Is the highlight clipping really that bad?

[Flu]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Never seen an exposure meter? Those are the things to use when refining TTL metering.

Sure, but I'm not going to use a separate light meter besides the in-cam one for street or spontaneous shots - only in studio. I love everything about the M10, the way it looks, the feel in the hand, and speed of operation. I just need multi-zone metering that will most likely come with the M10P. Will pick it up again when it comes.

 

If you want to use multi-zone metering just turn on LV, set metering to multi-zone, and then shoot the camera as a rangefinder. No-one said you have to look at the LCD display.

 

 

I would if I could! The problem for me is that I'm left eye dominant and even if I close my right eye, the light from the screen would be a constant bother - I've tried it. And no, I don't want to use electricians tape over the entire screen....lol. I shall wait patiently for the M10P.

Edited February 10, 2018 by Flu

[Printmaker]

On highlight clipping: How did we ever get anything that looked half decent on Kodachrome 25 ? 

 

http://www.photoweb.ru/exusr/pdf/kodak/e88.pdf

 

K25 dynamic range (log exposure axis on the chart on Kodak publication E-88) is D 2.2, 7.3 stops, part of that is noise, so in the real world is about 6 stops, so strange how National Geographic managed.

Just for comparison here is the M10 chart:

http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Leica%20M10

Let's say 10.5 stops at base, the sensor doesn't clip unless you make it clip, light meters whether built in or waved about externally, so you look like you know what you are doing, aren't infallible they require interpretation and judgement, if you clip once that should be a lesson learnt and not repeated.

 

Having acquired a used National Geographic drum scanner in the 80s, I discovered you could expand the shadow detail of slides on the printed page slightly by metering (setting the black point) on the black frame of the film. Still, back in the day, we always rated Kodachrome at 32 and used flash, or reflectors, or repositioned the subject to tame the contrast.

 

It is so much easier now to just use a touch of exposure compensation and adjust the shadow slider in LR or CR. I still do not like using a flash on a M camera but if I were shooting weddings portraits on the beach in daylight, it would be a necessary accessory.

[Advertisement]

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

[erl]

That pic above, taken from Jaaps pages (I presume), gave me the instant feeling of, 'the light is too extreme to expect a fair result,' or I need to move to the other side if I want useable light contrast. I would venture no sensor would render that particular image significantly better. It's just terrible lighting, which happens. You take it anyway if it is an important moment, otherwise don't fight with it.

[erl]

For what it's worth, I've worked for 50+ years as a pro, obviously mainly using film. But I picked up on digital with the first  M8 (I still have 2), then the M9 and now the M10. I do shoot a lot of low light and extreme light stuff. I bought a Sony A7S to partner the M9 in low light situations. Now that I have the M10, the Sony is nearly obsolete for me.  I am very happy with the dynamic range and general image rendering of the M10. All it generally requires is an adjustment for BP and WP to suit my taste, as do all my digital files, regardless of camera source. It is mostly a global adjustment to cover all files in a batch. Exactly like 'which paper contrast' do I want to use in the darkroom. It's a personal taste and must be done for all images regardless of source.

 

Addendum: My standard setting for both the M9 and M10 is '-1/3' exposure compensation. At times I vary this manually.

[Jeff S]

Sure, but I'm not going to use a separate light meter besides the in-cam one for street or spontaneous shots - only in studio. I love everything about the M10, the way it looks, the feel in the hand, and speed of operation. I just need multi-zone metering that will most likely come with the M10P. Will pick it up again when it comes.

 

 

I would if I could! The problem for me is that I'm left eye dominant and even if I close my right eye, the light from the screen would be a constant bother - I've tried it. And no, I don't want to use electricians tape over the entire screen....lol. I shall wait patiently for the M10P.

The M10P, if there is one, won’t change Leica’s center weighted metering approach, just the same as the M9P or any other digital M.

 

Best that you learn and adjust to it if you insist on not using a separate meter or live view.

 

http://www.overgaard.dk/leica-M9-digital-rangefinder-camera-page-17-light-metering-and%20quality-of-light.html

 

Jeff

[jmahto]

Sure, but I'm not going to use a separate light meter besides the in-cam one for street or spontaneous shots - only in studio. I love everything about the M10, the way it looks, the feel in the hand, and speed of operation. I just need multi-zone metering that will most likely come with the M10P. Will pick it up again when it comes.

