jonoslack Posted July 17, 2018 Share #1 Posted July 17, 2018 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hi There You will have noticed by now that Leica have fixed the base ISO for Auto ISO at 200 for the M10. There is good reason (and good thinking) here, so I've written a piece about it which might interest you Here is the link: http://www.slack.co.uk/m10-and-blown-highlights.html 15 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 17, 2018 Posted July 17, 2018 Hi jonoslack, Take a look here M10 firmware 2.4.5.0 Auto ISO and blown highlights. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
01af Posted July 17, 2018 Share #2 Posted July 17, 2018 That's what I said 1.5 years ago. But then, who cares what I say ... 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonoslack Posted July 17, 2018 Author Share #3 Posted July 17, 2018 (edited) That's what I said 1.5 years ago. But then, who cares what I say ... Well 01laf We ALL care what you say (at least I do) But what you said was that 100 ISO was a 'pull' and of course lots of people knew that (including Sean Reid and DXO and even Leica!) - however, the consensus was that the hit in dynamic range wasn't that great (which it isn't). Tests of dynamic range look at the noise floor, not the highlight roll-off, which was the problem here. Further reading of your post proves that you nailed it . . just like I had, but sadly nobody responded then! Edited July 17, 2018 by jonoslack 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
01af Posted July 17, 2018 Share #4 Posted July 17, 2018 We ALL care what you say (at least I do). Thank you for saying that. ... what you said was that ISO 100/21° was a 'pull' ... That's right—and I meant it. I still do. ... however, the consensus was that the hit in dynamic range wasn't that great (which it isn't). That's right again. But a hit it is nonetheless, even when it's less than one full f-stop. The point is: At ISO 200/24°, the M10's exposure range is wider than at ISO 100/21°. So for most subjects outside the studio, using ISO 200/24° makes more sense than ISO 100/21°. I suppose that the M10's optimal ISO setting would be around ISO 160/23° or thereabouts ... but alas, the intermediate values between ISO 100/21° and ISO 200/24° are not accessible via the user interface (I guess it's because otherwise it would reveal to anyone that the "ISO 100" setting isn't really ISO 100/21°). So in order to get the best out of the M10's exposure range, avoid the ISO 100/21° setting and use ISO 200/24° instead. Tests of dynamic range look at the noise floor, not the highlight roll-off, which was the problem here. ISO 100/21° leads to less noise in the shadows at auto exposure, that's right. But at high subject contrast, you pay dearly for that. The loss in the highlights is worse than the gain in the shadows. In real life, a wider exposure range always is more valuable than a lower noise floor in the shadows at the same nominal exposure. You can always adjust your actual exposure according to the requirements at hand. At the same highlight rendition, ISO 200/24° will reach further down the shadows than ISO 100/21°. It doesn't make any sense to let the camera crush the highlights more than necessary. And by the way—please do not confuse exposure range with dynamic range. 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgh Posted July 17, 2018 Share #5 Posted July 17, 2018 I haven't touched ISO 100 since the first week of the M10 for this reason. Still not sure why they don't allow access to ISO 160 via the menu at least - if that's the actual base why can't we use it? Even if it only lets you capture very slightly more highlight range I would take it. It's already a sensor that has tighter limits than other current ones. The new base at 200 is nice and admits the issue but it seems to not fully fix it. Is it impossible to give access to 160 via firmware update? 2 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
M11 for me Posted July 18, 2018 Share #6 Posted July 18, 2018 I prefer anyway to set the ISO manually in normal lighting conditions. The reason for this is that I see in my own pictures many situations where I accidentally got ISO 600 or 800 with AUTO ISO, as I set the aperture to 8 or 11 for DOF reasons and without realising it the ISO went up which I did want to have. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
evikne Posted July 18, 2018 Share #7 Posted July 18, 2018 Advertisement (gone after registration) I rarely use auto anything, but if I do, I use auto shutter in bright light, together with ISO 200, and in dark surroundings I use auto ISO, together with a manually selected shutter speed (the longest I can allow without undesirable motion blur or camera shake). Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted July 18, 2018 Share #8 Posted July 18, 2018 (edited) Still not sure why they don't allow access to ISO 160 via the menu at least - if that's the actual base why can't we use it? alas, the intermediate values between ISO 100/21° and ISO 200/24° are not accessible via the user interface Just out of curiosity - what is the difference between setting the ISO to 160, and setting the ISO to 100 with exposure comp of -0.7? Same net exposure (sunny 16: f/16 @ 1/100th vs. f/16 @ 1/160th), and I thought the M10 was measured as "virtually ISO invariant." Leaving aside the question of the M's semi-spot metering and the issues it introduces. I tend to use EC of -0.3 or -0.7 as a default anyway - have done so since the M8 - just in case the narrow metering area misses seeing some bright scene areas in fast photojournalism metering. Edited July 18, 2018 by adan Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gobert Posted July 18, 2018 Share #9 Posted July 18, 2018 I haven't touched ISO 100 since the first week of the M10 for this reason. Still not sure why they don't allow access to ISO 160 via the menu at least - if that's the actual base why can't we use it? Even if it only lets you capture very slightly more highlight range I would take it. It's already a sensor that has tighter limits than other current ones. The new base at 200 is nice and admits the issue but it seems to not fully fix it. Is it impossible to give access to 160 via firmware update? I would wish possible ISO values of 50 and 25 in stead of a ridiculous 50.000. 