Guest tofu_man Posted September 5, 2018 Share #1 Posted September 5, 2018 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) When playing with my new M10 last night after installing firmware 2.4.5.0, I decided that I would compare the M10 with my Q in low light. I was stunned at the difference (and needed a whisky afterwards!). With a 28mm Summicron V2 on my M10, and both cameras set at F/2 and ISO 1600, there was a very marked difference in shutter speeds when taking photos of the same subject (plain carpet & backlit curtains) in low light. As one example with auto shutter speeds, the Q was 1/60 and the M10 was 1/5. The other 'test' shots produced the same magnitude of difference. I know ISO is a standard open to varying interpretations, and f/2 on one camera might be marginally different to f/2 on another camera, but I expected the shutter speeds to be broadly similar. Do I have a camera or photographer issue or have others experienced the same when comparing the M10 with other cameras? Edited September 5, 2018 by tofu_man Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 5, 2018 Posted September 5, 2018 Hi Guest tofu_man, Take a look here High ISO - M10 vs Q. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
david strachan Posted September 5, 2018 Share #2 Posted September 5, 2018 (edited) Did they open with the same exposure? That's quite a few f-stops difference. Are u using LR? There have been quite a few ISO discussions, between camera brands. It seems it's a concept open to whatever the manufacturers want to claim. ... Edited September 5, 2018 by david strachan Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hteasley Posted September 5, 2018 Share #3 Posted September 5, 2018 Are you sure you didn't have an Exposure Comp setting on one of the cameras? That's often easy to do by accident. If not, then it's just weird. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tofu_man Posted September 5, 2018 Share #4 Posted September 5, 2018 Are you sure you didn't have an Exposure Comp setting on one of the cameras? That's often easy to do by accident. If not, then it's just weird. thanks but both were set at -1/3 which is my default Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tofu_man Posted September 5, 2018 Share #5 Posted September 5, 2018 Did they open with the same exposure? That's quite a few f-stops difference. Are u using LR? There have been quite a few ISO discussions, between camera brands. It seems it's a concept open to whatever the manufacturers want to claim. … yes, both exposures looked the same without any adjustments, and I use LR. My only experience with 'optimistic' ISO has been with Fuji which was around one stop difference compared to my previous M240. I would have expected Leica to be consistent between cameras. I'd be interested if anyone has done a similar test? 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
david strachan Posted September 5, 2018 Share #6 Posted September 5, 2018 Hi Mr Tofu It does seem unusual there would be such a difference between Leica models...is the Q a Japanese camera...like the Panaleicas? I have Fuji too, and find a difference in ISO. Once was film and light meters, and trustworthy...now anything manufacturers want to put on their specifications. ... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tofu_man Posted September 5, 2018 Share #7 Posted September 5, 2018 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) Hi Mr Tofu It does seem unusual there would be such a difference between Leica models...is the Q a Japanese camera...like the Panaleicas? I have Fuji too, and find a difference in ISO. Once was film and light meters, and trustworthy...now anything manufacturers want to put on their specifications. … that's why I needed a whisky last night: the realisation that I might have to change my default nighttime ISO from 1600 to 12500. Or replace the M10. Anyway, I'll need to do some more tests but I'm worried that Leica might have gamed the M10's iso Edited September 5, 2018 by tofu_man Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted September 5, 2018 Share #8 Posted September 5, 2018 Are you sure the Q wasn't doing some post exposure processing to account for the suspiciously 'safe' 1/60th second hand holdable speed? Post some examples. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
evikne Posted September 5, 2018 Share #9 Posted September 5, 2018 If you don’t use manual shutter speed, this test will not tell you much, except that the cameras light metering may be different. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tofu_man Posted September 5, 2018 Share #10 Posted September 5, 2018 Leica Q ISO1600 f/2.8 1/25 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! 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/288283-high-iso-m10-vs-q/?do=findComment&comment=3586606'>More sharing options...
Guest tofu_man Posted September 5, 2018 Share #11 Posted September 5, 2018 Ricoh GR2 ISO 1600 f/2.8 1/25 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! 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/288283-high-iso-m10-vs-q/?do=findComment&comment=3586607'>More sharing options...
