Is the highlight clipping really that bad?

[Jeff S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

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

Shouldn’t be strange to you given what they did with video.

 

Jeff

[Csacwp]

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.

Was this taken at iso 100?

[lct]

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

 

How did you set your M10 if i may ask. I mean, the ugly result you've shown above is the result of too high contrast on highlights generally. I have no experience with the M10 and i'm not familar with managing jpeg files anymore but did you try to reduce contrast through the M10 menus? Just asking as you could well fix your issue this way if my old jpeg user's memory serves me well.

[jaapv]

 

http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm

 

I think this guy is a lot better than DXO, as he measures the usable dynamic range, AKA exposure range.

 

The first graph shows the response of all measured Leica cameras. The M10 appears to respond the same as previous models, just a bit better. But have a look at the SL and Q. Possibly Leica seems to have made an effort to improve highlight recovery, maybe related to a pull ISO. I posted a second comparison to make it clear.

This would mean that the issue is not in in the sensor at all, but related to the firmware.

 

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!

 

 

 

I have no idea whether this is really related to the clipping problem in this thread, I have mailed Bill for an explanation.

BTW, he is looking for files from other Leica cameras to add to his site.

 

Anyway, as the problem is avoided by shooting  high contrast subjects at ISO 320, it is not much of an issue.

 

 

[jaapv]

 

Jaap,

Regarding the SL and the Q; they appear to be using dual conversion gain

technology.

This gives a performance boost at ISO 200 and ISO 400 respectively.

I would love to get CL or any other files from you or your members.

The basic procedure is outlined here:

http://www.photonstophotos.net/Collaborations/Collaboration_Overview.htm

Cheers,

Bill

[Tailwagger]

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. 

 

I'm confused.  The M10 allows for spot and multi-point metering along with center weight. Much faster than the M240 in these alternate modes. What am I missing here? 

[pgh]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

To be perfectly honest you do seem like someone who tries to lecture anyone and everyone about it. You see when throwing around terms like inferior, not fit for clients/professional use, not accepting center focus and exposing for the highlights you certainly are starting to sound more than just a little religious about your crusade.

And this is coming from someone who use an M246 where you really have to pay attention to the highlights...

 

The lesser dynamic range you go on and on about to no end are possibly not about an inferior sensor rather than the competitor's sensor being incrementally better. Reading this and other threads I'm starting to wonder if your problem with the M is more that you wish it was something it clearly isn't? Maybe, there are other tools for your needs?

 

I'm also very curious about your professional use? What kind of professional assignments to you take on? Reportage/documentary? Well then your M should be more then adequate. if you do carefully composed work where you really have to know what's in the picture frame or not then I suggest the ranger finder in itself isn't doing you any good despite whatever sensor. I'm not trying to disrespect you, but you really need to take a step back and realize that being so bombastic about the M's lack of capabilities suggest that the rest of us are intentionally or not - just being stupid for purchasing and using the M.

I apologize - my frustration stems from the fact that I get the sense that some try to say or imply this issue isn't of any material consequence - which I don't really buy when one plunks down close to $7k USD for a 35mm style camera. There seems to be a pile on mentality that any issues with the M10 are more or less user error, and because of this I feel compelled to forcefully speak to the fact that these issues are real, and they may matter depending on the way one uses the camera. They may not - and I think I've been at pains to state this.

 

I also have made a point to state that the Leica sensor is relatively inferior in my opinion. As in, not up to the standards of current comparable tools of small form factor full frame or aps-c documentary style cameras. Not saying that they are inferior as an absolute measure by any means. I still use the M10 the most, and generally, I think it is a fantastic tool, but this thread isn't about how fantastic it is. If you own one you know it's a great tool by most measures. There areas where it isn't (and where a Leica might be expected to be - no one buys an M for autofocus for example) and that may be of consequence to some buyers. This isn't a crusade - I didn't start this thread - it was simply my attempt to counter the points about user error - this isn't a problem with user error. It's just not. I mean, it could be if you don't know what you're doing, but most people here do and aren't talking about saving blown exposures. Right now the solution is to avoid ISO 100, which isn't a great solution, at least to me. I would really love to be able to use ISO 100 for the way I shoot. The best thing would be to allow to shoot at the native ISO of the sensor it seems, because while at 200 the highlight issue subsides noticeably, you do start to sacrifice slightly the total usable DR of the image. It's not a lot, granted, but again, for the work one does it might be a thing worth noting. 

