digitalfx Posted September 9, 2013 Share #21 Posted September 9, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) — and I've only seen one M240 high-ISO shot on LUF that I can recall, which was stated as being taken in light so dark that the photographer's eyes could barely make out the subject; and the shot looked like a surveillance camera photograph. Why would you want to shoot in "light so dark that [your] eyes could barely make out the subject"? and how are you focusing if you can't see the subject? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 9, 2013 Posted September 9, 2013 Hi digitalfx, Take a look here New M240. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Shade Posted September 9, 2013 Share #22 Posted September 9, 2013 M240 is of course a technically better camera. However the M9 is no slouch. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Ricard Posted September 9, 2013 Share #23 Posted September 9, 2013 My view detailed in another thread is that the conventional wisdom about the M9 simply is wrong: using the technique of shooting at ISO 640 and pushing exposure in LR5, makes the M9 a very good camera for night photography with color rendition that I have not seen matched by another camera. Below are four night shots with the M9 using this technique, pushed about 2–4+ stops. It amazes me that this technique, and the real high-ISO capability of the M9 is not generally known, considering that it's now four years since this camera came out. —Mitch/Paris Tristes Tropiques [WIP] Wow. Are there any threads on this forum where you don't make this point? The horse is dead. Now about we stop beating him now? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest malland Posted September 9, 2013 Share #24 Posted September 9, 2013 Why would you want to shoot in "light so dark that [your] eyes could barely make out the subject"?...and how are you focusing if you can't see the subject?No idea: I was just quoting what someone had written when posting the M240 picture in question. Wow. Are there any threads on this forum where you don't make this point? The horse is dead. Now about we stop beating him now?I see: three people above (that I quoted) stated that the M240 was such an improvement that either there was no comparison with the M9 or that they "could now take night shots again" — and my post is irrelevant? I, for one, would like to see results from the M240 that show what they say is true, as I have not seen that. Incidentally, there is an ongoing discussion in this M240 thread on how the M240 performs when pushing in post-processing rather than in-camera. The tests are being made by Jim Kasson, who is the one who validated the "Shoot at ISO 640 and push in LR4/5" technique for maximizing the high-ISO performance for the M9. —Mitch/Paris Tristes Tropiques [WIP] Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
01af Posted September 9, 2013 Share #25 Posted September 9, 2013 Why would you want to shoot in "light so dark that [your] eyes could barely make out the subject"? Why not? And how are you focusing if you can't see the subject? Live view can see it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.