Guest tofu_man Posted September 5, 2018 Share #12 Posted September 5, 2018 (edited) Leica M10 ISO1600 f/2.8 (exif shows f4.0) 1/6 sec all test shots handheld, auto shutter, imported to LR as DNG and exported as JPG with nil adjustments 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 September 5, 2018 by tofu_man 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/288283-high-iso-m10-vs-q/?do=findComment&comment=3586608'>More sharing options...
Guest tofu_man Posted September 5, 2018 Share #13 Posted September 5, 2018 (edited) Hypothesis 1: The M10 needs ISO 6400 to produce a similar exposure to the Leica Q at ISO 1600 , i.e. my M10 under-performs the Q (and the Ricoh) by approx 2 stops Hypothesis 2: My M10 is faulty Edited September 5, 2018 by tofu_man Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fatihayoglu Posted September 5, 2018 Share #14 Posted September 5, 2018 (edited) Have you tested M10 with EVF or LV, because M10 image looks brighter than the others. As far as I know Q and GR use matrix metering and M10 uses Centre weighted, which that white envelope can confuse the system, Edited September 5, 2018 by fatihayoglu Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
erl Posted September 5, 2018 Share #15 Posted September 5, 2018 Over more years than I care to declare, I have never found any two in camera meters, hand held meters, spotmeters, et al, that agree. Their main MO is to confuse you in the presence of any competition. Use any one, and learn to trust it, if it gives the result you desire . Ignore all other external 'opinions'. if you get your picture, walk away smiling. P.S. I have the M10 and think it is a fantastic improvement on the M9. I have no experience with the Q, so no comment. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tofu_man Posted September 5, 2018 Share #16 Posted September 5, 2018 (edited) Over more years than I care to declare, I have never found any two in camera meters, hand held meters, spotmeters, et al, that agree. Their main MO is to confuse you in the presence of any competition. Use any one, and learn to trust it, if it gives the result you desire . Ignore all other external 'opinions'. if you get your picture, walk away smiling. P.S. I have the M10 and think it is a fantastic improvement on the M9. I have no experience with the Q, so no comment. Well my Q and Ricoh and Sony are all showing the same exposure at a given ISO so my M10 is two stops out which I don't think is trivial as I shoot a lot at night. It makes the camera not fit for purpose, in my view. I'm not prepared to shoot the M10 at 12,500 ISO at night when I can use 1600 on my Q. I'm inclined to think that Leica has made blatantly false claims. I'll contact them to see what they have to say but as much as I like the M10, I can't work with with a camera that has its ISO misrepresented by two stops....that's a huge margin. Edited September 5, 2018 by tofu_man Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
duoenboge Posted September 5, 2018 Share #17 Posted September 5, 2018 did you take the whisky before you took the photos? If not I would send the camera to Leica. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTLeica Posted September 5, 2018 Share #18 Posted September 5, 2018 Hmm something isnt right. I owned a Q and still have my M10... Only at 25000 ISO and above was bothered by the noise performance of the M10, which I rarely ever hit. But the Q on the other had i was not overly impressed with by comparison. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mute-on Posted September 5, 2018 Share #19 Posted September 5, 2018 (edited) I see three different exposures in the samples you posted. In order of decreasing exposure M10, Q, GRII. The M10 is a stop différent at the same nominal exposure at the very most. Interestingly the M10 identified the lens a stop down on the set aperture, which actually accounts for the one stop, so the difference is nullified. Edited September 5, 2018 by Mute-on Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark II Posted September 5, 2018 Share #20 Posted September 5, 2018 That is about right, and also what I see in a quick comparison between my M10 and GRII. It also roughly agrees with the DXO data, which suggests that at the same ISO the M10 under-exposes by almost a full stop compared to the GR. It is difficult to make a precise evaluation without using something like Raw Digger to analyse the files. But in CO11 the default processing tends to exaggerate the difference, and CO11's exposure evaluation puts the difference in exposure for two shots with the same ISO, shutter speed and f-stop at about 2/3 a stop - again broadly in agreement with the DXO data. Essentially much of the perception of the M10's "improved" higher ISO performance relative to the M240 comes from this recalibration of the ISO settings. I think that the only meaningful "real" improvement is in reduced pattern noise, which tends not to be caught in the DXO measurements. 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.