MarkP Posted May 8, 2015 Share #21 Posted May 8, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) I'm not saying that the M240 can't be used for night photography, but the exposure limit is still limiting.. Gerringong, NSW Central Coast, Australia M240 1.4/50 Summilux ~f4.0, 4 sec 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/244552-long-exposure-on-m240/?do=findComment&comment=2812883'>More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 8, 2015 Posted May 8, 2015 Hi MarkP, Take a look here Long exposure on m240. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jsjxyz Posted June 7, 2015 Share #22 Posted June 7, 2015 Sorry a bit out of topic. But can M9 do long exposure? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mornnb Posted June 7, 2015 Share #23 Posted June 7, 2015 No, and it can't do short exposures either. You use your imagination. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkP Posted June 7, 2015 Share #24 Posted June 7, 2015 Sorry a bit out of topic. But can M9 do long exposure? 240 seconds maximum. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jack-tucker Posted June 7, 2015 Share #25 Posted June 7, 2015 The two examples are great, but still you see the limitation, as Mark is mentioning: 1. The stars in the example with the ruin are (very little) stripes. Recently I was in a similar situation, and to avoid stars shown as stripes I wanted to have a exposure time of about 15 to 20 sec. 2. The stars don't appear really sharp (due to the f4 aperture, I guess). When I wanted to do a similar shot, recently, my preferred setting would have been something like ISO 6400, f8 (or a little bit wider open) and exposure time of about 20 sec. It took me a long (and cold) hour or so, to figure out, that such an exposure setting is not possible, due to the m 240s limitation. Finally another photographer was so kind to let me do the shot with his DSLR. The picture I finally choose I took with ISO 3200, f 2 (the mountains in the foreground where already quite far away) and 13 sec. In some other discussion it was suggested, that the M 240 is build in a way that doesn't allow to conduct the heat so fast as it is build in a very (or comparable) compact form. So, to avoid sensor issues like hot pixels Leica build in this limitation. That could make sense... I agree that the Leica M is not the best tool for many things. It is perfect or near to perfect for what it does: capturing the decisive moment, being fast, discrete and with me when I need it. Next time I know that I might do some landscape pictures at night I will consider to take another camera with me (at least as a backup). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TerryB Posted June 7, 2015 Share #26 Posted June 7, 2015 On a recent trip to Patagonia I experimented with star photography for the first time. It was a remote location, clear night and only a 100m from the hotel although I was standing in a marsh. The attached image was taken with a MP240 with a 35mm Summilux. Exif says 16 sec f4 and ISO 800, I believe the true aperture was f2. I have also pulled the exposure by 1.2 in LR. With a 35mm lens the star trails are quite visible at 1:1; in future I will probably try and use 8 sec max for this lens and perhaps 16 sec with my 28mm Summicron as I was looking for a picture with stars not trails etc.. I had read before that the M was not very suitable for this kind of photography and consequently not bothered to go out into the cold at 2 am to experiment - my mistake. You can take good star images (my view I know) with the M, I had another 3 EV in hand (ISO 3200 and f1.4) and could have reduced the trails, 8 sec and the need to pull an EV in LR. One thing that did confuse me a little out there in the dark and cold is when I was viewing the full image on the camera LCD no stars at all were visible the mountains and iceberg etc. were quit clear; however just zooming in one click and the stars all came out bright and clear. I assume that the camera when reducing the image for the small display dropped the stars as they did not qualify for a whole pixel! I know this is not addressing the "long exposures" issue but what the M allows is more than adequate for this type of photography. 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/244552-long-exposure-on-m240/?do=findComment&comment=2829425'>More sharing options...
Mornnb Posted June 7, 2015 Share #27 Posted June 7, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) I would be inclined to think the M has some major advantages for astrophotography. A good selection of wide angle f1.4 lenses with sharp performance wide open, including the worlds only f1.4 21mm. ISO 3200 and f1.4 ought to be enough. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loren Posted June 7, 2015 Share #28 Posted June 7, 2015 I need help on using long exposure on M240. Confusion arises when 1. On bulb mode: ISO200, longest exposure duration is 1min/60sec( by default.) Once the ISO goes up to 400, the exposure duration by default goes down to 30sec. For shooting start trails, aurora, silky water surface, night scene, ISO can go as high as 800, 1000, 2000, no way to have long exposure longer than 8 sec. how to overcome this problem? 2. How to get timed exposure at regular interval ? e.g 2 sec interval, exposure 30 sec for as long as 1.5 hours 3. Using 18mm lens - when the ISO goes up to 800 and above OR bulb mode is on, the f stop automatically goes down f/4 regardless of what is being set. f/4 does not give the effect what f/8 or f/11 gives. How to solve this problem? Thank you. very much. As others have said, the camera is limited in this regard, probably to control thermal noise. The cheapest solution may be a Sony A7 with an adapter, which is good with 35mm and larger lenses. I do some night photography with 5 minute exposures using a Nikon D800 and it works very well for that application. If the M did exposure times of at least 5 minutes or longer I would sell my Nikon equipment in a heartbeat. