Jump to content

MM, M240, MM246 comparison images


thighslapper

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

and another ......


 


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

x
  • Replies 186
  • Created
  • Last Reply

First is 320 iso ....... second is 8000 iso 

 

and here's a shot of her vile moggie .... who used to spend most of it's time trying to scratch me but has turned over a new leaf and become a bit more sociable .....

 

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!

 

again ....... 8000 iso

Link to post
Share on other sites

His test part two is obviously failed. The amount of moire and the apparent pixel size in MM2 images tells that something has gone badly wrong in prosessing.

The moire you see is from the M(240) in the comparison with the M246. Any color camera will show moire at this level of fine detail.

Link to post
Share on other sites

thighslapper

 

Love the shots. Like Farkas showed ISO 8000 is very easily doable with the M246. What type of PP did you do on the 8000 shots? TIA

 

Just some sharpening and NR ..... highlights down a bit on the top shot as it was under an awning and the background was blown ...... and 1 and 3 (in particular) have been cropped a fair bit.

Unlike the MM1 the basic DNG's in LR seem to need very little adjustment and most look fine as is. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Puts .......  :huh:

 

this is precisely why I used real world images taken by mr. average and processed them to get the best results possible.

 

no normal photographer just takes photos of test charts, uses unsharpened images with no NR (when it helps ...... although Puts is rather vague about precisely what he has done)  and then views them at 200%.

 

He's being Scientific

. . . . and this would be a grand thing IF we all took images of test charts and developed them in Iridient (which is great, but rather subject to Moire).

Fortunately we don't all take pictures of test charts.

You're doing a grand job here (and it's great to see your daughter!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

The moire you see is from the M(240) in the comparison with the M246. Any color camera will show moire at this level of fine detail.

No, I was referring to test part two. There is something wrong.  Parts 1 and 3 show logical results.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually I was surprised how well the M240 did….

I've made some gorgeous b/w prints, using both the M8.2 and M240, typically at lower ISOs.  None of these cameras provide an excuse for inferior results if the image and the rest of the workflow suits.  So, I'm not really surprised, but will be interested to see if the MM246 takes things up a notch without going to super high ISO.

 

Jeff

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've had great results from the MM at up to ISO 5000, 3200 if I print large.  I actually got to try the M246 yesterday and was very impressed, but was still quite impressed with my MM images the same evening.

 

These cameras are both far better than I am at using them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

M246 with 12mm Voigtlander.  f8. 320iso. Shading correction off.

Exposed towards the sky but managed to pull the shadow detail quite well.

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

3 more MM246 with Voigtlander 12mm.

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

Kudos to Thighslapper for the comparisons.  I think they are fascinating, including all the many reactions.  Because there is no empirical way to measure "better" or "worse" in these situations, it boils down to which look you like, and in my case, I like what I saw from the M246 so I will not cancel my order.  I have to admit though, that the differences are small except in extremely high ISOs, and maybe I am seeing what I want to see exactly because I have ordered one and don't want to admit that maybe I didn't need it.  Then I remind myself that this isn't at all about "need".  It is about "want".

Link to post
Share on other sites

The main differences become immediately apparent in usage ........ the old MM just feels antiquated and cumbersome in comparison ...... no idea if images are in focus as the screen is crappy, dodgy with long lenses or very fast lenses wide open, generally slower and fiddlier to use ......

Even if the performance was identical it would be worth changing ...........

....... and you will find the OOC images need very little PP ...... unlike my old MM images that needed a rinse with SEP2 to get the look that pleased me. 

The MM1 was excellent ...... the MM2 is a whole lot better on a wide range of fronts and I am sure you won't be disappointed ....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...