Jump to content

Telling it as it is...


David Monkhouse

Recommended Posts

That is because people -present company included- are talking about dynamic range when they actually mean exposure latitude, and because ISO ratings on digital cameras are basically not standardised.

 

Yes, that is true, but it also means that as camera have more exposure latitude as you call it that will show up in the prints and if the M10 has more exposure attitude than the M240 (which it will if the ISO 100 has more exposure latitude than the ISO 200--the M240 has no improvement here) it will show up in the prints in at least some situations. I see reports of this from landscape photographers who report they are able to recover the shadows much better with the M10 than with the M240. This is another way, in addition to the better high ISO performance, that the image quality of the M10 has improved over the M240, or so it seems. I would like to see somebody demonstrate this result with side by side tests, but if the ISO 100 has more exposure latitude than ISO 200 on the M240, then it should show in the prints in this way.

Edited by Steve Spencer
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Can anyone explain how to interpret the Siemens star, please?

 

"The reproductions of the Siemens star pattern give a comparable impression. With this pattern the M10 performs quite well at ISO6400 and is still commendable at ISO25000. The final step, ISO50000, shows the limit, but also how effective the software does its job." - Erwin Putts article linked up front.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Look this is silly this 240 vs 10 banter. Puts is right. If you have the 240, wait for the M11. Probably the best of them all coming eventually. More megapixels, too. I don't doubt the M10 is nice, and that the higher ISO photos are cleaner than the 240, but why spend 6500$ for the M10 when you know the M11 has to be a quantum leap ahead of all previous M digitals. It HAS to be, to keep up. SO, I am happy with my 240 for now. Puts is smart. He says wait for the M11 if you have the 240. Tradu up if you have the M9 or 8.

Edited by ananda
Link to post
Share on other sites

M10 ISO (2.5 stop) advantage is the quantum leap! Next camera will not improve on ergonomics, maybe more ISO (?), and certainly more pixels but that will only benefit huge prints at this point. The ability to ditch flash and use ambient light in almost all scenarios is the big leap... of course the M11 will be better than the M10... and the M12 , etc...

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Look this is silly this 240 vs 10 banter. Puts is right. If you have the 240, wait for the M11. Probably the best of them all coming eventually. More megapixels, too. I don't doubt the M10 is nice, and that the higher ISO photos are cleaner than the 240, but why spend 6500$ for the M10 when you know the M11 has to be a quantum leap ahead of all previous M digitals. It HAS to be, to keep up. SO, I am happy with my 240 for now. Puts is smart. He says wait for the M11 if you have the 240. Tradu up if you have the M9 or 8.

 

 

Thats just nonsense...why not wait for the M14 then.

Its not all about more megapixels...there are other reasons to upgrade now. Its a personal decision each person has to make. Just because it doesn't work for you, doesn't mean everyone will feel the same. The difference between the M240 and the M10 is significant for me...I don't miss the M240 in the least. Everything I hated about the M240 is fixed in the M10. And if you own the M240, you can sell it so its not a $6500 upgrade, its more like a $3000 upgrade. 

 

If all that matters is IQ at iso 800 or less, then don't upgrade...but if all the other improvements are something you will enjoy, then the M10 is a great update.

Edited by digitalfx
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

If you have the 240, wait for the M11. ... Trad[e] up if you have the M9 or 8.

I think this is very sound advice, unless you are someone who absolutely must have every new model. But those people probably wouldn't be asking the question.

 

The additional benefits of each new model are incremental, but cumulative. I think skipping generations gives you the best bang for the buck. Especially if you plan to keep your old model as a backup. Perhaps it gets a little more complicated if you are selling your old model to finance the new one. The decreasing value of the old model over time may equalize the trade-up costs in the two scenarios.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if the Sean Reid reviews addresses the native ISO question. I no longer subscribe but seems like the kind of thing he would be interested in. Regardless, maybe Jono or one of the others in close Leica connections can find out the truth on this point.

 

As far as I remember, he doesn't.

 

He extensively compares the colours of the M 10, M (Typ 240) and SL at ISO 100, but does not comment on the settings being base or "pull". 

Edited by UliWer
Link to post
Share on other sites

I was fine with the M9's high ISO limitations, and the M240 upped it a notch.   For me the only advantage to more ISO headroom might be not needing to bring my table tripod for bracing on walls or posts when shooting at night, but that's not something I'd be willing to spend thousands for.  If I did a lot of hand-held low-light street photography where I wanted to stop down a bit for zone focusing, then every stop of ISO would be a godsend I suppose. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I was fine with the M9's high ISO limitations, and the M240 upped it a notch. 

Funny, we all have different needs. I was constantly frustrated with the M9's ISO limitations. Felt like I was shooting a film camera in the age of digital. But I skipped the M240. So for me, the M10 is a godsend. I can see how those with an M240 may decide to pass on this version, just as I passed on the M240. Skipping generations to get the most bang for your upgrade dollars makes a certain amount of sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites

M10 ISO (2.5 stop) advantage is the quantum leap! Next camera will not improve on ergonomics, maybe more ISO (?), and certainly more pixels but that will only benefit huge prints at this point. The ability to ditch flash and use ambient light in almost all scenarios is the big leap... of course the M11 will be better than the M10... and the M12 , etc...