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkP Posted June 7, 2015 Share #29 Posted June 7, 2015 Although I think the maximum exposure time is inadequate, I agree with Mornmb it is somewhat offset by the fast Leica lenses performing so well wide open. Of course, that doesn't help if one wants a long night exposure not to capture enough light but to smooth out movement (such as water) where a longer exposure really is needed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mornnb Posted June 7, 2015 Share #30 Posted June 7, 2015 Of course, that doesn't help if one wants a long night exposure not to capture enough light but to smooth out movement (such as water) where a longer exposure really is needed. Exactly! The issue with the long exposure time limit is the impact on landscape photography, it greatly reduces your options for handling water. I don't think it is as big of an issue for astrophotography, because Leica has excellent fast lenses. With landscape, you are usually shooting above f8. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkP Posted June 7, 2015 Share #31 Posted June 7, 2015 Exactly! The issue with the long exposure time limit is the impact on landscape photography, it greatly reduces your options for handling water. I don't think it is as big of an issue for astrophotography, because Leica has excellent fast lenses. With landscape, you are usually shooting above f8. Yes. One of the few reasons I should have kept the M9: 240 sec stopped down is just barely enough for giving water at night that glassy smooth or misty look. But sometimes when not shooting at infinity at night one needs some DOF, again a requirement for lower f-stop and even longer exposure times. Will just have to go back to the M7! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkP Posted June 7, 2015 Share #32 Posted June 7, 2015 you are usually shooting above f8. Mornnb, when you wrote above f8, dis you mean numerically as in a smaller aperture? I tend not to shoot at a smaller aperture than two, if not one, above the minimum if I can avoid it due to diffraction degrading the image (more of a problem than shooting wide open). Obviously if that's what's required then so be it. If I wanted a very small aperture for DOF then there's not much option, but if it's just to slow down the shutter further I'd try to use an ND filter if possible/convenient. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mornnb Posted June 7, 2015 Share #33 Posted June 7, 2015 You should be fine with diffraction if you stay at around f8. At f11 to f16 is where the performance drops, that being said though you're probably not going to visibly notice diffraction until you get right up to f22. For many lenses, the performance at f16 can be competitive with the performance wide open. The best performance is usually between f4 and f5.6 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkP Posted June 7, 2015 Share #34 Posted June 7, 2015 I agree. I'd not really believed this until I tested it for myself. For lenses with minimum aperture I therefore try to avoid f16, and f11 if possible, and for lenses with minimum aperture of 22 the same for f16 and f11 respectively. However, if the photo needs the DOF then I'll use the smaller aperture regardless. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted June 7, 2015 Share #35 Posted June 7, 2015 Will just have to go back to the M7! Use a camera made for sky shooting, such as this one. 8x10" film under a 153mm super-wide lens. Aluminum-magnesium body. Yeah, no fooling around with miniature cameras. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mememarathon Posted June 15, 2015 Share #36 Posted June 15, 2015 Has anyone tried exposure-stacking to get around the 60s limitation on the M240 bodies? I'm not an avid astrophotographer (plenty of light pollution where I am!), but I heard that exposure-stacking is preferred over ultra-long exposure times. From my understanding, stacking together 5 shots taken at 60sec each would give an equivalent exposure of 5 minutes, often without the noise associated with heat buildup.As a reference, I would like to link the following article http://galleries.aaronpriestphoto.com/Articles/StarTrails and I've used the StarStaX application once for this purpose as well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted June 15, 2015 Share #37 Posted June 15, 2015 From my understanding, stacking together 5 shots taken at 60sec each would give an equivalent exposure of 5 minutes, often without the noise associated with heat buildup. When planning such, remember that after each shot there will be an equally long dark-frame subtraction. (Mentioned earlier) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ai_Print Posted June 17, 2015 Share #38 Posted June 17, 2015 Good to know since I am planning on getting a 240. Thankfully I have other cameras systems I much prefer to do this kind of shot with anyway, D810, Hasselblad and 4x5 film... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
drneilgoodwin Posted November 21, 2015 Share #39 Posted November 21, 2015 The 60 second meximum is very irritating, especially given the longer time available that was available on the M9 which allowed it to be a more flexible camera. If I had known this before purchasing the M then perhaps I would have hesitated. Or perhaps I should have checked it out more thoroughly instead of assuming it wouldn't be an issue. I don't do a lot of landscape work but when I do I like the flexibility that a long exposure time has to offer. Not offering more than 60 seconds on the M restricts it to street, portraiture and related reportage work. Serious landscape work just isn't possible. I'm now at the stage of being somewhat disillusioned with Leica because my M is currently back at Leica Germany for the second time to repair a lack of sensitivity with the sensor. My dealer in Manchester UK is being very supportive but Leica need to get their act together to not only sort this somewhat unique fault but also dramatically speed up their repair turnaround time. Their marketing and sales may be good but if it wasn't for local dealers their backup and support reputation would be zilch. Whether I keep the M or not I'll need another body for landscape work and I'm seriously thinking about one of the Sony models. Of course if Leica decide they can extend the 60 second maximum then that's a different story. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giulio Zanni Posted November 29, 2015 Share #40 Posted November 29, 2015 Not only it doesn't do more than 60 sec. exposure but then the long exposure noise reduction kicks in and you have to wait for another 60 sec. before being able to use the camera. Giulio Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.