Chaemono Posted September 25, 2018 Share #141 Posted September 25, 2018 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) See here:https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3794936and I concur with the third reply by Mitrajoon. The way the M10 sensor works, and that’s what’s so great about it, is expose to protect the highlights and lift exposure in post. The comparisons are perfect because the α7R III serves as the control camera in these tests (definition of control group: the standard to which comparisons are made in an experiment.). Great job by Leica to choose a sensor that behaves like this for the M10.And besides ergonomics, rangefinder experience (whatever that is, for me it’s just a compact FF camera with excellent compact lenses), that’s what’s so addictive about the M10, it’s the FILES!!!! Edited September 25, 2018 by Chaemono 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 25, 2018 Posted September 25, 2018 Hi Chaemono, Take a look here High ISO - M10 vs Q. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
pico Posted September 25, 2018 Share #142 Posted September 25, 2018 (edited) indergaard, I wonder if that photo is of your living room. Edited September 25, 2018 by pico Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaemono Posted September 29, 2018 Share #143 Posted September 29, 2018 Okay, weekend Raw lovers, I'm not the only one whom this DxOMark score ticks off a bit. So, let's post a few more. Play around with them, lift the shadows all the way, pull back the highlights, and pay attention to the right side of the histogram, as they say. α7R III + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/4.0 @1/2000 sec. ARW file: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g761517904-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=l3rEuOAvvRqh-F6oMO3hWGwYqf1pvpBE1wbakLiON5Y= M10 + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/4.0 @1/2000 sec. DNG file: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g935169348-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=DU9n7eVRVMNoy_L_7vpJCnZ_XUZxCIsm3ydH9DttY4k= α7R III + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/2.0 @1/1000 sec. ARW file: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g580879451-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=yMa-aWESsLaT-Vb1qVBooCUpZ62PAHqEmngYtscf2E8= M10 + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/2.0 @1/1000 sec. DNG file: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g840427587-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=Ijh3wB0D3w5iThkSjdsRAMVFPmM6YxwR9O2YURhy-Ec= α7R III + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/2.0 @1/2000 sec. ARW file: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g1048748666-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=DJ5R3BIZukTPzyNrOJ8KyZNEAMbweN47VeOTZW79bcM= M10 + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/2.0 @1/2000 sec. DNG file: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g901524489-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=QZWGBbgMeyNKBEmThnt5HMbz6spKyrH_JZQP8e4ylC0= α7R III + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/5.6 @1/1000 sec. ARW file: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g690067982-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=XDzIEJ4KP3cRuKp3pRqElXaXRAcpYlRHHQ3KBLIpfjI= M10 + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/5.6 @1/1000 sec. DNG file: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g934105064-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=uvCuFWGj4rPUhG8dY1jE2qwlZVp3zfXoZohILY5BKvY= α7R III + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/2.8 @1/2000 sec. ARW file: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g990824460-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=frciETeTDCTe3qQNfVxYXrASEKulix6_vdmVRc4n7lo= M10 + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/2.8 @1/2000 sec. DNG file: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g728140710-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=rLlHuSEDVS3YzQZOdzB-Z_JOjT885uR4Xv0BRRivZTk= α7R III + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/4.0 @1/2000 sec. ARW file: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g1060848840-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=Ej6QJ501uPkLK3hPAu4azsbzCDMkDOUUYWhQlfkd6Jc= M10 + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/4.0 @1/2000 sec. DNG file: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g599199700-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=biNozLcEyHbdyshU-hig_S2M5z_1PUdwqlc2XhGsiMw= α7R III + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/2.0 @1/2000 sec. ARW file: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g989789811-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=-PfLgBTx040CF9JE60tgSZ5PFO_kpQ3I7yqIlU-yLl8= M10 + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/2.0 @1/2000 sec. DNG file: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g749850744-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=fD0jJQxfNCKRjNee35N3NSlhx7L1RWZPlkVxfGirIWw= α7R III + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/5.6 @1/1000 sec. ARW file: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g1064966523-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=ZGyYreDLSNfcvxoeexuBakPhwzJIiPKcAv8I-UUXRgE= M10 + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/5.6 @1/1000 sec. DNG file: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g777620113-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=U8zTwnVC-kkoI6stGVKWHyuDhrzMXsE81WG1Zab27NE= α7R III + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/2.8 @1/2000 sec. ARW file: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g978766628-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=JAscEJDXEIVKLCgJ8h7o5s9Kfk8fI30oz7OIGjgE4zM= M10 + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/2.8 @1/2000 sec. DNG file: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g625040672-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=hxuMLojxJHB-1Ce77xYepmIMgKjKVUenxnZTGcCPkH0= α7R III + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/2.0 @1/4000 sec. ARW file: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g715020238-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=PpFuI-S2lZLElE3LRj9g9WhFAHflKwuKOea2zyW2Ja0= M10 + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/2.0 @1/4000 sec. DNG file: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g981294212-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=Zm3jPnzFvae_vXkmL7JluIGoei2ocDUkSR9UD5tWXF4= α7R III + 35 Summicron-M ISO 200 f/4.0 @1/4000 sec. ARW file: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g1009369503-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=fGYR6ELgNO-YpUKAd25llPFdlYqf5Y2jCKoyrLF7ZxE= M10 + 35 Summicron-M ISO 200 f/4.0 @1/4000 sec. DNG file: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g876419153-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=A8pvoony-jszgD7NntxisXH7yX551YMwjWdlyXDtsoQ= α7R III + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/2.0 @1/4000 sec. ARW file: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g689693020-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=pz478RFV32yI8klK9_hSt8p2vS599EZ_f0t4LJ9EL6Q= M10 + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/2.0 @1/4000 sec. DNG file: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g930501677-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=h2EnzOxji9q7CuqqXrBzv-FXNQ6s50tbZd68Uv-5IO8= α7R III + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/2.8 @1/2000 sec. ARW file: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g708464335-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=VaZ3KysGDeys2UbRTuWt8M6RQoF5MRtaC4RQeKDOp3E= M10 + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/2.8 @1/2000 sec. DNG file: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g996103045-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=K_v_jBFwIS3WJj_G6pfgzSdsHnriskxVhbj5zrG7SB8= 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 30, 2018 Share #144 Posted September 30, 2018 I'm missing something here. DxO shows a plot of camera ISO vs. sensor ISO, and the latter is based on the amount of light it takes to saturate the sensor. Camera ISO is a subjective evaluation by a camera manufacture of what looks best at a given luminance, and is very different from sensor ISO. Assuming you know this, what are you trying to show with your M10 vs. α7R III test shots? