gab3x Posted December 5, 2011 Share #1 Posted December 5, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) Dear All, We often read about our beloved M8s being a bit crap at low light photography, a bit past its time. Well I argue not and I have evidence to prove it ;-) Please see my set on Flickr from last nights election night Izborna Noć @ SDP, Kukuriku - a set on Flickr All were taken with M8 & Summicron 28mm combo at ISO 640 in very little light. Apart from this one Izborna Noć @ SDP, Kukuriku | Flickr - Photo Sharing! with banding issues all photos turned out really well I think. I think my dear M8 will stay with me for a loooong time to come. What say you? Have you samples of low light M8 goodness to share? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 5, 2011 Posted December 5, 2011 Hi gab3x, Take a look here M8 bad in low light? I don't think so... I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Doc Henry Posted December 5, 2011 Share #2 Posted December 5, 2011 "Have you samples of low light M8 goodness to share? " Yes please look at this link (in full dark and in color) : http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/landscape-travel/186029-cathedral-color.html Best Henry Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwg Posted December 5, 2011 Share #3 Posted December 5, 2011 I agree entirely - while the sensor may not be quite as incredible as the M9 or Nikon D700, the way raw files manage to retain detail (especially for black and white) combined with the incredible hand-holdability of the M's makes the M8 my absolute favourite. Just got a VC 35 1.2 to explore that some more! Here are some snaps from a recent trip to Cracow with the Ultron 28 1.9 lens at high ISO: Poland September 2011 - a set on Flickr (any comments always welcome!) @gab3x: Is that the actual Kukuriku restaurant where the coalition was established? Should have been quite a night of celebration! Best, GWG Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gab3x Posted December 5, 2011 Author Share #4 Posted December 5, 2011 "Have you samples of low light M8 goodness to share? "Yes please look at this link (in full dark and in color) : http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/landscape-travel/186029-cathedral-color.html Best Henry Dear Doc Henry - wow, that is one full color low light goodnes example, love it! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gab3x Posted December 5, 2011 Author Share #5 Posted December 5, 2011 I agree entirely - while the sensor may not be quite as incredible as the M9 or Nikon D700, the way raw files manage to retain detail (especially for black and white) combined with the incredible hand-holdability of the M's makes the M8 my absolute favourite. Just got a VC 35 1.2 to explore that some more! Here are some snaps from a recent trip to Cracow with the Ultron 28 1.9 lens at high ISO: Poland September 2011 - a set on Flickr (any comments always welcome!) @gab3x: Is that the actual Kukuriku restaurant where the coalition was established? Should have been quite a night of celebration! Best, GWG Hi gwg, Amazing and very haunting photos. I see in Crakow restaurant shots you managed to keep the ISO down to 320 so the shots came out all smooth. The photos are from SDP headquarters in Split city centre (Bačvice). It was quite a party last night; consequently, am finding time today for forum activity despite it being a working Monday ;-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted December 5, 2011 Share #6 Posted December 5, 2011 640 iso is still acceptable but things become more tricky at 1250 iso, at least in color. B&W is another story. http://tinyurl.com/6ww7yyy (13MB file) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ErikP Posted December 5, 2011 Share #7 Posted December 5, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) 640 iso is still acceptable but things become more tricky at 1250 iso, at least in color. B&W is another story.http://tinyurl.com/6ww7yyy (13MB file) The M8 is not that bad but to be honest I bring a D700 to work at night 640 is as mentioned some sort of limit Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestMichigan Posted December 5, 2011 Share #8 Posted December 5, 2011 My 2 cents worth: In my experience, my ole EOS 20D is better at higher ISO's than my M8. For whatever that is worth. Using 'just' my 20D as a benchmark: I find my M8 lacking above 640 - as other's have noted in their posts. ISO 800 and 1250 are a bit crunchy and to noise for my tastes. Better Question IMO: Do I use 800 and/or 1250? That would be Affirmative. Yes I do - because the camera one has at hand is better than no camera and I believe getting the shot is more important than not getting it just because it won't be perfect based on x,y, or z, criteria. IF I was getting PAID to get the shot, I would have a modern cmos camera handy for getting pictures when the iso's start ramping up. Sincerely Richard in Michigan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianv Posted December 5, 2011 Share #9 Posted December 5, 2011 Lightroom 3 does a great job with noise reduction. Black 1955 KMZ Jupiter-3 - SeriousCompacts.com Gallery Several night shots at ISO 2500, 1250, an 640 with the M8. The M9 is better, but I have no problem using the M8 at ISO 2500. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestMichigan Posted December 5, 2011 Share #10 Posted December 5, 2011 Thanks for the Link BrianV. I haven't really attempted 'seriously' post-processing my M8 Low ISO images as of yet. Maybe a good sprinkling of some adobe 'secret sauce' upon them can perk up my results nicely. I suspect that -as has been noted exhaustively!- nailing the exposure is of paramount importance to getting good results when the iso's are high and the photons are scarce. R in Mi Lightroom 3 does a great job with noise reduction. Black 1955 KMZ Jupiter-3 - SeriousCompacts.com Gallery Several night shots at ISO 2500, 1250, an 640 with the M8. The M9 is better, but I have no problem using the M8 at ISO 2500. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted December 6, 2011 Share #11 Posted December 6, 2011 Sure it is possible to get noise-free files at 1250 or even 2500 iso but it is at the price of smearing effects and plasticky rendition. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
