Wonka Posted March 21, 2010 Share #1 Posted March 21, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) I've searched the forum and found a few discussions on what pull 80 means. However, the discussions always end up with techno jargon all over the post which ends up being way over my head! My understanding is that one should use the "pull 80" iso feature when shooting in bright light while the lens is wide open. I also believe that pull 80 pulls down highlights. Apparently, the native iso is 160 and noise can't be any lower than what is present at 160. However, if I'm correct, that's the extent of my understanding. I still don't really understand it very well and I'm afraid I'm missing an important feature of the M9 as I never use it due to my pull 80 ignorance. Would someone be willing to explain why and when you would want to use the pull 80 feature in laymen's terms? Thanks in advance. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 21, 2010 Posted March 21, 2010 Hi Wonka, Take a look here M9 & Pull 80. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jaapv Posted March 21, 2010 Share #2 Posted March 21, 2010 If you want a lower ISO value because you want to use a fast lens wide open for DOF reasons and the light is bright, you can use this setting. But the dynamic range is smaller, so it is more advisable to use a ND filter, or in a pinch a pol filter. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wonka Posted March 21, 2010 Author Share #3 Posted March 21, 2010 If you want a lower ISO value because you want to use a fast lens wide open for DOF reasons and the light is bright, you can use this setting. But the dynamic range is smaller, so it is more advisable to use a ND filter, or in a pinch a pol filter. Thanks for your quick response. But my next question is wouldn't it be easier to shoot wide open in bright light at 160 and reduce the exposure in Lightroom/Photoshop/Aperture, etc.? What is the benefit of pull 80? Why is it offered by Leica? Please forgive my ignorance on this topic. Thanks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted March 21, 2010 Share #4 Posted March 21, 2010 No - you would lose detail in the highlights by blowing them, as you would be overexposing. Just regard pull 80 as an ISO 80 setting - which it is. The only reason Leica calls it pull 80 is because normally lower ISO means higher quality - until you are down to base ISO (160 on the M8/9) Because there is a quality reduction in this case Leica emphasizes this by calling it "pull" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wonka Posted March 21, 2010 Author Share #5 Posted March 21, 2010 No - you would lose detail in the highlights by blowing them, as you would be overexposing. Ok. That helps. Is this a feature you and/or others frequently use? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted March 21, 2010 Share #6 Posted March 21, 2010 Up till now - never. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottwallick Posted March 22, 2010 Share #7 Posted March 22, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) If you want a lower ISO value because you want to use a fast lens wide open for DOF reasons and the light is bright, you can use this setting. But the dynamic range is smaller, so it is more advisable to use a ND filter, or in a pinch a pol filter. Jaap, I have a question about this, only slightly off topic. Why is a ND filter more desirable than a PL for this purpose? I have never bothered to buy ND filters and just have used PLs (but only on rare occasions). Any reason not to? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted March 22, 2010 Share #8 Posted March 22, 2010 Actually. "pull 80" does reduce noise slightly, in that you are giving the sensor twice as much light (signal), and then "deamplifying" both the image and the underlying noise. Sort of like Dolby ( noise reduction in audio. Dolby noise-reduction system - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia I've used it, mostly to see what it looked like - it is just noticeably smoother in shadow noise than ISO 160, but the highlights can be at risk for overexposure, since an oversaturated pixel is blown regardless of how it is processed or post-processed. I gather some raw processors had trouble reading the Pull 80 files at first. This image (full frame and crop of an area with shadow) was Pull 80 under soft light (tree shade + clouds), 75 Summilux. 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/116071-m9-pull-80/?do=findComment&comment=1268416'>More sharing options...