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaemono Posted September 30, 2018 Share #145 Posted September 30, 2018 (edited) If you had read the OP’s question before posting in this thread you would know the answer to your question. But I’m going to summarize it for you, again. We are trying to prevent tofu_man from becoming an alcoholic. The poor chap resorted to drinking when he compared the M10 and the Q at the same settings, including same F-Stop values, and concluded that there must be something wrong with the M10’s ISO. What he didn’t understand was that F-Stop is a mathematical equation. It’s based on the focal length of the lens relative to the size of the opening through which light is allowed. The actual measurement of light transmitted through the lens is expressed in T-Stops, and T-Stop values vary from lens to lens. So, what better way to show this to tofu_man before he needs to start going to A.A. meetings than to use the same lens on the M10 and that state-of-the-art-late-2014-designed-sensor-sporting α7R III. I suspect the α7R IV will be out by year end, though. It’ll probably still be the same α7R II sensor, but Sony will now call it G-Master. You sound like you’re curious to see more, Jono. Stay tuned I’ll post more just for you but I need to do 50-Summilux-SL vs Sigma Art 50/1.4 for some other guys, first. Edited September 30, 2018 by Chaemono Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 30, 2018 Share #146 Posted September 30, 2018 I thought a Leica prime lens with its excellent coatings will give a T-stop very close to its actual f-stop? Anyway, when you’ve finished your M10 vs Sony project, I’d be interested to see your results with M10 vs M240 (or another M) with the same lens. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaemono Posted September 30, 2018 Share #147 Posted September 30, 2018 Advertisement (gone after registration) First, it's extremely challenging to make small egg sized lenses like the 35 Summicron-M or the Apo 50 Summicron-M of such high quality. The amount of 'good' light a lens lets through is affected by coatings, of course, but, also, the fewer elements a lens has the more absolute amount of light it lets through. The latter does not necessarily correspond to better performance. Let's compare the Sony Sonnar T* FE 35mm f/2.8 with the 35 Summicron-M, for example. Both have seven elements if I'm not mistaken, but the Sony lens has that Zeiss T* coating, a multi-coat anti-reflective technology which greatly reduces the amount of inter element reflection. Comparing it on the α7R III to the M10 with the 35 Summicron-M will lead to a difference of about -0.6 EV less on the M10, so this needs to be adjusted in post. I also upsize the M10 pictures to 42 MPx when comparing. You will see in the three example below that despite all the coatings in the world for the Sony lens, it's no match for the Summicron in terms of detail resolution and depth rendering. Of course, the Leica lens is a bit more stopped down. α7R III + Sonnar FE 35/2.8 ISO 1000 f/4.0 @1/60 sec. ARW file: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g44783098-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=KfBn3oBg1WyApTJiQyK26EUjM4ANkIfL71ER1w1z92I= M10 + 35 Summicron-M ISO 1000 f/4.0 @1/60 sec. DNG file: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g333939987-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=NowTIJovlrtf5F3nIJEOapTmVHNkZcFv0GodeS5J06c= α7R III + Sonnar FE 35/2.8 ISO 400 f/4.0 @1/60 sec. ARW file: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g312468659-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=bJbohfMFTH5lHE57czQIsALswrdcbjmp8RasWXRwR-g= M10 + 35 Summicron-M ISO 400 f/4.0 @1/60 sec. DNG file: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g354906906-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=9NpAtpL227t2UOT_KWXLrrjG0OoLIShggLf7s3hagKI= α7R III + Sonnar FE 35/2.8 ISO 640 f/4.0 @1/60 sec. ARW file: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g134996006-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=CVA4PSeQaCsyRiVpEWm8yOQueCIZYNZ2NqYADKXDK7k= M10 + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/4.0 @1/60 sec. DNG file: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g14018288-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=sUMAv2KiFyiLzAJUwh0AcAg7ub3WftfMsSTzPjkdq5E= On the M240, once I had bought the M10, I didn't dare to compare. I much preferred the way the M10 sensor worked. I sold my M-P (Typ 240) to a young chap for €2,400 and gave him all the accessories I had for it (value of about another €800) for free. That was about €1,800 less than what I could have gotten on eBay, but it just felt dishonest to ask for more given the performance limitations, especially in low light, of the M240 sensor. The M10 is a different matter. Lucky those who will pick up a used one once the M11 is announced. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoffrey James Posted October 3, 2018 Share #148 Posted October 3, 2018 (edited) I am very late to this thread, but would chime in with what seems to me an obvious and perhaps simplistic observation. I don't test cameras, I go out an take pictures. On a lightly overcast day with good shadowless even light, I set my ISO to 400 and aperture to 5.6, assuming that the shutter speed would be sufficient for fairly swift picture-taking. I was surprised to see that I was working mostly with 1/30th of a second, which would never have happened with my Q. I bought the M10 in part because I am working on a series of pictures made from a train travelling around 140 kph. The Q is good for this, except for the weird tilting of verticals that happen when something is close to the train window. I wanted a real shutter, and the chance to use different lenses with the high ISO capability of the M10. We will see what happens when I work from the train. With the Q, I mostly use ISO 800, with the 1`.7 used open if necessary. I suspect I am going to have to really boost the ISO to get exposures at 1000th of a second and up. I would also note the Q shutter release has a fast feather-light action. The M10 doesn't activate until depressed further, which makes a difference when split second timing is critical. Some examples can be found on Instagram under the handle Photolaureate. This is not a criticism, but the M10 is not quite what I imagined it to be. Nice camera, though Edited October 3, 2018 by Geoffrey James Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Q Posted October 3, 2018 Share #149 Posted October 3, 2018 You mean like rolling shutter? You may be better off with a smaller sensor'd camera for that usage. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoffrey James Posted October 3, 2018 Share #150 Posted October 3, 2018 You mean like rolling shutter? You may be better off with a smaller sensor'd camera for that usage. I am hooked on Leica, and a good larger print is the final objective. I'll see what the M10 does. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 4, 2018 Share #151 Posted October 4, 2018 I was surprised to see that I was working mostly with 1/30th of a second, which would never have happened with my Q. My experience is similar, and I'm having to use significantly higher indicated ISO settings on my M10 (vs my other cameras) to maintain useable shutter speeds in low light or when I want good depth of field. For example, I rarely go above 2500 on my M246 or 1600 on my Q, and find it easy to estimate exposure at those ISOs in low light, but now I'm often using 3200 or 5000 on my M10. I'm also still finding it difficult to get a consistent 'look' from M10 files vs. exhibition prints from my other Leica's at higher ISOs. The M10 files are so very clean and malleable. Quite an interesting learning curve for me. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaemono Posted October 4, 2018 Share #152 Posted October 4, 2018 I used to use Sony until Jono reviewed the M10 and showed how good it was. So, I switched. I realize now how outdated the Sony sensor is. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
indergaard Posted October 4, 2018 Share #153 Posted October 4, 2018 I used to use Sony until Jono reviewed the M10 and showed how good it was. So, I switched. I realize now how outdated the Sony sensor is. I guess that's why the M10 sensor starts showing minor striping and banding in dark areas at ISO 6400, while the Sony sensor doesn't (and I have not factored in the fact that ISO 6400 on the Sony sensor creates an exposure that is comparable to an ISO 8000 exposure on the M10 with the same lens, shutter speed and aperture). Amongst other things. Yup. You are so right. The M10 sensor is pure magic (compared to the M240). Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted October 4, 2018 Share #154 Posted October 4, 2018 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? The light metering in the M10 is some kind of center weighted type, and the Q has different possibilities. That is the most probable reason of the difference. The resulting picture from the M10 should have a different exposition than the picture coming from the Q. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaemono Posted October 4, 2018 Share #155 Posted October 4, 2018 I guess that's why the M10 sensor starts showing minor striping and banding in dark areas at ISO 6400, while the Sony sensor doesn't (and I have not factored in the fact that ISO 6400 on the Sony sensor creates an exposure that is comparable to an ISO 8000 exposure on the M10 with the same lens, shutter speed and aperture). Amongst other things. Yup. You are so right. The M10 sensor is pure magic (compared to the M240).In the post-factual age, I don’t look at charts, I look at Raw files. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