Really! Only if you shoot above 1600. Only if you use elmarits instead of luxes. Only if you have a need to freeze motion more in very low light. Only if you shoot without tripod in very low light. Only if you print your low light pictures at full resolution.

 

So many "only if"s. Nobody discounts M10's increased operating envelop but if this not light and day.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm...

 

of course DXO tells one version only of how You can measure noise; but it feels to me, that if You look at their measurements for the 240 compared  for instance to a Sony A7Rii, You get the same noise at approximately just 1/2 stops of ISO-difference.

 

Taking that into account, it would seem, there is a risk of some degree of optimism being involved in the judgements of 2-3 stops better noise-performance between the 240 and M10. It would seem quite a technological feat, indeed.

 

That being said, I also see difference spoken about; however, Leica does (at least according to DXO) have a bit of experience with smoothing RAW-files, and so that would seem it may be a somewhat de-leveled playing-field - maybe? (will still probaly get an M10, myself)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Really! Only if you shoot above 1600. Only if you use elmarits instead of luxes. Only if you have a need to freeze motion more in very low light. Only if you shoot without tripod in very low light. Only if you print your low light pictures at full resolution.

 

So many "only if"s. Nobody discounts M10's increased operating envelop but if this not light and day.

 

 

 

The comparison involving Elmarits and "luxes" is flawed, because the sacrifice of dof that comes with using very wide apertures(along with other compromises)  is not always acceptable.

 

You may say it's just another "if", but that works both ways. Better access to higher quality high iso is an advantage. It's up to you whether you want to use it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was fine with the M9's high ISO limitations, and the M240 upped it a notch. For me the only advantage to more ISO headroom might be not needing to bring my table tripod for bracing on walls or posts when shooting at night, but that's not something I'd be willing to spend thousands for. If I did a lot of hand-held low-light street photography where I wanted to stop down a bit for zone focusing, then every stop of ISO would be a godsend I suppose.

+1

 

People forget how low light pictures were taken in film era. Use tripods. :)

 

Having said that, I admit that high ISO capability does add more to journalistic usage than other usage (landscape, portraits etc.). I didn't mention sports since M is not and never will be a sports camera.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The comparison involving Elmarits and "luxes" is flawed, because the sacrifice of dof that comes with using very wide apertures(along with other compromises) is not always acceptable.

 

You may say it's just another "if", but that works both ways. Better access to higher quality high iso is an advantage. It's up to you whether you want to use it.

I somewhat agree on your comment on elmarits vs luxes. However, I should add that loss of Dof is more pronounced in longer lens and less DOF becomes a liability than assset. For 28mm or wider and object farther than 20ft, DOF penalty is minimal and the gain in apertures is somewhat equivalent to high ISO increase. I said somewhat because I am ignoring minuses of high ISO, such as loss of DR and grain. Edited by jmahto
Link to post
Share on other sites

+1

 

People forget how low light pictures were taken in film era. Use tripods. :)

 

Having said that, I admit that high ISO capability does add more to journalistic usage than other usage (landscape, portraits etc.). I didn't mention sports since M is not and never will be a sports camera.

 

 

They also used fast films and push processing.

 

Photographers have traditionally used any means they can  to continue shooting when the light is against them.

 

I assume we're not going to suggest neck-braces in place of higher iso ratings!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Look this is silly this 240 vs 10 banter. Puts is right. If you have the 240, wait for the M11. Probably the best of them all coming eventually. More megapixels, too. I don't doubt the M10 is nice, and that the higher ISO photos are cleaner than the 240, but why spend 6500$ for the M10 when you know the M11 has to be a quantum leap ahead of all previous M digitals. It HAS to be, to keep up. SO, I am happy with my 240 for now. Puts is smart. He says wait for the M11 if you have the 240. Tradu up if you have the M9 or 8.

If you have 6600, get the M10

 

If that's a stretch, defend 240 ;)

 

Or for that matter, M9 which many prefer to 240 still LOL

 

Pretty soon they will be worth the same :)

 

I'm a big fan of Puts, but he was wrong and misleading about the M10 sensor vs M240 sensor. It's way more than ISO, totally different CFA, and improved edges with problem wides suggest other fundamental differences.

Edited by uhoh7
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

+1

 

People forget how low light pictures were taken in film era. Use tripods. :)

 

Having said that, I admit that high ISO capability does add more to journalistic usage than other usage (landscape, portraits etc.). I didn't mention sports since M is not and never will be a sports camera.

 

Right, lets get back to film... 

I have taken plenty of low light pictures with my M9 - at 200 ISO it is extremely clean when mounted on a tripod. But of course that works with buildings, if they are solidly built. With humans, even using a Summilux, ISO 1600 quickly gets to slow. So yes, I try to use my M9 as good as possible, but the high ISO capabilities of the M10 are one of its most important enhancements to me.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...