4 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgh Posted July 18, 2018 Share #10 Posted July 18, 2018 Just out of curiosity - what is the difference between setting the ISO to 160, and setting the ISO to 100 with exposure comp of -0.7? Same net exposure (sunny 16: f/16 @ 1/100th vs. f/16 @ 1/160th), and I thought the M10 was measured as "virtually ISO invariant." Leaving aside the question of the M's semi-spot metering and the issues it introduces. I tend to use EC of -0.3 or -0.7 as a default anyway - have done so since the M8 - just in case the narrow metering area misses seeing some bright scene areas in fast photojournalism metering. This isn't the same. EV is used in auto exposure modes, and just meters the scene differently - adjusting the shutter speed in accordance with the exposure. As far as I know there's not a way to force the effective ISO to be different. The M10 isn't ISO invariant, if you expose using the 100 setting you will lose highlights more easily. I want to simply maximize the exposure range that can be captured, which is usually done by shooting at the sensor's actual base ISO - not an equivalent exposure that uses a shutter speed or aperture change to compensate. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgh Posted July 18, 2018 Share #11 Posted July 18, 2018 I would wish possible ISO values of 50 and 25 in stead of a ridiculous 50.000. I don't - that's pretty un Leica like. Cameras that shoot at that speed are usually used in different scenarios. What I want most would be to maximize the data the current sensor can capture at base though. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
evikne Posted July 19, 2018 Share #12 Posted July 19, 2018 I would wish possible ISO values of 50 and 25 in stead of a ridiculous 50.000. Me too. If they can’t make a faster shutter, then I wish lower ISO, so I can shoot with large apertures also in bright light. Anything that could help me get rid of the ND filters all the time, would be welcome. 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgh Posted July 20, 2018 Share #13 Posted July 20, 2018 Me too. If they can’t make a faster shutter, then I wish lower ISO, so I can shoot with large apertures also in bright light. Anything that could help me get rid of the ND filters all the time, would be welcome. While an expanded ISO range is great I just don't see how this fits in with the way that Leicas are built for - reportage style work. Meanwhile, a higher ISO ceiling usually means less noise at the medium range ISOs. I don't think anyone really uses 50000, but it means that 6400 is all of a sudden a bit better, which is something practical. ND filters, picture perfect gradients, long exposures etc all are the domain of landscape cameras. Leicas can be used for this but it's not where they excel and it never has been. A Sony or Nikon will make this picture better in every way possible, from the higher resolution and DR to the lower ISO floor, all at much less money. To add to this, because the rangefinder is often a little less precise than todays AF cameras, shooting wide open isn't really the domain of the Leica strong suit. I know Leica makes lots of super fast lenses and people love them, but they're more niche uses - (I usually only see them used to show off the bokeh they're capable of rather than making actual interesting photos - that or they're one trick portrait ponies) - than the actual summicron workhorses. IDK. Super low ISO Leica just seems kinda the same as asking for a good ISO 50,000 on a hasselblad at the expense of the better base ISO. It has it, but it's not really why you'd use that camera. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonoslack Posted July 22, 2018 Author Share #14 Posted July 22, 2018 While an expanded ISO range is great I just don't see how this fits in with the way that Leicas are built for - reportage style work. Meanwhile, a higher ISO ceiling usually means less noise at the medium range ISOs. I don't think anyone really uses 50000, but it means that 6400 is all of a sudden a bit better, which is something practical. ND filters, picture perfect gradients, long exposures etc all are the domain of landscape cameras. Leicas can be used for this but it's not where they excel and it never has been. A Sony or Nikon will make this picture better in every way possible, from the higher resolution and DR to the lower ISO floor, all at much less money. To add to this, because the rangefinder is often a little less precise than todays AF cameras, shooting wide open isn't really the domain of the Leica strong suit. I know Leica makes lots of super fast lenses and people love them, but they're more niche uses - (I usually only see them used to show off the bokeh they're capable of rather than making actual interesting photos - that or they're one trick portrait ponies) - than the actual summicron workhorses. IDK. Super low ISO Leica just seems kinda the same as asking for a good ISO 50,000 on a hasselblad at the expense of the better base ISO. It has it, but it's not really why you'd use that camera. How many things to disagree with! Leica’s aren’t ‘built for reportage style work’ -they’re built to take pictures, whichever you like Nikon and Sony won’t make landscape pictures ‘better in every way possible’, all modern cameras produce excellent image quality, and whilst Nikon cameras are probably more convenient for sport digital M cameras have always been great for landscape, . . .. . . What Nikon and Sony don’t have are the wonderful M lenses. . . . And if you’re going to hike 20 miles to take landscape photos it’s a positive joy to have a small and lightweight kit with wonderful lenses and IQ! You say - ‘Shooting wide open isn’t really the domain of the Leica strong suit’ . . . I’m gobsmacked! My 50 APO is rarely away from f2. The absolute strong suit of the modern M lenses is that they are just as good wide open as they are stopped down . . Certainly not something you can say for the competition . . . 11 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