roelv1 Posted October 4, 2018 Share #156 Posted October 4, 2018 (edited) The light metering in the M10 is some kind of center weighted type, and the Q has different possibilities. That is the most probable reason of the difference. The resulting picture from the M10 should have a different exposition than the picture coming from the Q. That must be the reason, or they don't know how to measure anyway. I compared the metering of the M10 once again with my hand held meter. In daylight at 200 ISO and in artificial light at 1600 and 6400 ISO.The difference was never more than half a stop. Normal difference because light meters differ always a bit. So there is nothing wrong with the M 10, at least not with mine. http://www.roelvisser.nl Edited October 4, 2018 by roelv1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
indergaard Posted October 4, 2018 Share #157 Posted October 4, 2018 (edited) In the post-factual age, I don’t look at charts, I look at Raw files. So do I. In every aspect, the A7rIII sensor outperforms the M10 sensor. Wether it be upscaling, downscaling, color depth, sensor noise (vs ISO setting), or anything else. Both compared in the latest Lightroom Classic CC with the latest Huelight color profiles, with the Adobe profile, with tweaked profiles, and in the latest Capture One Pro 11.3, the Sony sensor has a noticeable lead in all aspects - not just resolution. One particular thing you should notice is that the M10's files usually has a far more magenta tint than the what the Sony sensor outputs. Even my wife can easily see this when images are compared side by side. And that is regardless of which raw converter is used, or what color profile (LUT) is applied. The Sony sensor is far more faithful to how the actual scene looked. Equipment that I have used for my own comparisons are: M10 - Summilux 50 ASPH, Summilux 35 ASPH FLE, Summicron 35 ASPH, Elmar-M 24mm, Macro-Elmar-M 90mm, Zeiss Biogon 35mm. A7rIII - Sony FE 28/2, Sony FE 35/2.8, Sony FE 55/1.8, Voigtlander Nokton 40/1.2 Aspherical, Zeiss Loxia Biogon 35/2, Zeiss Loxia Planar 50/2, Sony FE 24-105/4 G, Sony FE 24-70/2.8 GM, Sony FE 100-400/4.5-5.6 GM + a color calibrated DCI-P3 monitor, calibrated with the latest DisplayCAL and Spyder5 Pro, and I have also used a Spyder Checkr color calibration tool. You might prefer the output of the M10 sensor based on the baked-in "M10" LUT, but that doesn't make the M10's raw files better and the Sony sensor "outdated", even when to this date, no other camera except the Nikon D850 has been able to even match the a7rIII sensor in the 35mm world. The "M10" setting in LR is a LUT that is custom for the M10, and which is impossible to use for comparisons sake between other cameras, even other cameras from Leica. Also note that the M10 uses a warmer default for it's target white-balance than most other cameras, simply because it is manufactured to produce pleasing images out of the box, not accurate images. To compare the M10 and a7rIII images you need to on average raise the color temperature on the a7rIII raws between 300-500 kelvin. Also, the "Daylight", "Cloudy" and "Shade" white-balance profiles in Lightroom is definitely not comparable between the cameras. Use Capture One Pro to get an actual accurate white-balance between both cameras based on these settings. Even still, the Capture One results from the M10 will still have a noticeably warmer tint than the a7rIII files. But with some minor work and understanding of how color matching works, it is rather easy to get matching files from both cameras - at least in regards to perceptual color. Resolution, read noise, malleability, highlight retention, striping and banding is of course a totally different matter (where the M10 is behind the a7rIII). To put it another way, just because I prefer the look of images made with Kodak Tri-X 400 pushed to 1600, doesn't make them technically better than images I've made with Fujifilm Acros 100. Edited October 4, 2018 by indergaard Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaemono Posted October 4, 2018 Share #158 Posted October 4, 2018 I don’t post 100,000 words. I’ll just post links to Raw files. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMAL Posted October 4, 2018 Share #159 Posted October 4, 2018 @indeegaard while I agree that the Sony sensor is definitely superior to the M10 ones, I disagree with your magenta statement. While the white balance on the M10 Is mostly on point and I get pretty easy final results, the Sonys (A7III and A7rIII) mostly need to get the tint corrected cause they always add too much magenta. I also think the overall color rendition of the M10 is more appealing than the Sony ones. I still love all of them though. