M10: Improved low light performance worth it?

[Jk1002]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi,

 

mulling waiting for the M10 versus taking the package deal with the M262 I am wondering if the improved low light performance actually matters with the M10.

 

My understanding is, that in lower light the focussing with the optical viewfinder gets difficult to impossible, using zone focus isn't option either since any lens would be wide open.

 

So in praxis, unless one uses the electronic viewfinder, does the high ISO capability actually matter much?

[LocalHero1953]

I can't answer for the M10, but for the M240, if I can see a scene well enough to visualise a photograph, then I can normally focus on it. At the extreme that would require higher ISO than the M240 can support and also, I suspect, the M10.

 

I can take a shot in lighting requiring ISO 3200 on the M240, but I suspect the M10 at that ISO would produce a much better looking image (less noisy, better shadow colours etc).

[Advertisement]

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

[skanga]

 

My understanding is, that in lower light the focussing with the optical viewfinder gets difficult to impossible, using zone focus isn't option either since any lens would be wide open.

Hello Jk1002 Focussing has rarely been an issue - I've used film Ms since '80-'81 in many situations: Portraits, Journalism, Theatre, Dance, Music venues,  etc. - Hope this helps.

 

As an aside, I finally got a chance to play with an M10 recently - love it! I've waited years for Leica to create a digital M that is close to the film cameras - simplified, quick, discreet, small  - I think they might have more or less done that.

 

Thanks

Sam

[otto.f]

Hi,

 

mulling waiting for the M10 versus taking the package deal with the M262 I am wondering if the improved low light performance actually matters with the M10.

 

My understanding is, that in lower light the focussing with the optical viewfinder gets difficult to impossible, using zone focus isn't option either since any lens would be wide open.

 

So in praxis, unless one uses the electronic viewfinder, does the high ISO capability actually matter much?

I beg your pardon, have been lying under a stone since January '17? The optical viewfinder is much brighter, is much more often spot on, dramatically more so with longer lenses like 75, 90 and 135, and this also occurs in dark situations like nightscenes in metropoles and theatres Edited May 18, 2017 by otto.f

[a.noctilux]

M10 has the best viewfinder of all M that I use.

Not much better than M262 but the finder with more eye relief and greater magnification of M10 is joy to use quickly and reliably.

Even in darkest subject, it's brightness help and if not LV is there.

 

Another thing that is useful is liveview or EVF to check if the OVF is to be relayed.

[FrankX]

Interesting question. I tried to answer it for myself (new to rangefinder). The following image was taken solely for this thread! Thus nothing special...

 

Leica M10, 35 mm, f2.0, 1/45s @ISO10000 - at least for me that was the darkest scene I could focus using the rangefinder. 

(significantly cropped image; about 5 MP, i.e. 1/5 of complete image, before downscaling for publication here; LR6.10 with standard noise reduction)

 

Hope it helps a little bit!

 

 

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!

[Stonewall Brigade]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Compared to my previous M262, M10 is significantly better in low light performance.

[otto.f]

Interesting question. I tried to answer it for myself (new to rangefinder). The following image was taken solely for this thread! Thus nothing special...

 

Leica M10, 35 mm, f2.0, 1/45s @ISO10000 - at least for me that was the darkest scene I could focus using the rangefinder. 

(significantly cropped image; about 5 MP, i.e. 1/5 of complete image, before downscaling for publication here; LR6.10 with standard noise reduction)

 

Hope it helps a little bit!

 

May I point to the fact this image says nothing about the reality of the dark in which you took this photo? (and reality is relevant for the optical rangefinder). Perhaps we would know more if you'd know the EV value with incident light metering at for instance 100ISO in that situation. Many high ISO captures are much too light comparing with the *real* darkness at hand, because a light meter still levels everything down to an average of 18% grey, which is in night scenes a much too light standard compared to our experience of the darkness. If you look at the pictures in Barnack's Monthly of this month May, you'll see images that are in the vast majority underexposed, and rightly so because this comes closer to our experience than what the camera comes up with, in AUTO-everything mode.

Edited May 18, 2017 by otto.f

[Jk1002]

it doesnt say much about the darkness but for sure it shows that the higher ISO could be useful. You wouldnt take the 262 up to that level

[otto.f]

Sure! But the question was about usability of the optical viewfinder in the dark

[FrankX]

May I point to the fact this image says nothing about the reality of the dark in which you took this photo? (and reality is relevant for the optical rangefinder). 