 

I come from a background in photojournalism, yes. My assignment work tends to be reportage style portraiture, which the M is well suited towards. This means shooting in lots of available light. I like to use dramatic highlights and shadows in my compositions quite a bit - and then post process images to bring about a more even rendering that echoes negative color film, and have been able to do this and still maintain detail throughout the image with other modern cameras. I find the highlight issue is a very pertinent thing with this type of work. It's not often a deal breaker, but it is enough of an issue that I have to carry another camera with me on some assignments. I'd love to not do that. I would also add that I maintain an art practice that is different from this, that is basically landscape collage work, where I also use the M when I can (even though it's not a 'landscape' tool, it can be). 

 

This has nothing to do with compositional issues though (not sure what I said to give that impression, if I did, let me say here that I quite love the viewfinder).

 

I bought an M10, and I've put over ten thousand clicks on it in the 5 months I've owned it, so I don't mean to imply anyone here is stupid for buying it (unless I am stupid too...well, actually, I'm not the brightest fellow but I wouldn't put that on anyone else that uses the same tool as me - totally unrelated matter). Anyways, it's a lovely tool. It's limitations can be frustrating and may cause actual issues for some users.

 

If you're in the market for an M10, you'll probably love it. You'll probably love it a little more if you don't ever need to use ISO 100. 

Edited February 11, 2018 by pgh

[Jeff S]

It was noted on the forum a year ago that the base ISO on the M10 is really 200, with 100 acting more as a pull setting. I stick to 200 in good light, without problem.

 

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/268833-iso-100-on-m10/page-1?do=findComment&comment=3222039

 

Jeff

[jmahto]

...I apologize - my frustration stems from the fact that I get the sense that some try to say or imply this issue isn't of any material consequence - which I don't really buy when one plunks down close to $7k USD for a 35mm style camera. ....

Rest stripped... you certainly are trying to imply that if you plunk $7k then you should get whatever you want.

 

Forget AF, but for the rest you get a sensor that is the BEST for all (almost) M lenses amongst all camera bodies. There is no reason for it to be put down just because it doesn't do what you want.

 

Note: the super duper sensor from (insert your fav manufacturer here) has no use to me if it doesn't work with my fav 28 cron ASPH or (insert you fav M lens here.)

 

Edit: btw, all camera bodies have limitations. Tell me which is your fav camera body in the market and I will tell you how it doesn't work with my 28cron ASPH.

Edited February 11, 2018 by jmahto

[pgh]

Rest stripped... you certainly are trying to imply that if you plunk $7k then you should get whatever you want.

 

Oh c'mon now. No, I am not. This is the sort of mentality in some of the posts of this forum I find truly silly - this sort of absolutism - no acknowledging the in between. That is unreasonable. I am not an unreasonable person. I'm at pains to state that these things might not even matter for some users. It's an argument that amounts to how important eeking out the last 10% of performance is important to you.

 

I, personally, think that current sensor tech regarding usable dynamic range is something reasonable to expect though. (I mean, when a Fuji X pro 2 does a better job with it for under 2k you're telling me this is unreasonable?)

For me, and maybe only me - though maybe not given the other posters here, it is sometimes the difference between pictures I can use and pictures I have to toss. If it's otherwise a successful picture (I don't make very many), it is an issue. 

 

I can't show you another camera that will work better with your specific lens, but I can give you examples of small cameras that will give you better* results with a 28mm attached - but it sounds like that won't do. If we're "inserting favorite M lens here" though - if that lens happens to be 50mm or longer, then there options, with of course a sacrifice if you're . As you said there are always limitations though. 

 

*(subjective - only in terms of resolution and usable dynamic range)

[blacksinner]

How did you set your M10 if i may ask. I mean, the ugly result you've shown above is the result of too high contrast on highlights generally. I have no experience with the M10 and i'm not familar with managing jpeg files anymore but did you try to reduce contrast through the M10 menus? Just asking as you could well fix your issue this way if my old jpeg user's memory serves me well.

