M8 At Higher ISO Levels

[arthury]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Yeah Jamie, I was right at the edge of the available light exposure limit on a lot of shots. I like the look of the ones that came out okay. But, I got some banding on a few culls, and others just had to be lifted to much in C-1. Since they weren't critical shots they weren't worth the effort.

 

BTW, I had the V/C 28/1.9, and it wasn't any better than the Leica 28/2 in terms of exposure. Same for the V/C 35/1.2 ... I'd get the same meter reading from it as the 35/1.4 ASPH. Irakly thinks it's because the Leica glass transmits more light (clearer) at the same aperture. Don't know about that, but I did get the same readings in constant light so I sold the VC lenses.

 

Here are a couple of Canon shots at ISO 1600. I've found that the M8 is as good or better at ISO 640 compared to the Canons ... but in general the Canon seems to provide a different look to the stuff --- kind of pastelish ... attributable to the lenses I guess since I use to notice the same differences when shooting an EOS1V verses a M6 using the same film and lab. What I want for the available light work is the Leica look.

 

 

This young girl is definitely over the drinking age ... or the bride was really drunk!

[khanosu]

i think jaap's point went unoticed

and yet it is important so i will restate it

 

at high iso if you tend to overexpose 1/3 to 1/2 stop

you will find some benefit in less noise

 

Yes good point. And if you are using ACR then the highlight recovery slider will often let you recover blown highlights if you end up blowing some.

[sean_reid]

i think jaap's point went unoticed

and yet it is important so i will restate it

 

at high iso if you tend to overexpose 1/3 to 1/2 stop

you will find some benefit in less noise

 

Yes, naturally, because what one is doing then is almost the same as reducing ISO by 1/3 to 1/2 stop, were that possible on the M8. It's not technically the same but the end result is much the same. For example, one might find that an ISO 1250 exposure over-exposed by a stop to be as clean as ISO 640 and indeed it might be, since one would end up at the same aperture and shutter speed that he or she would have had at 640.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[jaapv]

Yes Sean, but I do it more to avoid underexposing the shadows, which really produces a lot of noise otherwise, and not just through ISO shift, it seems to me.

[wparsonsgisnet]

Jaap, I really like that night shot with the water. Really beautiful

[jaapv]

Thank you Bill. Summilux 75 at 1/60th handheld. I love that lens.Btw, I see now in the exif I did not correct exposure, as I thought before.

[blakley]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm with Marc here. The M8's quality at ISO 640 is outstanding. At 1250, much less so currently. For color work I just won't use it above 640 - I take my chances with longer shutter speeds and use fast lenses wide open. For B&W it's another story - I use 1250 with no hesitation because the noise looks sufficiently "film-like" that I don't mind it. But even here, 2500 exceeds my tolerance and I'm not using it.

 

But really I don't find this much of a limitation. I can shoot in really really dark places at 640 and 1/15 at f/1.4 and get outstanding results much of the time.

 

The noise above 640 isn't nearly as much of an issue for me as the lack of a really rock-solid C1 profile for a 486-filtered lens right now.