35mmSummicron Posted March 22, 2010 Share #9 Posted March 22, 2010 I've found the Pull 80 ISO function rather useless, and DO NOT RECOMMEND shooting with it. If you are shooting in a bright enough setting, you will get an average one stop less, but the highlights will be COMPLETELY clipped. the better solution is to over expose at 160 ISO shooting DNG and pull back in software (I am using C1 Pro 5.1) You will likely still lose highlight info, but the histogram will be smoother. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fotomiguel Posted March 22, 2010 Share #10 Posted March 22, 2010 Very interesting thread. I've used pull 80 in a few ocasions with really high lights. Sometimes not to use wide open aperture but just in case or if I want to underexpose a bit. The results has been quite good. Anyway I will review my results. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest roey Posted March 22, 2010 Share #11 Posted March 22, 2010 Actually. "pull 80" does reduce noise slightly, in that you are giving the sensor twice as much light (signal), and then "deamplifying" both the image and the underlying noise. Sort of like Dolby ( noise reduction in audio. Dolby noise-reduction system - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia This implies that PULL 80 is preferable over ISO 160 if the dynamic range of the scene is less than that of the M9 -- if you care about low noise. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted March 22, 2010 Share #12 Posted March 22, 2010 Jaap, I have a question about this, only slightly off topic. Why is a ND filter more desirable than a PL for this purpose? I have never bothered to buy ND filters and just have used PLs (but only on rare occasions). Any reason not to? A Pol filter will also render the normal polarizer effects, like removing reflections, darkening sky and intensifying colors. An ND filter will just reduce the amount of light, nothing else. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bybrett Posted March 22, 2010 Share #13 Posted March 22, 2010 I'm interested this. Does anyone know what the M9 can do with a one stop overexposed image that post processing software cannot do...? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
yanidel Posted March 22, 2010 Share #14 Posted March 22, 2010 Pull 80 creates a special look IMO, kind of using a different color film. Skies turn more cyan. Personally I like it but the big issue is lack of homogeneity within a series with other ISO's. Therefore I use ND 0,6 filters in bright light with my F1.2 and F1.4 lenses. Works great. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted March 22, 2010 Share #15 Posted March 22, 2010 Pull 80 creates a special look IMO, kind of using a different color film. Skies turn more cyan. That’s just the effects of overexposure – an overexposed blue channel makes the sky turn cyan – or in other words a side-effect of the loss of one f-stop’s worth of dynamic range. Btw, digital pull development will be one of the topics covered in the next installment of “A Different Kind of Process” in LFI. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jager Posted March 22, 2010 Share #16 Posted March 22, 2010 I've used Pull 80 a couple times, when that was my only option to maintain correct exposure with a nearly wide open aperture in bright sunlight. That's the only reason I can imagine anyone ever using it. And as Jaap has described, using a ND or polarizing filter to cut down on light is far preferable. Alas, I don't usually carry those with me. Maximum image quality is going to be at base iso (160). Anything above or below that is going to start seeing degradation (albeit something that may be desired for artistic reasons). I disagree with the notion of using 160 and simply overexposing. One of the characteristics of digital sensors is that once the highlights are clipped, they're not coming back. That's one reason of lot of folks deliberately set their cameras to underexpose by 1/3 or 1/2 a stop. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
35mmSummicron Posted March 22, 2010 Share #17 Posted March 22, 2010 That general logic towards shooting is sound advice however, from my experience, over-exposing a high contrast scene (with bright highlights) at 160 ISO shooting DNG and pulled back 1 stop will produce a much better file--particularly in highlights compared to shooting 80 ISO DNG at "correct" exposure. andy I disagree with the notion of using 160 and simply overexposing. One of the characteristics of digital sensors is that once the highlights are clipped, they're not coming back. That's one reason of lot of folks deliberately set their cameras to underexpose by 1/3 or 1/2 a stop. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fotomiguel Posted March 23, 2010 Share #18 Posted March 23, 2010 Now I'm checking my photos taken with pull 80. Using this option for special situations: When really bright lights and underexponsing on purpose or using a wide open aperture. I've been playing with the files DNR and noise. My conclusion is that pull 80 works fine and is a good option when you need it. The lost of quality is not at all big and I handle the files easily with capture one: exposure, contrast, shadows and brightlights. Even the quality is not the same as a 160, the result for me is fine and I prefer the quick setting of changing to pull 80 than placing filters on my lens. From now on in Mallorca I'm going to spend many of this bright days with harsh light. So I'm happy to have this feature. Here you have an example of a 80pull file and a crop: direct from capture one. 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! Screen shot crop 200% With my M9 I enjoy viewing my files even at 200% Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Screen shot crop 200% With my M9 I enjoy viewing my files even at 200% ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/116071-m9-pull-80/?do=findComment&comment=1269855'>More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.