Telling it as it is...

[Stef63]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Most photographers don't shoot martial arts classes in the dark...

Can you please explain why you make this kind of comment?

[olgierdc]

From what I have seen from online comparisons, I suspect the better high ISO of the M10 has been achieved partly by reducing the color filter array density. This produces files that look more mainstream than what we're used to with previous M.

 

I think in same way, but it lead us to higher native ISO. First monochrome has native ISO 320 against 160 ISO in M9, because lack of bayer array.

With higher native ISO we need less to amplify the signal, so there is less noise. What will happen with noise and DR if we go in opposite direction with ISO? We need more amplification.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Viv1857]

Most photographers don't shoot martial arts classes in the dark...

 

Probably wrong. Small kids, indoors, evening ... 6400 ISO reached easily. 

[jmahto]

Most photographers don't shoot martial arts classes in the dark...

 

Did I hear martial arts!.... Using this opportunity to show off.

This is me demonstrating flying kick in Death Valley. Shot using D-Lux5 six years ago.

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!

[jmahto]

Not discounting value of high ISO capability for any action sport and I am sure M10's ISO6400 cleaner files will be appreciated, however one can stretch the capability of other cameras too.

The following shots (my son's martial arts class) are shot with D-Lux5 at ISO1000 to 2500 in late evening. I really loved that tiny camera with totally silent shutter.

Basically you shoot with whatever you are carrying.

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!

[BerndReini]

Another stop and a half is a nice achievement. The argument whether we need it or not is ludicrous since subject matter is a very personal choice. In my opinion people should rephrase their comments a little. I think it is better to say "I don't need high ISO" but we shouldn't speak for others.

[scott kirkpatrick]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Martial arts, yay!  With the M8, from 2008, when I only dared to go to ISO 320 (800 was really horrible!):

 

[scott kirkpatrick]

and another:

 

[SiOnara]

The DoF is much smaller at 1.4 which is great for that type of shooting. It also handles much better at night.

 

Personally anyone that says 6400 is useless doesn't shoot in dark places or night architecture or reportage

Yes I loved shooting my A7s at night at f8 on the street. Liberating. High ISO's are very useful.

[Mikeleica]

LOL, what an odd bunch of posts!

 

To me, high ISO is the main reason I use digital over film in the first place, especially in color.

 

If I am at ISO 800 or lower, I just take my M4-P out and shoot Tri-X. But when the light gets lower than that, I'll take all I can get in a digicam. I am often at ISO 3,200 which 99% of the time the 240 handles really well. But it would be even better to have clean and usable ISO 6400, 12K and even 25K, images taken at those light levels can be truly otherworldly especially in documentary or street-travel genres. 

 

A craftsman may not blame his tools, but that does not mean he would not know what to do with an even better one.

[jaapv]

Can you please explain why you make this kind of comment?

of course. It implies that this is a rather extreme type of use that not many users will attempt

[jaapv]

Probably wrong. Small kids, indoors, evening ... 6400 ISO reached easily.

 

Fast action under one 60 W bulb outdoors? It hardly compares.

[furcafe]

Fast action under one 60 W bulb outdoors? It hardly compares.

Actually, it may.  Mr. Kirkpatrick wrote that he "shot a martial arts class working outside in the evening under a single streetlight, f/2 @ ISO 18,500".  Since streetlights are usually much brighter than 60W, his experience may not be very different from snapping running children indoors under your typical 60-150W house lamp.

[Stef63]

of course. It implies that this is a rather extreme type of use that not many users will attempt

He said "under a single street light" and you make of it "in the dark". For digital sensor that is quite a difference.

 

I recently made some shots of a group of moving camels in the Arabian desert just after sunset with a full moon with the 90 APO. I was very glad I could go up to 6400 ISO and use 125/s to avoid camera shake. I used F4 and F5.6 to keep several animals and riders in focus. If you call this extreme type of use that not many users will attempt I can live with that and glad I can make these extreme photographs.

 

So then I guess I must be happy with my M10 knowing this camera can go "extreme" like you call it, where my M240 would have left off. I have no problem that for your needs 6400 ISO sounds extreme, but why making comments on other users that are happy with the streched ISO of the new camera by using exaggerations like "shooting in the dark" while they where refering to other light conditions?

Edited February 16, 2017 by Stef63

[BerndReini]

Again, this is just arguing for argument's sake. I use film Ms, an M9, and an MM1. I didn't absolutely higher ISO capabilities than ISO 1,000 before I got the MM1, but I do use it plenty nowadays. I have two young children, and they  do not stand still at all times, neither do they stand on the same plane for focusing. I am convinced that when Jaap buys an M10, even he will appreciate its high ISO capabilities.

[jaapv]

I certainly would, but I would not buy an M10 for that reason. However, that is just me. Everybody has his own priorities.

[jlindstrom]

Well, I've thought of this long & hard. I'm sure someone with an M9 or M8 has a legitimate reason to upgrade.

 

But for many if not most of us this is a case of want more than need. If you're not making money or fame for the photos, it's a case of want.

 

I certainly don't need a M10, but I for sure want one. I can easily find a dozen reasons why it makes sense too. But in the end it's a hobby. And since it's a hobby, it's a case of want or ie. case of luxury item.

 

No need to justify it with high isos or something else.. want + means = purchase [emoji23]

 

The technical merits are there, but if we "cut down the crap" they don't really matter. If one wants it and can buy one, just do it.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[BerndReini]

I thought there was a Mae West quote about "want vs. need," but I couldn't find it. Instead I found to other MAE West wisdoms:

 

"I generally avoid temptation unless I can't resist it."

 

And "I like restraint as long as it doesn't go too far."

[sblutter]

And in prints? It takes very careful postprocessing to render anything over say 8 EV values in print, and no sensor nowadays is under 11, the better ones, including Leica, considerably in excess.

To me this is the whole point - what do you shots look like printed large?  With careful PP its amazing what you can get out of all sorts of captures. 

 

Taking a test shot @ high ISO and comparing a tiny bit of dark sky noise using several sensors isn't helpful to telling visual stories

 

If you're just shooting for the internet - IQ depends on the viewers' screen - and many people these days look on phones & tablets

 

Exhibition size prints is where all this stuff matters.  Outside that - irrelevant.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[jmahto]

To me this is the whole point - what do you shots look like printed large? With careful PP its amazing what you can get out of all sorts of captures.

 

Taking a test shot @ high ISO and comparing a tiny bit of dark sky noise using several sensors isn't helpful to telling visual stories

 

If you're just shooting for the internet - IQ depends on the viewers' screen - and many people these days look on phones & tablets

 

Exhibition size prints is where all this stuff matters. Outside that - irrelevant.

Totally agree. Recently I did a small experiment of shooting at ISO 3200 using M240. Did appropriate NR and sharpening in LR and resized to 10mega pixel size. The resized picture was totally noise free even at 1:1 zooming on the screen. I tested by resizing to 10mp since not too long ago my old camera was 10mp.

 

You can do a lot with PP and a cooperating subject matter (I agree that different subjects may need different PP).

 

If I do have access to cleaner high ISO files then I will certainly find use for it, but I am not missing out in my current usage.

 

Edit: typos

Edited February 18, 2017 by jmahto