M9 Colors at Night — Best Way to Shoot High ISO?

[Guido]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

nightfire, sorry, but I don't really follow either your posting above nor #184. I presume that you're showing sections of your file at 100%. Using Lightroom 4 or 5, I have never seen anything that looks as blotchy as that. What version of Lightroom have you been using?

Yes, these are 100% crops in Lightroom 4.4. In post #184, the caption of each image in the sequence lists the LR adjustments made, beginning with the original image.

 

The blotchy pattern is introduced by LR's color noise reduction (for which I used slider values 25/50). If noise reduction in your images produces cleaner results, I'd definitely be interested in the values you use. Provided of course that the original, raw sensor noise in your pushed images looks anything like the noise in mine (see picture #2 in post 184). If not, I'd have to start worrying about my M9...

[Guest malland]

Thanks. How do your images look at 50%, which essentially gives a good simulation of the print. At 50% mine look very similar to the one's I've posted above.

 

Here is a 100% section of the photo in post #174, which is pushed 4.15 stops on the main subject (LR5 has a new Radial Filter that allows an oval selection to which the basic adjustment, in this case Exposure, can be made.) The Noise Reduction is Luminance 36 and Color 79.

 

EDIT: when I look this 100% section in LR or Photoshop it looks substantially better than it does here because I've had to reduce the JPG quality so much (i.e., increase JPG compression), to get the JPG file small enough to fit the allowed limits for attachments. Also, I don't know why it looks larger as an attachment here than it does on my monitor as a 100% view in LR and Photoshop. Here it looks like a 200% view.

 

I've also now included the original whole file, so that you can see it here. I should also add, that in most of the pictures I haven't had to push as much as 4+ stops: usually it's in the 0.5-–2.0 stop range, so the files, of course, look much better at 100%.

 

 

Bangkok

 

 

—Mitch/Paris

Tristes Tropiques [WIP]

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!

[tomasis7]

malland, thats 100% crop is impressive. no banding ever.

 

nightfire, I dont think noise ninja is good, it removed some details and looked smothered out. Lr seems better at preserving details.

 

Darn, I cant wait to test it when I get chance *tick tick*

[tredlie]

Hei Mitch

Have been following this thread with grest interest.

 

I do like lowlight photography and as far as the lenses go Leica has long been the camera of choice. Now in the digital age your proposal sounds indeed very appealing.

For me metered values on the M9 have always been too bright in available light situations. Thus I always go to manual. Then the result on the little monitor looks sufficiently dark.

This brings me to my question. Operationally, how do you work?

You take a camera reading and then stop down up to 3 stops (either aperture or shutter speed or both which implies going manual as I do anyway)

Am I right in assuming that you will likely see anything on the monitor, it must be pretty dark and will come back to life only after pushing in PP?

So your means of checking after the shot are limited. Correct? An issue or not?

 

Cheers

 

Tred

 

 

 

Gesendet von meinem GT-N7100 mit Tapatalk

[Guest malland]

Tred, when I first heard about this "Shoot at ISO640 and Push in LR5" technique I had the same questions that you have. Below is the what I wrote in post #101 above, which I hope will be of help. With these exposure you are underexposing so much that you usually see nothing useful on the LCD, and simply don't need to worry about that (as if you were shooting film). Please note that the processing steps are as important as the expire.

 

Exposure

At ISO 640 start (with the Elmarit 21mm ASPH for example) by exposing at f/2.8 and a shutter speed of 1/60 or 1/90, and (with a Summicorn-28) by exposing at f/2.0 and a shutter speed of 1/120 or 1/180. The aim is not to blow out the highlights. On a dark night, I find that I don't need much depth of field because of the rapid drop-off in light intensity.

 

Added on 4-Nov-2013:

[The above exposures are the ones I would start with. If the night is brighter or if the main subject is well-lit, you can use faster shutter speeds and smaller apertures. You start by trial and error and then, as you gather experience you'll simply know what to do. When the main subject is well lit you cal also take a meter reading and then adjust the shutter speed and aperture as Tred suggests.]

 

Lightroom 4/5 Post-Processing

1. Click Auto in the Exposure Panel and use this as the starting point.

2. Adjust the Exposure Slider to the point at which you like the look.

3. Press "J" and see whether any of the highlights are blown out.

4. If necessary (from Step 3), pull back on the Highlights Slider.

5. I like to pull back the Black Slider to negative numbers so that picture has a look that I like.

6. Click White Balance Eye Dropper in an area you want to be neutral grey, but I don't like to neutralize the colors completely because I want a "real" look from the lights in the picture.

