LLT Posted November 6, 2009 Share #1 Posted November 6, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) When Leica announced the improvement in high ISO noise in the M9, I was a little dubious I must admit. I haven't got the images here to post, but I feel I must share! The improvement has just blown me away! I cranked the ISO up to about 1600 (haven't yet pushed it further), and the results were amazing! Noise, yes, but minimal! TO be honest, I'd rather there be noise than the images being "smoothed" internally! Compared to the M8, the improvements are very visible! I can keep listing the improvements and the why's to buy the M9... you'll just have to try it for yourselves! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 6, 2009 Posted November 6, 2009 Hi LLT, Take a look here M9 - A Fabulous Buy!. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jaapv Posted November 6, 2009 Share #2 Posted November 6, 2009 ISO 2500 no NR. 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 Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/102725-m9-a-fabulous-buy/?do=findComment&comment=1105151'>More sharing options...
j_lir Posted November 6, 2009 Share #3 Posted November 6, 2009 ISO 2500, very nice if you ask me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_tribble Posted November 6, 2009 Share #4 Posted November 6, 2009 How did you process the images? The revelation for me has been M9 images at 2500 under LR3 beta. Can't wait for the final version of this programme to come through. Astounding results - IMHO it demonstrates that the M9 is now a realistic option for very low light work... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
erl Posted November 6, 2009 Share #5 Posted November 6, 2009 These two pics taken at the celebration of a certain person going O.S. with a brand new M9. Very dark environment to shoot in (see tech. specs). The relevant facts that may be of interest are: M9 + Noctilux. 2500ISO, 1/20th sec @ f1.0 using Auto Exp. Some error apparent in exp (and focus! - actually, it is probably camera shake.) Processed in C1 Ver 5Pro, no NR or sharpening, just conversion to jpeg for web. 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 Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/102725-m9-a-fabulous-buy/?do=findComment&comment=1105363'>More sharing options...
johnbuckley Posted November 6, 2009 Share #6 Posted November 6, 2009 I'm still pretty stunned with how well the M9 performs in low light situations, from ISO 800 to 1600. The biggest problem isn't with the camera, it's focusing in low light. 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 Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/102725-m9-a-fabulous-buy/?do=findComment&comment=1105455'>More sharing options...
M. Valdemar Posted November 6, 2009 Share #7 Posted November 6, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) I don't think these photos are so great. In reality, the right tool for the job here would be something like a Nikon D700 with a fast prime, and AF. Do you need $11,000 worth of M9 camera and lenses to get some crummy out of focus photos? You can't even focus correctly in the dark, and you can't use a high enough shutter speed. You guys are delusional. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcg Posted November 6, 2009 Share #8 Posted November 6, 2009 I don't think these photos are so great. In reality, the right tool for the job here would be something like a Nikon D700 with a fast prime, and AF. Do you need $11,000 worth of M9 camera and lenses to get some crummy out of focus photos? You can't even focus correctly in the dark, and you can't use a high enough shutter speed. You guys are delusional. Well you are right. They aren't so great and you are right about "the tools for the job". On the other hand I do think that you are making assumptions about why the photos were taken and what the photographers were trying to achieve and also why they were displayed to critical view on this site. The pics have been put up as vehicles to illustrate some particualr point or purpose. I think that this has just as much validity as "tools for the job". I don't think that any of these photographers would want to say that this was the pinnacle of their abilities but they all contribute to this interesting discussion. I have to say, that I would have been embarassed to put up the first photo. The second one has no clear meaning to us and is probably just experimental. JB's photo is huge fun. Bulging with colour and mischief but buggered up somewhat by the guy with the tonsure on the left. But they are just casual photos I expect. They punctuate this topic of this thread and as such they are perfectly reasonable tools for the job. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
M'Ate Posted November 6, 2009 Share #9 Posted November 6, 2009 Agree with Valdemar. These images do nothing to promote the M9 as a fabulous buy. In fact quite the opposite. The low light shop images we see from time to time are a waste of bandwidth as they are crappy images encouraging the reader to extend his imagination to 'if it was worth taking, it would be good'. Well, they never are. Erl, how can you illustrate the use of a Nocti with completely out of focus and shaken images ? Don't stop, but please be more discerning so we can see what the M9 is capable of and not observe how it fails so badly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ennjott Posted November 6, 2009 Share #10 Posted November 6, 2009 Proves nothing of course - at this low "web resolution", the same could be done with any 6 MP DSLR from 5 years ago. Still, the high-res >=ISO1600 M9 samples I saw so far are pretty good. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 6, 2009 Share #11 Posted November 6, 2009 Well you are right. They aren't so great and you are right about "the tools for the job". On the other hand I do think that you are making assumptions about why the photos were taken and what the photographers were trying to achieve and also why they were displayed to critical view on this site.The pics have been put up as vehicles to illustrate some particualr point or purpose. I think that this has just as much validity as "tools for the job". I don't think that any of these photographers would want to say that this was the pinnacle of their abilities but they all contribute to this interesting discussion. Well said. The first photo was put up there to show the limits. If I thought it had artistic merit it would have been in the photoforum. I have a number of perfectly exposed and hairsharp flash photos of the same event - and they can go straight into the trash as there is no atmosphere at all - unless you like a frozen choir in a featureless black background . It shows a few things: 1 noise is well-controlled 2 DR is adequate. 