elmars Posted July 22, 2018 Share #15 Posted July 22, 2018 Well said. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark II Posted July 22, 2018 Share #16 Posted July 22, 2018 (edited) Meanwhile, a higher ISO ceiling usually means less noise at the medium range ISOs. I don't think anyone really uses 50000, but it means that 6400 is all of a sudden a bit better Since when was ISO6400 a "medium range" ISO?! The lack of a genuine ISO100 on the M10, along with corresponding noise and DR gains is for me the biggest disappointments - particularly since Leica has tried to pass off ISO 100 as a "native ISO" rather than a pull value. At least the auto-ISO change addresses the worst consequence of that pretence. Also, the main reason that I shoot Leica digital is the access to small, fast lenses - with the way that they render. If you are looking to shoot run-and-gun digital reportage where there is no time to focus manually there are arguably many many better options than a Leica M10 today... Edited July 22, 2018 by Mark II Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
M11 for me Posted July 23, 2018 Share #17 Posted July 23, 2018 . . . If you are looking to shoot run-and-gun digital reportage where there is no time to focus manually there are arguably many many better options than a Leica M10 today... Do you mean options with auto focus? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgh Posted July 23, 2018 Share #18 Posted July 23, 2018 Since when was ISO6400 a "medium range" ISO?! The lack of a genuine ISO100 on the M10, along with corresponding noise and DR gains is for me the biggest disappointments - particularly since Leica has tried to pass off ISO 100 as a "native ISO" rather than a pull value. At least the auto-ISO change addresses the worst consequence of that pretence. Also, the main reason that I shoot Leica digital is the access to small, fast lenses - with the way that they render. If you are looking to shoot run-and-gun digital reportage where there is no time to focus manually there are arguably many many better options than a Leica M10 today... 1) Since probably 2012 or so when sensors began excelling at these ranges. It's a subjective term, but my point is that the higher ceilings mean better images in the settings below that. 2)Yes, I agree with you about the 100 as a pull value. Personally, I don't need much a real 100 ISO as I do a better exposure range at whatever the native ISO actually is. 200 is generally more versatile but if 100 would give us better range instead of the weird pull I would take it. The ISO change still does not let us access the actual native value of the sensor though. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgh Posted July 23, 2018 Share #19 Posted July 23, 2018 (edited) How many things to disagree with! Leica’s aren’t ‘built for reportage style work’ -they’re built to take pictures, whichever you like Nikon and Sony won’t make landscape pictures ‘better in every way possible’, all modern cameras produce excellent image quality, and whilst Nikon cameras are probably more convenient for sport digital M cameras have always been great for landscape, . . .. . . What Nikon and Sony don’t have are the wonderful M lenses. . . . And if you’re going to hike 20 miles to take landscape photos it’s a positive joy to have a small and lightweight kit with wonderful lenses and IQ! You say - ‘Shooting wide open isn’t really the domain of the Leica strong suit’ . . . I’m gobsmacked! My 50 APO is rarely away from f2. The absolute strong suit of the modern M lenses is that they are just as good wide open as they are stopped down . . Certainly not something you can say for the competition . . . Leicas can be used however, yes, but when considering the use of a tool for where it excels the M still generally is better in reportage. Landscape photographs tend to ask for more precision in composition (rangefinder is not the most accurate way to frame), and rely on high levels of detail (the M sensor is just in the middle of the pack with resolution and with dynamic range, the point of this thread). Hiking 20 miles with a Sony and 2 lenses is really no weight difference and a better sensor. I do this a good bit. Fast Leica lenses of course do well on the M, but given the fact that focus shift becomes an issue and that you're limited to focusing in the center and then reframing (or using the EVF), I find it much more practical to shoot fast lenses on other technology. My Nikon or Sony lenses at 1.4/1.8 have been quite good, and easier to nail focus with, especially when trying to avoid centered composition. I'm not saying the M can't be used these ways, it certainly can, but other tools arrive at these solutions more fluidly and easily, to me. All of that said, my one question - why we can't access the actual base ISO of 160/167 (whatever it is) - persists. Is this impossible with firmware? Edited July 23, 2018 by pgh Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
M11 for me Posted July 23, 2018 Share #20 Posted July 23, 2018 Since I am with my M10 I got used to care a lot about exposure: Try not to have blown parts in the sceene. Then I feel that it is quite easy and very well possible to pull up the deeper parts in LR. I am actually very pleased how that works. Somehow I could say that I try to do ETTR in order to have the least black areas. 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.