All the setting is standard. Contrast saturation and sharpness set to standard. This is only the jpg algorithm in M10 camera that does this. The raw converted to jpg files show that the transition is not as bad as the in camera jpg. Maybe they should fix this on next firmware. Now i set my camera dng only or monocrom in certain situation. I really hate the in camera jpg color.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[blacksinner]

Was this taken at iso 100?

Heres the link

https://flic.kr/p/24cPtsE

 

Yes it was iso 100.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[lct]

All the setting is standard. Contrast saturation and sharpness set to standard. This is only the jpg algorithm in M10 camera that does this. [...]

 

OK but why don't you set your in camera contrast to low? That's what i used to do with my jpeg cameras in the past, we used to call this "poor man's raw". I'm pretty sure you would not get those artefacts anymore and there is no harm to try this setting anyway.

[blacksinner]

OK but why don't you set your in camera contrast to low? That's what i used to do with my jpeg cameras in the past, we used to call this "poor man's raw". I'm pretty sure you would not get those artefacts anymore and there is no harm to try this setting anyway.

I’ll try the setting and let you know

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[lct]

[...] I can't show you another camera that will work better with your specific lens, but I can give you examples of small cameras that will give you better* results with a 28mm attached [...]

 

I'm not interested in the M10 personally and i'm using what you would call modern cameras as well but what i'm after is a sensor made or fit for M lenses, whatever good results i could get with my Nikon, Sony or Fuji gear. Aside from my Kolari modded Sony A7s and my old R-D1 and Ricoh GXR, i'm not aware of any non-Leica camera capable to compete with my M8.2, M240 and digital CL from this viewpoint so i don't quite understand your criticism with respect. What i want is using little gems called Summilux, Summicron, Elmarit or Elmar and for that i see no serious alternative but Leica cameras. YMMV.

[jmahto]

Oh c'mon now. No, I am not. This is the sort of mentality in some of the posts of this forum I find truly silly - this sort of absolutism - no acknowledging the in between. That is unreasonable. I am not an unreasonable person. I'm at pains to state that these things might not even matter for some users. It's an argument that amounts to how important eeking out the last 10% of performance is important to you.

 

I, personally, think that current sensor tech regarding usable dynamic range is something reasonable to expect though. (I mean, when a Fuji X pro 2 does a better job with it for under 2k you're telling me this is unreasonable?)

For me, and maybe only me - though maybe not given the other posters here, it is sometimes the difference between pictures I can use and pictures I have to toss. If it's otherwise a successful picture (I don't make very many), it is an issue. 

 

I can't show you another camera that will work better with your specific lens, but I can give you examples of small cameras that will give you better* results with a 28mm attached - but it sounds like that won't do. If we're "inserting favorite M lens here" though - if that lens happens to be 50mm or longer, then there options, with of course a sacrifice if you're . As you said there are always limitations though. 

 

*(subjective - only in terms of resolution and usable dynamic range)

 

Highlights mine.... and I am responding to only the highlights.

 

First, attacking someone else as "silly mentality" is misguided. It is you who think that it is "silly", not me. Lets get that cleared up.

 

Now, the for the second highlight. Yes, you can show me a camera gives better* (with your asterisk) results than my 28cron ASPH, but your camera will not have the same haptics as M and won't have RF focusing and won't be compatible with compact and awesome legacy M lens.

 

You are totally missing the "system argument". You can't isolate "sensor" with rest of the system. If your so called awesome sensors doesn't work with M lenses then they are not awesome for me. Those (whatever they are) sensors will work with their own system lenses for sure but then you will have to deal with their haptics (which I find markedly inferior and less satisfying than M YMMV).

[Mark II]

Leica could probably eliminate all the grumbling but n this thread if they would just provide an option that replaced ISO 100 with the genuine base ISO of the sensor, rather than the existing (partial) software pull.

 

At the very least this should be an option with auto-ISO.

[TG14]

I use the Sony cams for the sensors and if the Leica were a better sensor I could get rid of them but I can't.

 

Why do you use the m10? I'm not trying to be snarky.

 

You mentioned the point about the sensor and that it was the most important thing for you.

 

Interested to know why and how you pick sony or leica in the different situations.

[Rollin]

I'm confused.  The M10 allows for spot and multi-point metering along with center weight. Much faster than the M240 in these alternate modes. What am I missing here? 

