M11 for me Posted May 7, 2017 Share #21 Posted May 7, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) Yes. Please. Can you also have one shot at ISO 200 underexposed by 4-5 stops? On M240, pushing ISO200 shots by 4-5 stops in PP highlights green channel disproportionately. I would like to see how M10 behaves in similar push. Here the Link: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/impetfb03merscy/AADcekcq53-PyAo-0faTjkota?dl=0 I would appreciate a feedback. I will try to do the tests that you proposed. Only I found that pushing 3 stops is a lot already. We'll see if 5 stops works as well. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 7, 2017 Posted May 7, 2017 Hi M11 for me, Take a look here Higher ISO Pictures – Usability. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jmahto Posted May 8, 2017 Share #22 Posted May 8, 2017 (edited) Here the Link: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/impetfb03merscy/AADcekcq53-PyAo-0faTjkota?dl=0 I would appreciate a feedback. I will try to do the tests that you proposed. Only I found that pushing 3 stops is a lot already. We'll see if 5 stops works as well. Impressive. ISO 12500 (left) and 1600+3stop (right) look "almost identical" after processing. The only difference I could see is in color noise. The following comparison is after only color noise adjustment for ISO1600+3stop. Luminance slider left to 0. Notice that in-camera processing is actually doing a better job in removing color noise. Removing color noise in pushed picture reduces color fidelity a little bit. But I guess for all practical purposes they are identical. (update: I should add that M10 has almost 2 stops advantage over my M240) 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! Edited May 8, 2017 by jmahto Quote 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/272147-higher-iso-pictures-%E2%80%93-usability/?do=findComment&comment=3271123'>More sharing options...
M11 for me Posted May 8, 2017 Share #23 Posted May 8, 2017 Note that the real ISO full doubling from 6400 would be 12800 whereas the M10 give you 12500 only. The little difference in noise might be a result of that difference as well. With pulling 3 stops: What is your judgement? Would you say that we have an ISO-invariant sensor? As soon as I find some time I will try with 5 stops. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmahto Posted May 8, 2017 Share #24 Posted May 8, 2017 (edited) Note that the real ISO full doubling from 6400 would be 12800 whereas the M10 give you 12500 only. The little difference in noise might be a result of that difference as well. With pulling 3 stops: What is your judgement? Would you say that we have an ISO-invariant sensor? As soon as I find some time I will try with 5 stops. It sure does look like it has ISO-invariant sensor. However it also looks like M10 does some extra processing (at least to reduce chroma noise) at high ISO which seems to be superior to NR in PP. Edit: I also would like to see the same shot (properly exposed) at ISO 200. You would need tripod though. Edited May 8, 2017 by jmahto Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted May 9, 2017 Share #25 Posted May 9, 2017 (edited) Note that the real ISO full doubling from 6400 would be 12800 whereas the M10 give you 12500 only. The little difference in noise might be a result of that difference as well. This gets into the realm of "angels dancing on the head of a pin." The difference between ISO 12500 and ISO 12800 is exactly the difference between ISO 125 and ISO 128 (which does not exist). On the close order of 1/9th of 1/3rd (i.e. 1/27th) of an f/stop - or less. The ISO itself (the agency that sets the standards) has always - happily - rounded off ISO 64 x 2 to be 125 instead of 128. And ISO 640 x 2 to be ISO 1250 (not 1280). As did the ASA for decades before it. Edited May 9, 2017 by adan Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
M11 for me Posted May 9, 2017 Share #26 Posted May 9, 2017 (edited) Yes, you are certainly right. On the other hand the M10 exposes ⅓ stop differently when setting 6400 and 1/125 or 12500 and 1/250. Maybe its just by accident. I actually wanted just explain why there was a slight difference in the photos that JMAHTO discussed. Nothing more. There might be another effect. Actually when we set the cam to e.g 6400 or 3200 the REAL ISO might differ from the value shown on the ISP knob. But in general I fully agree with you. Our tests are anyway not scientific. As a consequence the statement ist brobably right to say that in practice we have an ISO-invariant sensor in the M10. The accuracy of that statement is then not so clear. I enjoy the caracteristics of the M10 sensor. That is why I stared to look a bit deeper into that matter. And I know now the the new sensor shows a marvelous behavior. Edited May 9, 2017 by Alex U. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.