7. Try moving the Clarity Slider between +10 – +30. (I find that increasing Clarity creates a good feeling of light in a high contrast scene, but sometimes this may not be necessary or even may not look good.

8. If you increased Clarity, you can probably pull back a bit on the Exposure.

9. In the Noise Reduction panel, after setting the View to 100%, move the Color Slider to the right until the color noise disappears.

10. Still at 100% View, move the Luminance Slider to the right if necessary to remove more noise, but be careful no to go too far. Some pictures will not need any Luminance Slide increase.

 

—Mitch/Bangkok

Looking for Baudelaire [WIP]

[tredlie]

Mitch

Thanks a lot for the added PP.

It seems that I basically got it right. Will try it out and see how I can translate your LR instructions to those in darktable.

Thanks again

Tred

 

Gesendet von meinem GT-N7100 mit Tapatalk

[russell]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

8. If you increased Clarity, you can probably pull back a bit on the Exposure.

Are you sure "pull back"? Don't you mean "push out"? As I increase Clarity I find I have to increase the exposure slider. For example if I increase in Clarity from 0 to 10, it means I have to increase exposure by +0.20.

[Guest malland]

...It seems that I basically got it right. Will try it out and see how I can translate your LR instructions to those in dark table...

That could be an issue because this technique is based on the way LR4/LR5 process PV2012 works: on the one hand, as Jim Kasson explains, the LR4/LR5 "Basic" sliders compress highlights and shadows like film rather than blowing out highlights; and the Noise Reduction sliders also work in a special way that works well with this technique. The results with other processing software could be quite different.

 

—Mitch/Bangkok

Looking for Baudelaire [WIP]

[Guest malland]

Are you sure "pull back"? Don't you mean "push out"? As I increase Clarity I find I have to increase the exposure slider. For example if I increase in Clarity from 0 to 10, it means I have to increase exposure by +0.20.

No, I find that often when I increase Clarity I can pull back a bit on Exposure, deposing on how the tonality is in the file.

 

—Mitch/Bangkok

Looking for Baudelaire [WIP]

[Talat]

Wow!!! This has to be one of the most informative threads I've ever read on any forum. It's taken me a good few evenings to read through it due to work commitments, but each evening I have really looked forward to reading the posts from where I last left off. It's felt like reading a great book, didn't feel like putting it down

 

I'd like to thank everyone who has contributed to this thread especially Malland for starting the thread in the first place. It has totally opened my eyes to this technique as I love low/natural light photography, although I've not been scared to push the camera to its mx ISO setting, this technique will negate the need to under certain circumstances. This has been extremely educational at the same time. I've yet to read Jim's blog post as linked by Malland in his first post. That's next!!

 

Personally, I have to agree whole heartedly with Mitch regards how he feels about the look of the files out of the M9. I've used slrs/dslrs all my life and the first time I saw an image from an M9 I was sold. I absolutely adore the files produced by this camera, but I'm also a gear junky I want the latest next best thing...I've posted elsewhere about how I thought about an M240 but wasn't over the moon with the image compared to the M9, granted there are some welcome improvements but there is something special in the M9 file that I like straight out of the camera. To me it needs the minimalist amount of processing I have yet encountered in any camera I have used.

 

This thread has confirmed to me that I will keep the M9 for many many moons to come, hopefully alongside an MM

 

Back on topic...I can't wait to try this technique out over the weekend, although I fired off some experimental shots in my lounge under lamp light, whilst reading this thread over the last few evenings just to see how they would look on the screen. I've yet to process them...Incidentally, I also favour and have the 28Cron and 50Lux.

 

Will hopefully post my results in a couple of days.

[Talat]

I can report that having tested this technique with my lenses, I am 100% sold on this technique, as it just works.

 

I'm really happy with results after applying the adjustments that Malland suggests as a base guideline starting point.

 

It really has opened up night shooting for me again like when I was shooting with the Nikon D700 and Canon 5Dmk3, albeit shooting with those cameras at the soaring ISOs they're capable of I would have been losing DR at an incredible rate as stated.

 

I used to put the M9 away at dusk outside and in very badly lit interiors, not anymore.

 

I've learned so much from this thread and I'd like to thank all the main contributors again.

 

THANK YOU!!