Center-weighted is the only one available if Live View is not turned on (pg. 168 of the Manual). From what I remember when I tried out the M240 is it allowed spot and multi-field without the live image being shown on the LCD screen, but when you hit the shutter button it was still activating the sensor first to meter, then shutter closed then re-opened for the shot. Glad to hear the M10 does that all faster.

 

In a way the M10 lets you go very quickly from center-weighted to either spot or multi-field by just hitting the convenient LV button, however there are times in dark situations or with people behind me I don't want my LCD lite up. And for the reasons outlined by Flu for left-eye shooters. Seems like firmware could change this set up.

 

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.

Flu, you might consider this eye cup - available in two sizes http://www.matchtechnical.com/Pages/eclypse.aspx 

I'm considering the small one as sometimes jab the corner of the camera into my brow LOL

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Mr Fjeld]

I apologize - my frustration stems from the fact that I get the sense that some try to say or imply this issue isn't of any material consequence - which I don't really buy when one plunks down close to $7k USD for a 35mm style camera. There seems to be a pile on mentality that any issues with the M10 are more or less user error, and because of this I feel compelled to forcefully speak to the fact that these issues are real, and they may matter depending on the way one uses the camera. They may not - and I think I've been at pains to state this.

 

I also have made a point to state that the Leica sensor is relatively inferior in my opinion. As in, not up to the standards of current comparable tools of small form factor full frame or aps-c documentary style cameras. Not saying that they are inferior as an absolute measure by any means. I still use the M10 the most, and generally, I think it is a fantastic tool, but this thread isn't about how fantastic it is. If you own one you know it's a great tool by most measures. There areas where it isn't (and where a Leica might be expected to be - no one buys an M for autofocus for example) and that may be of consequence to some buyers. This isn't a crusade - I didn't start this thread - it was simply my attempt to counter the points about user error - this isn't a problem with user error. It's just not. I mean, it could be if you don't know what you're doing, but most people here do and aren't talking about saving blown exposures. Right now the solution is to avoid ISO 100, which isn't a great solution, at least to me. I would really love to be able to use ISO 100 for the way I shoot. The best thing would be to allow to shoot at the native ISO of the sensor it seems, because while at 200 the highlight issue subsides noticeably, you do start to sacrifice slightly the total usable DR of the image. It's not a lot, granted, but again, for the work one does it might be a thing worth noting. 

 

I come from a background in photojournalism, yes. My assignment work tends to be reportage style portraiture, which the M is well suited towards. This means shooting in lots of available light. I like to use dramatic highlights and shadows in my compositions quite a bit - and then post process images to bring about a more even rendering that echoes negative color film, and have been able to do this and still maintain detail throughout the image with other modern cameras. I find the highlight issue is a very pertinent thing with this type of work. It's not often a deal breaker, but it is enough of an issue that I have to carry another camera with me on some assignments. I'd love to not do that. I would also add that I maintain an art practice that is different from this, that is basically landscape collage work, where I also use the M when I can (even though it's not a 'landscape' tool, it can be). 

 

This has nothing to do with compositional issues though (not sure what I said to give that impression, if I did, let me say here that I quite love the viewfinder).

 

I bought an M10, and I've put over ten thousand clicks on it in the 5 months I've owned it, so I don't mean to imply anyone here is stupid for buying it (unless I am stupid too...well, actually, I'm not the brightest fellow but I wouldn't put that on anyone else that uses the same tool as me - totally unrelated matter). Anyways, it's a lovely tool. It's limitations can be frustrating and may cause actual issues for some users.

 

If you're in the market for an M10, you'll probably love it. You'll probably love it a little more if you don't ever need to use ISO 100. 

 

Thanks pgh for your well reasoned and fine reply.

 

I do understand your points of view but must say I have a different opinion. I don't have the M10 myself (yet) as I mostly concentrate on black and white these days. I have rediscovered my interest in photography and haven't felt this great about photography since the early eighties. The possible problem of blowing out the highlights and not be able to retract details in editing, is an even larger concern with the M246 which I happen to have. I might be guilty of likening this with the M10 but I can understand that what might be an acceptable shortcoming with a camera lacking RBG filter, may not be expected with an M10. I don't know and I won't try to persuade you too feel otherwise.

 

I must also apologize if I sounded a bit harsh. Maybe the total focus of the these topics has become a bit too much recently.

Here's hoping the M10 will give you lots of joy whether it is professional or for your own pleasure.