Jump to content

M8 and Canon 5D Comparison Pix and High Isos


mahler_one

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Tina Manley, a very accomplished photographer and an even nicer person, has graciously posted some comparison "high iso pictures" taken with her M8 and Canon 5D. All opened with Capture 1, actual pixel size. As Tina said, I'll let you be the judge.

 

Edwin

 

Tina Manley's Photo Galleries at pbase.com

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 115
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Guest guy_mancuso

Two things i noticed immediately without really looking the 5d highlights in the window blew right out , the M8 are underexposed or dark and they did not use a IR filter. Again she maybe a great shooter but the test tell me nothing because the data is wrong

Link to post
Share on other sites

Two things i noticed immediately without really looking the 5d highlights in the window blew right out , the M8 are underexposed or dark and they did not use a IR filter. Again she maybe a great shooter but the test tell me nothing because the data is wrong

 

so can one say the the IR is mandatory in ALL cases, even if there are no black textiles or things like that?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest smep_reloaded
As Tina said, I'll let you be the judge.

 

Thanks a lot!

 

Very easy to see:

 

The 5D is the queen of available light photography!

 

Sorry Leica.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest guy_mancuso
so can one say the the IR is mandatory in ALL cases, even if there are no black textiles or things like that?

 

 

Yes in tungsten light especcially which has the highest contamination of IR light. Look at the colors.

 

The 5d maybe the high ISO queen but trust me in no way shape or form does it even come close to the microdetail of leica even at the high ISO's. So you have a nice noise free 1250 shot that is mush. Sorry i hate the whole 5d comparision stuff to begin with. Not even in the same ballpark. But i will die first before any 5d owner will accept that fact, so i am out of this conversation right now . It ' hitting your head against a brick wall with prove and still they don't get it. It produces a nice file but does not have the exposure latitude of a M8 and does not have the detail. I owned it and compared it against a DMR and also the 1dsMKII . i own Leica that may say something

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest smep_reloaded
i own Leica that may say something

 

You may own 3 M8 and 20 M-Lenses but this only shows that you don´t know anything about the philosophy of the Leica M-System.

 

It´s a philosophy of "less is more".

 

The best pictures were made with one M-Body and one or two lenses and not by people who own everything from Leica.

 

Regards, Stefan

Link to post
Share on other sites

You may own 3 M8 and 20 M-Lenses but this only shows that you don´t know anything about the philosophy of the Leica M-System.

 

It´s a philosophy of "less is more".

 

The best pictures were made with one M-Body and one or two lenses and not by people who own everything from Leica.

 

Regards, Stefan

 

I think someone's having a bad day...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Stefan,

 

I don't know whether Guy owns 3 M8 cameras and 20 M lenses, but I think his point was he had the possibility to compare the Leica to other digital cameras, and after doing so chose to stay with Leica because in his view the results are better. Since you are shooting Leica, too, I believe you are in fact not far from where Guy stands. You may have misunderstood Guy's words 'i own Leica that may say something', they were just meant in the sense I tried to explain before.

 

Cheers,

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest guy_mancuso

Me too. I own every lens i can get so i can do more with it. The M philosphy is bunk as you call it. i understand what your saying but having more lenses means more options for me to complete tasks they way i want. So what if I own a lot the point is i need to use them the way it suits what i am going to shoot. i also own lenses for different looks and style. I'm not a journalist that carrys 2 lenses into a battle zone . I am a commercial shooter that gets paid to bring home the bacon. i own leica becuase the have the best optics around and the best Kodak sensor that i love the quality from . History and philosophy are one thing and the way a M works but i need to make money to eat. I have been shooting digital longer than almost anyone and this is by far the best system short of MF that produces the best files around if it did not i would simply not own it money or not. Philsophy will NOT make me money. I am not on some leica acid trip here, I want the best images i can get, period.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So you have a nice noise free 1250 shot that is mush. But i will die first before any 5d owner will accept that fact

 

Maybe it would help if you had your facts straight. A noisy shot needs noise reduction and noise reduction softens detail that can't be restored by sharpening. OTOH the 1250 shot from the 5D is only "mush" in RAW, the detail is in there for someone who knows what they're doing in post.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i own Leica that may say something

 

Now this is starting to get really weird. I own Leica too, what EXACTLY does this say?