[parsod]

I can just agree to what Talant has written. This has really been a useful thread for me as well and together with the recent versions of LR it has turned my M9 into an even more versatile tool. I have been using this technique quite a lot during the last couple of months (it is pretty dark here in Sweden this time of the year;)) and with great results. I think the high iso's from my M9 are actually better than what I am getting from my D800E. I guess part of that is due to the Leica lenses and the fact that they are really good wide open.

 

It also makes low light photograpy with the M9 very easy. Just set iso to 640, select largest aperture and the longest possible shutter time you can manage. Then you only need to compose, focus and shoot!

 

I am surprised that this technique is not discussed more in different forums? It would shift the debate about high iso in camera's to more of a factor for jpeg shooting. From the blog post in the beginning of the thread I understood that for a new camera like the D800 it is actually no point at all to increase iso in camera if you shoot raw which at least for me was a bit revolutionary!

 

Here is an example (it gets dark in Spain too) at iso 640 and +1 step exposure. Super-Elmar 21/3.4 @ 3.4

Cityscapes - parsoderlund

[Talat]

I came across this post last night, although not shot at night, it uses the same post processing technique for the Monochrom. Stunning just how much information can be retrieved and is in the shadows of an MM file.

 

Leica M Monochrom – performing recovery on my exposure mistakes | Bo Photography

[Guest malland]

I don't recall whether it was earlier in this thread or elsewhere that Jim Kasson and I discussed how to apply the technique of this thread to high-ISO photography with the M-Monochrom. While he has not done any tests, he surmised that with the M-Mononchron, one would "Shoot at ISO 1250 and push in LR5." I've tired this (not with the rigorous tests that Jim has done with the M9), and find the results are very good.

 

Some people may argue that this technique is not necessary with the M-Monochrom because shooting at ISO 5,000 and 10,000 in-camera can gives "film-like results." However, the advantage of "Shooting at ISO 1250 and Pushing in LR5" with the M-Monohrom of is that you get much greater dynamic range and protect the highlights.

 

—Mitch/Chiang Mai

Looking for Baudelaire [WIP]

[Talat]

Mitch, I do recall reading about that earlier in the thread.

 

I know this is about Hi ISO night shots with the M9, but I'd really like to see what you're results with similar processing applied to MM files looks like, albeit from a base ISO of 1250.

 

I remember reading earlier on in the thread that you were curious to see the results from MM users too, seems that you managed to by an MM of your own in the meantime

 

Adendum- ignore that lastt request, I've just come across your shots with the MM on Flickr

[Guest malland]

Thanks, Talat. Yes, the night shots in the Baudelaire series linked below the signature to this post are shot with the M-Monochrome using the "Shooting the MM at ISO 1250 and Pushing in LR5" technique. It would be interesting to see the experience of other people with this.

 

—Mitch/Chiang Mai

Looking for Baudelaire [WIP]

[Jeff S]

 

I am surprised that this technique is not discussed more in different forums?

 

I'm surprised that there's surprise. Setting a lower ISO and pushing in post is common, and nothing unique about the M9 or MM or most any digital camera in this regard. One of many shooting and PP techniques, depending on one's needs and intended results.

 

Over 200 posts to basically reiterate some obvious options.

 

Guess what...it works on the M8, too, in case anyone wonders.

 

Jeff

[Guest malland]

Despite the supercilious tone of the previous post, there's nothing at all obvious that, with the M9, it's better to increase ISO in-camera up to 640 and then to push in LR4/LR5. Nor is is obvious that this may not work with other raw developers, nor that other with other cameras it is best to push in post starting with the base ISO of the camera — all points that Jim Kasson has developed through rigorous testing and presented the results in his blog, where he explains the reasons for all this. Nor does this technique work the way pushing film does; nor is it obvious how to expose and how to process in LR4/LR5. I could go on, but you should have the idea by now...

 

—Mitch/Chiang Mai

Looking for Baudelaire [WIP]

[Jeff S]

I could go on, but you should have the idea by now...

 

And you do, for 200 posts now. No different than your M240 color posts....go on and on. We get it.

 

Funny I didn't need any of these posts to learn to moderate ISO for my M8.2 and let the ever improving LR do the work. I posted on the LR improvements over the years here, suggesting that it did more to improve my prints than a new camera.

 

Supercilious....no, pretty obvious to anyone who actually does the work and experiments for real, rather than read forum posts. Same with M240 color. I see a trend.

 

Jeff

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[BerndReini]

Man, you two really need to get together and have a beer.