 

 

I would if I could! The problem for me is that I'm left eye dominant and even if I close my right eye, the light from the screen would be a constant bother - I've tried it. And no, I don't want to use electricians tape over the entire screen....lol. I shall wait patiently for the M10P.

If I remember correctly, M240's advanced metering does not require you to switch on LV. You shoot like RF using optical VF but the camera opens shutter to meter off the sensor (rather than shutter blade as in classic metering). The advantage is better metering at the cost of shutter delay (?) and twice opening sound and possibly more battery consumption. I don't use it though since I am use to classic (center weighted).

 

If I am wrong in my description then someone correct me. I can experiment tomorrow to verify.

 

I guess M10 is similar.

[Jeff S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

If I remember correctly, M240's advanced metering does not require you to switch on LV. You shoot like RF using optical VF but the camera opens shutter to meter off the sensor (rather than shutter blade as in classic metering). The advantage is better metering at the cost of shutter delay (?) and twice opening sound and possibly more battery consumption. I don't use it though since I am use to classic (center weighted).

 

If I am wrong in my description then someone correct me. I can experiment tomorrow to verify.

 

I guess M10 is similar.

Yes, but as Michael says, Classic metering is much faster. Which is what RF photography is generally about. Best to learn the camera as originally designed IMO.

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/246504-classic-metering-vs-advance-metering/page-1?do=findComment&comment=2835755

 

Jeff

Edited February 11, 2018 by Jeff S

[jaapv]

If I remember correctly, M240's advanced metering does not require you to switch on LV. You shoot like RF using optical VF but the camera opens shutter to meter off the sensor (rather than shutter blade as in classic metering). The advantage is better metering at the cost of shutter delay (?) and twice opening sound and possibly more battery consumption. I don't use it though since I am use to classic (center weighted).

 

If I am wrong in my description then someone correct me. I can experiment tomorrow to verify.

 

I guess M10 is similar.

Exactly the way I remember the M240. Hard to imagine that they would have dropped this system on the M10.

[elmars]

They dropped it because it is too slow, I guess.

[jaapv]

That would be a strange decision; it was user-selectable.

[elmars]

Leica does not all the things, that user want.

[Jeff S]

Part of the notion to “focus on the essentials”, Video was also user selectable.

 

Jeff

[blacksinner]

Jpg file

 

Raw file

 

i want to show you my issue with M10. look at the jpg file, the transition on the clipped highlight is so ugly. its has very distinguish line makes it looks so bad.

in the raw files, the transition is smooth even though the clipping is still very visible. 

i don't mind cliped highlight, but the highlight on the M10 is the most sensitive among other camera i've ever used.  

[AlanJW]

If you process it in raw and then save as jpg, what happens?  There is some in camera processing going on to produce the jpg.  Leica seems to have made a choice in the jpg processing that produces this.

I have always found underexposure works better in difficult light situations as it is much easier to bring out shadow detail than to deal with blown highlights.  But I can also understand why exposing for the fish is a rational choice here. The camera/sensor are actually dealing with it - not perfectly but perhaps adequately -- as shown by the raw.

I would think Leica might want to see this so the engineers could have a look at the jpg processing. 

[chris_livsey]

 

Raw file

 

 

 

 

That is not a RAW file, you cannot directly view a RAW file it is not an RGB image. A RAW file is a record of the data captured by the sensor it has to be processed to be viewed:

A RAW file must undergo demosaicing, white balance (using metadata) , colorimetric interpretation (the effect of the sensor filters), noise reduction, antialiasing, gamma correction and sharpening. Other factors such as lens correction may be used as well but the prior steps are essential to produce a viewable RGB image.  Each converter uses different algorithms so converters vary in Jpeg output, and can output other formats as well of course.

The "RAW" file you show has obviously a more pleasing appearance than the Jpeg that proceeds it, that I presume is the camera Jpeg output so it is not the sensor that is producing  unpleasant clipping it is the in-camera Jpeg algorithms.