3 Even with this lack of light focus is easy. But - in these circumstances ISO 2500 - which corresponds to ISO 3200 on a handheld exposure meter- and a Summilux one can expect nothing more than an impressionistic schetch. For stopping the motion (more or less) one needs a cameras with a faster sensor and still the same speed of lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest EarlBurrellPhoto Posted November 6, 2009 Share #12 Posted November 6, 2009 My experience with the M9 was not as orgasmic as some of you. The noise is about 1 stop better than the M8, period. Which means it's still at least 2 stops behind my Canons, which even if they are "plasticky" or "over smoothed" (which they are not), they appeal to my clients far more than the noise of the M9. For me it comes down to what sells, and even if I preferred the "look" of the M9 to the "look" of the Canons (which I don't), trying to convert clients to my opinion is something with significant downside risk and no upside other than being able to join the gushing love-fest on an internet forum. @ jappv and jonbuckley: Were your subjects actually wearing magenta clothing? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 6, 2009 Share #13 Posted November 6, 2009 You are quite right, and I doubt that any CCD camera without significant noise reduction does better. We should be well aware of the limits of the tool. As a matter of fact in my case they were wearing this colours . These people are to poor to wear anything but locally produced cotton clothes. The black in the skirt of the lady had faded. Unfortunately it would have been a 56 hour round trip to go home and pick up a camera with better noise performance Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pluton Posted November 6, 2009 Share #14 Posted November 6, 2009 I don't think these photos are so great. In reality, the right tool for the job here would be something like a Nikon D700 with a fast prime, and AF. D700 plus manual or AF wouldn't focus so well in that low light either, unless you had the AF assist light on a flash working... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bernd Banken Posted November 6, 2009 Share #15 Posted November 6, 2009 D700 plus manual or AF wouldn't focus so well in that low light either, unless you had the AF assist light on a flash working... sorry, you don't need a flash assist light, the camera has it's own.... PS: 3200 ISO zoom lens 17-55 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 Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/102725-m9-a-fabulous-buy/?do=findComment&comment=1105815'>More sharing options...
smoody Posted November 6, 2009 Share #16 Posted November 6, 2009 I am finding that I can take clear photos at lower shutter speeds vs. a DSLR because of the elimination of the mirror slap. This was a low-light handheld shot even though it's difficult to tell because I boosted the exposure a bit. 28mm 2.8 Leica Lens. ISO 1250 Here is a 100% crop. Please keep in mind that each tile is roughly the size of your thumbnail. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
swamiji Posted November 6, 2009 Share #17 Posted November 6, 2009 I don't think these photos are so great. In reality, the right tool for the job here would be something like a Nikon D700 with a fast prime, and AF. Do you need $11,000 worth of M9 camera and lenses to get some crummy out of focus photos? You can't even focus correctly in the dark, and you can't use a high enough shutter speed. You guys are delusional. I feel sorry for people who post there photo's in a thread like this one. Good or Bad, your going to get comments like above. Some one who has an axe to grind.... There is no such thing as a perfect camera, even the M3 had it's critics... Why does it take two strokes of the film advance lever to move to the next frame? (issue 1, 1954 Leica Photography) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfritze Posted November 6, 2009 Share #18 Posted November 6, 2009 Ravenna? Have wanted to go there since art history class in high school.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
M. Valdemar Posted November 6, 2009 Share #19 Posted November 6, 2009 But - in these circumstances ISO 2500 - which corresponds to ISO 3200 on a handheld exposure meter- and a Summilux one can expect nothing more than an impressionistic schetch. For stopping the motion (more or less) one needs a cameras with a faster sensor and still the same speed of lens. If I wanted an impressionistic sketch I could use a Holga or a Brownie Starflash. Let's not be preposterous. So what you are saying is that you need your high resolution, expensive Summilux to produce a blurry, out of focus photo? Because the sharp, well-exposed photos would have to be discarded due to the fact that they are not "atmospheric"?? I can easily equal the quality of the Leica photos with my Kodak SLR/n, albeit with lower ISO capability. 90% of what you're all oohing and ahhing about is simply because you see a digital file made without an AA filter on the sensor. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
M. Valdemar Posted November 6, 2009 Share #20 Posted November 6, 2009 I am not saying that they are bad photos. They may be very artistic. I have no axe to grind. But to crow about the quality of the M9 and the Summilux, and then use those photos as examples is bizarre. Let's have some reality here. I feel sorry for people who post there photo's in a thread like this one. Good or Bad, your going to get comments like above. Some one who has an axe to grind.... There is no such thing as a perfect camera, even the M3 had it's critics... Why does it take two strokes of the film advance lever to move to the next frame? (issue 1, 1954 Leica Photography) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.