efix Posted December 6, 2011 Share #12 Posted December 6, 2011 Well, once you start pixel peeping, it really is rubbish. And now don't come with "you're not supposed to pixel peep" bs. Once you wish to print larger than at sizes 8" and above, you're getting damn close to what the pixel-level resolution of the M8's files can provide. I just created a photobook with pictures from my grandfather's 80th birthday, with each picture spread over two pages, thus reaching a sitze of 20x30 cm (8x12"). All pictures were taken under difficult lighting conditions, and I hade to boost ISO do 640 quite a lot - especially when I was using my 28mm Biogon with its f/2.8 initial aperture. On screen, the pictures didn't look so bad. Printed was another matter. Lots of residual chroma noise in the shadows, even in the 320 ISO shots. Only a couple of them looked really nice and clean - those where I hit the exposure and didn't have to process a lot, maybe even pull the exposure a bit in Lightroom. Those where I had to brighten the shadows didn't turn out very nicely. My grandparents probably won't notice, but I do, and I am really disappointed. Granted, my processing wasn't top-notch, I don't use a calibrated screen, and I didn't have it printed in a high-end pro lab. But the difference between the clean and smooth 160 and 320 ISO shots and the blotchy noisy ISO 640 shots is quite obvious. I should've stuck with the E-P1 and the 20mm f/1.7 lens - those turned out fantastic, and compared side-by-side with the M8's pictures, I even prefer them in overall appearance. I'm not bashing the M8, I love it, and in good light it can deliver fantastic results. And I don't doubt others are happy with what they get at ISO 640 and above. I was just disappointed in this very case. For me personally, the M8 is a good light camera, preferrably to be used at its base sensitivity. Or with REALLY fast glass if light gets sparse, and converted to b&w if you really need to use higher ISOs. I much prefer my little E-P1 in low light. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted December 6, 2011 Share #13 Posted December 6, 2011 Felix, if you get blotchy 640 shots in print I would suggest you take a close look at your postprocessing or possibly your exposure technique. The Lord knows the M8 is not a marvel at high ISO, but if you cannot get excellent 20x30 cm prints at ISO 640 or 1250 it is definitely pilot error. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
efix Posted December 6, 2011 Share #14 Posted December 6, 2011 Felix, if you get blotchy 640 shots in print I would suggest you take a close look at your postprocessing or possibly your exposure technique. The Lord knows the M8 is not a marvel at high ISO, but if you cannot get excellent 20x30 cm prints at ISO 640 or 1250 it is definitely pilot error. Jaap, bedankt voor jou aanmerking! I am sure it was my processing that left the residual noise in the shadows. I went easy on the NR, as too much chroma noise reduction will cause colour to look mushy. But obviously I could've dialed in a little more chroma NR, which would also have helped reduce the occasional banding. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted December 6, 2011 Share #15 Posted December 6, 2011 If you have ACR 6.0 the color detail slider will prevent color bleed. The color noise reduction slider can be used with quite a heavy hand, provided the other color sliders are used. Luminance noise, as you certainly know, if far less problematic in print. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lcam11 Posted December 6, 2011 Share #16 Posted December 6, 2011 Thanks for this thread and great examples. I have just begun to explore the M8's high-Iso capabilities, for me 1250 is quite ok. 2500 is another story. I have always used Capture One - is there better raw-processor out there for high-Iso shots? What do other people use? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted December 6, 2011 Share #17 Posted December 6, 2011 Capture One is an excellent - arguably in the top - raw converter. It has quite good noise controls. However, ACR 6.0 2010 (the raw converter of Lightroom 3 and Photoshop CS5) takes noise control to a whole new level. You can find a long post in the M9 FAQ at the top of this forum. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
efix Posted December 6, 2011 Share #18 Posted December 6, 2011 If you have ACR 6.0 the color detail slider will prevent color bleed. The color noise reduction slider can be used with quite a heavy hand, provided the other color sliders are used. Luminance noise, as you certainly know, if far less problematic in print. Thanks Jaap - I usually make extensive use of the various sliders in Lightroom. I guess I was in a rush this time and didn't re-check the settings properly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted December 6, 2011 Share #19 Posted December 6, 2011 No problem:) It is just that I took Martin Evening to bed with me last night. (his book I mean, I do prefer a slightly different configuration of companion...) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwg Posted December 6, 2011 Share #20 Posted December 6, 2011 A second vote for the NR of Lightroom - have been very impressed by the new version! Btw: EFIX, the pictures I linked to should all still be shot with your Ultron that I very much enjoy, although getting less use now I got the Nokton 35! Here are some Ultron-shots of Rome for nostalgia purposes Rome Mar/Apr 2011 - a set on Flickr Best, GWG Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.