M10 exposure latitude

[Overgaard]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The M 240 has it's base ISO at 200 but actually in tests have highest dynamic range at 400 ISO (I always used 200 ISO as base ISO, so if the 400 ISO is actually better, I missed out on that one for four years). The M10, nobody knows yet, but should obviously be able to handle low ISO as that would enable to use it in bright light without ND filter. 

[MarkP]

The M 240 has it's base ISO at 200 but actually in tests have highest dynamic range at 400 ISO (I always used 200 ISO as base ISO, so if the 400 ISO is actually better, I missed out on that one for four years). The M10, nobody knows yet, but should obviously be able to handle low ISO as that would enable to use it in bright light without ND filter. 

 

Do you have any more information on this Thorsten?

 

However, the tradeoff would be some image degradation at 400 c/w 200 ISO.

[hmathias]

On any imager, the darkest levels of exposure depends on the "noise floor" (usually clipped in camera processing at non-extreme ISOs) and the camera's ability to discriminate between dark gray exposure levels. The highlight rendering is a function of photosite overload and clipping implementation (if a clipper is used). Beyond that, the most critical highlight issue (to me) is does the "blown" overexposed white areas of the image look photographically "natural" or does it have have a "strained artificial imager" look. As you raise of lower the base ISO that you use, you simply strain either the top or bottom (shadow detail) of the camera's tonal reproduction curve. 

 

In a brief dynamic range test that I did with the M 10 in the San Francisco Leica Store yesterday, I was not able to do any critical testing, but I shot several passers by (in shadow ) on the store window side of the street and I deliberately blew out the other side of the street in full sunlight. The shadow detail held well, in some extremely exposed shots, I had to do some shadow lifting in post processing, but it looked fine. The severely "abused" highlights looked excellently natural, not artificial at all. 

 

My impression of the results of this quick test was that the "blown highlight handling ability" of the M 10 is almost equal to my SL, is much more natural and pleasing than my current M (type 240) and is equal or better than my M9 was (which was great at this exposure "abuse"). This is similar to what I am seeing on other's test shots with the M 10.

 

I really want to explore this more. 

[johnbuckley]

 

My impression of the results of this quick test was that the "blown highlight handling ability" of the M 10 is almost equal to my SL, is much more natural and pleasing than my current M (type 240) and is equal or better than my M9 was (which was great at this exposure "abuse"). This is similar to what I am seeing on other's test shots with the M 10.

 

I really want to explore this more.

 

Thanks for this. One of the wonderful things about the SL is how well one can shoot directly into light, including the sun, and still get good images. I haven't yet been able to test this on the M10 since we haven't seen sunshine -- coincidence? - since January 20th. So your testing is helpful.

 

Until someone can prove otherwise, I am going to assume Leica means it when the say the base ISO is 100. Which given Leica lenses is, of course, delightful.

[UliWer]

Until someone can prove otherwise, I am going to assume Leica means it when the say the base ISO is 100.

 

Yes, if the base ISO was 200 - as some reviewers state without giving any reasons on what their statement is based - one should expect to see some degradation of the file quality if one uses "pulled" ISO 100. Unfortunately nobody published yet any results of testing or at least looking at this.

[hmathias]

Yes, if the base ISO was 200 - as some reviewers state without giving any reasons on what their statement is based - one should expect to see some degradation of the file quality if one uses "pulled" ISO 100. Unfortunately nobody published yet any results of testing or at least looking at this.

 

 

Yes, but this degradation would depend on the contrast of the test scene also. Just as in the case of film exposure latitude, the tolerance for over or underexposure depends on the contrast range of the test scene. Flat lit scenes don't degrade at all from a 1stop pull or push, while contrasty scenes do.