Edited February 11, 2018 by chris_livsey

[blacksinner]

That is not a RAW file, you cannot directly view a RAW file it is not an RGB image. A raw file is a record of the data captured by the sensor it has to be processed to be viewed:

A RAW file must undergo demosaicing, white balance (using metadata) , colorimetric interpretation (the effect of the sensor filters), noise reduction, antialiasing, gamma correction and sharpening. Other factors such as lens correction may be used as well but the prior steps are essential to produce a viewable RGB image. Each converter uses different algorithms so converters vary in Jpeg output, and can output other formats as well of course.

The "RAW" file you show has obviously a more pleasing appearance than the Jpeg that proceeds it, that I presume is the camera Jpeg output so it is not the sensor that is producing unpleasant clipping it is the in-camera Jpeg algorithms.

I know. You dont have to explain this to me. What i mean by raw in this is offcourse it alteady convert by lightroom. I thought i dont have to explain this? it can display the file in this forum so it cannot be raw. Isn’t it?

 

What i mean by the jpg file is its the jpg file produced by the m10.

 

And i think you just repeating the thing i said. Yes the jpg file is not that unpleasant clipping. Thats my point. I hope it has smoother transition.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jaapv]

Part of the notion to “focus on the essentials”, Video was also user selectable.

 

Jeff

Exactly. The main reason I passed on the M10.

[Flu]

If I remember correctly, M240's advanced metering does not require you to switch on LV. You shoot like RF using optical VF but the camera opens shutter to meter off the sensor (rather than shutter blade as in classic metering). The advantage is better metering at the cost of shutter delay (?) and twice opening sound and possibly more battery consumption. I don't use it though since I am use to classic (center weighted).

 

If I am wrong in my description then someone correct me. I can experiment tomorrow to verify.

 

I guess M10 is similar.

 

This is exactly the feature I'm talking about! The M10 dropped the advanced metering. I've never felt this slight delay of advanced metering in the M240P to get in my way. IMO it's very minimal, in fact very well done and speedy. I don't use the M to shoot something too fast anyways - most always slow and planned. Different tools for different jobs - I've the SL, Q, or even the A9 if I want blazing speed!

I have a feeling Leica will put back the advanced metering in the M10P. IMO it's features like these that they intentionally strip to add back later as a way to differentiate the models and to better market the new camera. 

[Flu]

The M10P, if there is one, won’t change Leica’s center weighted metering approach, just the same as the M9P or any other digital M.

 

Best that you learn and adjust to it if you insist on not using a separate meter or live view.

 

http://www.overgaard.dk/leica-M9-digital-rangefinder-camera-page-17-light-metering-and%20quality-of-light.html

 

Jeff

I can shoot the M10 just fine. It's just not my preference to do so. Besides my 240's that I kept, I also have a 262 which is RF only and also center weighted only due to no live view or evf - thus, it shoots exactly like the M10 in that regard. I just have to be mindful whenever I pick up that camera to remember that it does not behave the same as my other M's. I put up with it however because this "red head" 262 is very special to me.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[M11 for me]

That is not a RAW file, you cannot directly view a RAW file it is not an RGB image. A RAW file is a record of the data captured by the sensor it has to be processed to be viewed:

A RAW file must undergo demosaicing, white balance (using metadata) , colorimetric interpretation (the effect of the sensor filters), noise reduction, antialiasing, gamma correction and sharpening. Other factors such as lens correction may be used as well but the prior steps are essential to produce a viewable RGB image. Each converter uses different algorithms so converters vary in Jpeg output, and can output other formats as well of course.

The "RAW" file you show has obviously a more pleasing appearance than the Jpeg that proceeds it, that I presume is the camera Jpeg output so it is not the sensor that is producing unpleasant clipping it is the in-camera Jpeg algorithms.

And still one is the Raw and the other one is the JPG. We understand the difference. The Raw renders much nicer. Here I agree with blacksinner. I stoped to shoot Raw and JPG at the same time. Rarely the JPG is better than the Raw so that all the comparing of the JPG ooc with the Raw is not necessary. But in any case you have to mind the highlights. With the Canon it is actually very similar. Edited February 11, 2018 by Alex U.