 

BTW, if you want to shoot in low light conditions, you need fast wide angel lenses which Leica doesn't have anymore, 2.8 is as fast as it gets with Leica-M8 lenses below 37mm [35mm Film equiv].

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest guy_mancuso

I was talking the raw file is mush. Look at Seans review and look at his noise comparision the 5d is softer in detail to the M8 on every shot.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest guy_mancuso
Now this is starting to get really weird. I own Leica too, what EXACTLY does this say?

 

BTW, if you want to shot in low light conditions, you need fast wide angel lenses which Leica doesn't have anymore, 2.8 is as fast as it gets with Leica lenses below 37mm equiv.

 

 

What i am saying is after all these systems that I have had , Nikon, Canon , Kodak i chose leica digital because it produces the best images . It may not have all the bells and whistles or noise control but the best color, saturation, contarst, tonal range, DR all come from leica better than anyone else. The reason i said that is why i own leica

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest guy_mancuso
Maybe it would help if you had your facts straight. A noisy shot needs noise reduction and noise reduction softens detail that can't be restored by sharpening. OTOH the 1250 shot from the 5D is only "mush" in RAW, the detail is in there for someone who knows what they're doing in post.

 

 

So Ken let me go back to this you take a mushy 1250 5D shot and add shrapening to correct for the detail right. What happens to the noise than. Answer it gets noiser. So what have you gained. Than take that shot and put in noise reduction what doe s that do . Answer soften the image . You can't win here. if it is soft in Raw there is not a lot of help you can give it at those ISO levels to sharpen it without adding more noise. Why not start we a detailed raw to begin with than no need to sharpen . What I am saying is if i have to go in and save a image like this than you actually are getting lesser quaility from it. i agree the noise levels are better on the 5d no question but you are also losing micro detail. It's almost like pick your poision

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest smep_reloaded

Andy,

 

you see I have been right. ;)

 

Guy,

 

maybe a Zoom will be better for you.

 

If you have the M8 with TRI16-18-21 - 21 - 24 - 24shift - 28 - 35 - 50 - nocti - 75 - 90 -135 mm lenses you will need too much time to think about what lens to use and will miss a lot of opportunities while you are changing lenses.

 

I travel with Leica M (2 Bodies M6TTL (ISO100/400) + CV15 - 28/2.0asph. - 50/1.4 - 90/2.8 or CV15 - 28/2.0asph. - 35/2.0asph. - 90/2.8) and can take all pictures I want to.

For example: the difference between 28 and 24mm is one step.

VIEW-Magazin: Serie: Cuba 2004

 

I have also done a report on one week in Kiew just with one Nikon D200 + 12-24/4 - 24/2.8 - 50/1.4

Stefan M. Prager -photographie-

 

Leica of course has the best optics but the Kodak sensor is far away from being the best on the market.

 

Stefan

Link to post
Share on other sites

I travel with Leica M (2 Bodies M6TTL (ISO100/400) + CV15 - 28/2.0asph. - 50/1.4 - 90/2.8 or CV15 - 28/2.0asph. - 35/2.0asph. - 90/2.8) and can take all pictures I want to.

For example: the difference between 28 and 24mm is one step.

VIEW-Magazin: Serie: Cuba 2004

 

Stefan, everyone is free to make their own decisions, there's no compulsion to use one, two or 20 lenses. If you find something that works for you that's fine, but other people may have different preferences.

 

Personally I can manage without Kodachrome, but I wouldn't deride people who use it just because I don't.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest guy_mancuso

I agree the 24 and 28 i am still debating that one. But i don't do reportage work per say. I do a lot of differnt work . BTW it is only 7 lenses 15,21,24,28,35,50 and the 75 and 2 bodies. Than there is the DMR with 28,50,80 and 180. i don't own as much as you think, wish i did.

 

Zooms there are only 3 i like and there from leica believe it or not the 35-70 2.8 and the 28-90 than the 21-35 is nice for what it is. i may buy another 28-90 again

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...