 

Of course, you're right about the image being brighter than in reality. My idea was that probably most members here can derive or at least imagine the darkness from the type of image plus the given values (ISO10000, f2.0, 1/45s). The following image (2.0 f-stops darker) shows more or less my 'experienced darkness' which may be also highly subjective.

 

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!

[otto.f]

So, now that's convincing for people who are in doubt of the usability of the optical viewfinder !

[Jk1002]

That wasnt actually the question, question was about high ISO. Improved viewfinder may be prt of the anwser since that seems to improve the focussing :0)

[pico]

Hello Jk1002 Focussing has rarely been an issue - I've used film Ms since '80-'81 in many situations: Portraits, Journalism, Theatre, Dance, Music venues,  etc.

 

Aw, you are just bragging about your superior eyesight.

.

[enboe]

Absolutely yes, the extra 2+ stops makes it worthwhile.

[adan]

May I point to the fact this image says nothing about the reality of the dark in which you took this photo? (and reality is relevant for the optical rangefinder). Perhaps we would know more if you'd know the EV value with incident light metering at for instance 100ISO in that situation.

 

Well, he used an EV of 7.5 @ ISO 10000. Which equates to an EV of 1 @ ISO 100 (6.6 f/stops difference). In other words, he'd have needed a 2-second exposure at f/2 and ISO 100 in that light.

 

Which equates to 5 Lux or 0.46 foot-candles, per: http://www.sekonic.com/united-states/support/evluxfootcandleconversionchart.aspx

 

Not, of course, scientifically precise, but close enough (assuming a 1-stop (100%) error either way) to say the illumination was somewhere between 0.23 and 0.92 fc. On the close order of 1 foot-candle maximum, which as we know means the light available 1 foot (0.30 m) away from a "standard" candle flame, historically speaking. (E.G. "a pure spermaceti candle weighing ¹⁄₆ pound (76 grams) and burning at a rate of 120 grains per hour (7.8 grams per hour).")

 

Photography by candle-light. Or - pretty darned dark.

 

But as a check on my calculations, below is a picture I easily focused with a 90 Summarit @ f/2.5. Taken at ISO 12500 and a shutter speed of 1/60 (slightly brighter than FrankX's situation). My calculations say that is equivalent to ISO 100 exposure of 2 secs @ f/2.5, or EV 1.66. Or about 9 Lux/0.85 fc.

 

In an hour or so, when my living room returns to that darkness, I can check that against my Sekonic's actual incident measurement of ISO 100 EV, and we'll see how close I got.

 

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!

[adan]

Measured incident ISO 100 EV for the scene/lighting above - EV 2.1 - or about 1/2 f/stop different than my estimation.

 

Or to Jk1002's question - you run out of ISO long before you run out of enough light to focus, even with the M10's enhanced ISO capability.

 

Caveat - the M10 does allow up to ISO 50000, but at that setting, the image quality is so poor that focusing is the least of my worries.

 

Below is in yellow indoor lighting, white-balanced, at ISO 50000. 50mm f/2. Focus on the word "LEITZ" is still fine - but that is about the only thing usable at that ISO. (Noise, but more so banding).

 

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!

[CJJon]

Hi,

 

mulling waiting for the M10 versus taking the package deal with the M262 I am wondering if the improved low light performance actually matters with the M10.

 

My understanding is, that in lower light the focussing with the optical viewfinder gets difficult to impossible, using zone focus isn't option either since any lens would be wide open.

 

So in praxis, unless one uses the electronic viewfinder, does the high ISO capability actually matter much?

 

It might. Do you plan do a lot of shooting in low-light? Although high ISO won't save an out of focus shot. 

 

Focusing in low-light takes practice and an awareness of your DoF (which you can have even at large aperture). Try bracket focusing and focusing on something in the scene that is bright enough to see. Amp lights at concerts work well for this. There is usually something in the scene that you can focus on...digital clocks on cable boxes, lighted doorbells, pilot lights, cell phone screens, street lights, porch lights, cigarette cherry. Etc., etc. Focus bracket by taking a few quick shots of the scene racking focus in or out to try and nail your focus point. The LV on the M10 with focus peaking is very handy in low light (the M262 does not have LV)

 

Oh, and practice, practice, practice.

[Stealth3kpl]

More flexibility regarding aperture is useful. You might want to take the shot at f4 rather than f2 for example.

Pete

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[NZDavid]

Clearer focusing in any light but especially dim light and the ability to use higher ISOs are swaying me towards an M10 to replace M9 – if and when they are available in this part of the world.