISO/low light issues with the new sensor. Do people think that these problems can be be rectified, or at least improved, in a future firmware update? Or is the camera stuck with them? Or do the issues not really exist?
  19. Taken at a BBQ held by a bespoke motorcycle dealership this morning. Leica M240 + 35mm Summarit f2.5. 1/100th &f5.6 @3200 iso (yes, guess who forgot to reset the iso when he came out of the workshops!) Gerry
  20. Dear all, I am the happy owner of a M(240), and more recently a CL and SL. I am coming from over 15 years of film M. I like shooting the rangefinder camera though I find a huge difference between my almost 5 year old M and the most recent (for me: I got the CL last january and the SL in October) cameras in image quality as soon as I shoot over iso 1600. I almost never shoot the M in color over iso 1600 since I don’t like what I can get out of lightroom @iso 2500 or more in color. i also have trouble with color consistency in mixed (daylight + artificial) lighting with the M. on both issues I find the SL is far superior and even the CL. Do you share the same experience ? do you think the M10 is much better in those areas ? thanks for sharing your experience didier
  21. gwpics

    The Gesture

    Taken whilst having my morning coffee in my favourite coffee house in my home town of Southampton, England.
  22. Dear all, I had the opportunity to handle the CL for a few minutes this week. I have been considering for some time now either : . to add a SL to my M(240) . replace my M(240) with a M10 in order to gain better high ISO IQ and easier use for my 2 favorite lenses (right) now, ie Noctilux 50 and Summilux 75 (I use the a lot to shoot pictures of my 6 week old daughter) I like the way the CL handles, and wonder if another solution would not be to buy one for use with those lenses : I don't mind the crop factor for this, compact size is nice to take it with the M, and the EVF looks pretty good (although in my view nothing beats the M OVF as a window to the world and frame as I want - but to focus difficult lenses, EVF seems nice...). Has anyone tried the Noct / CL combo, or at least the manual focus capabilities ? Thanks for sharing your experience and thoughts Didier
  23. Dear all, how does the CL (JPEG / RAW) compare to M(240), to M10 and to SL regarding high-iso picture quality ? has anyone pictures ? thanks Didier
  24. Last night I took a trip into the centre of the city to look at the temporary ice rink but also took the opportunity to photograph the latest city centre leisure complex consisting of 10 cinema screens and countless restaurants. The ice rink is visible as the blue area bottom left, but not the purpose of this image. I must be honest, it is probably a young persons place, and I am not a young person, but I was quite pleased with my efforts. Here is a sample image taken at 2500iso using the Leica M240 and 24mm Elmarit-M f2.8. Settings were 1/45 at f2.8 (no tripod). If you want a larger image go to https://gerrywalden.smugmug.com/TRAVEL-IMAGES/England-The-English/i-T2CLZVL/A Gerry
  • Create New...