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaemono Posted October 5, 2018 Share #160 Posted October 5, 2018 Shooting Raw. Color is what one makes it. Nice try to change the subject. Still, just for the heck of it, there is no magenta in the M10 files. See LR Camera Calibration Panel to tune Camera Raw's color interpretation for the M10 here: 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! Let me be explicit. In the Raws above Sony clips Highlights. Sony Sensor's DR at ISO 640 is clearly inferior to the M10's. Below the same Raw files as posted above and more to come. Some people are begging for it. Sony clips Highlights. Sony sensor looks outdated. α7R III + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/4.0 @1/2000 sec. ARW file: https://cc2032.zenfo...pBE1wbakLiON5Y= M10 + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/4.0 @1/2000 sec. DNG file: https://cc2032.zenfo...Ism3ydH9DttY4k= α7R III + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/2.0 @1/1000 sec. ARW file: https://cc2032.zenfo...HqEmngYtscf2E8= M10 + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/2.0 @1/1000 sec. DNG file: https://cc2032.zenfo...xwR9O2YURhy-Ec= α7R III + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/2.0 @1/2000 sec. ARW file: https://cc2032.zenfo...N47VeOTZW79bcM= M10 + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/2.0 @1/2000 sec. DNG file: https://cc2032.zenfo...rH_JZQP8e4ylC0= α7R III + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/5.6 @1/1000 sec. ARW file: https://cc2032.zenfo...lRHHQ3KBLIpfjI= M10 + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/5.6 @1/1000 sec. DNG file: https://cc2032.zenfo...fXoZohILY5BKvY= α7R III + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/2.8 @1/2000 sec. ARW file: https://cc2032.zenfo...x6_vdmVRc4n7lo= M10 + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/2.8 @1/2000 sec. DNG file: https://cc2032.zenfo...uR4Xv0BRRivZTk= α7R III + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/4.0 @1/2000 sec. ARW file: https://cc2032.zenfo...OUUYWhQlfkd6Jc= M10 + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/4.0 @1/2000 sec. DNG file: https://cc2032.zenfo...Udwqlc2XhGsiMw= α7R III + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/2.0 @1/2000 sec. ARW file: https://cc2032.zenfo...Q3I7yqIlU-yLl8= M10 + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/2.0 @1/2000 sec. DNG file: https://cc2032.zenfo...WZPlkVxfGirIWw= α7R III + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/5.6 @1/1000 sec. ARW file: https://cc2032.zenfo...PKcAv8I-UUXRgE= M10 + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/5.6 @1/1000 sec. DNG file: https://cc2032.zenfo...sE81WG1Zab27NE= α7R III + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/2.8 @1/2000 sec. ARW file: https://cc2032.zenfo...30oz7OIGjgE4zM= M10 + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/2.8 @1/2000 sec. DNG file: https://cc2032.zenfo...UenxnZTGcCPkH0= α7R III + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/2.0 @1/4000 sec. ARW file: https://cc2032.zenfo...wuKOea2zyW2Ja0= M10 + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/2.0 @1/4000 sec. DNG file: https://cc2032.zenfo...DUkSR9UD5tWXF4= α7R III + 35 Summicron-M ISO 200 f/4.0 @1/4000 sec. ARW file: https://cc2032.zenfo...Y2jCKoyrLF7ZxE= M10 + 35 Summicron-M ISO 200 f/4.0 @1/4000 sec. DNG file: https://cc2032.zenfo...YMwjWdlyXDtsoQ= α7R III + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/2.0 @1/4000 sec. ARW file: https://cc2032.zenfo...EZ_f0t4LJ9EL6Q= M10 + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/2.0 @1/4000 sec. DNG file: https://cc2032.zenfo...0tbZd68Uv-5IO8= α7R III + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/2.8 @1/2000 sec. ARW file: https://cc2032.zenfo...RtaC4RQeKDOp3E= M10 + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/2.8 @1/2000 sec. DNG file: https://cc2032.zenfo...kxVhbj5zrG7SB8= Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Let me be explicit. In the Raws above Sony clips Highlights. Sony Sensor's DR at ISO 640 is clearly inferior to the M10's. Below the same Raw files as posted above and more to come. Some people are begging for it. Sony clips Highlights. Sony sensor looks outdated. α7R III + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/4.0 @1/2000 sec. ARW file: https://cc2032.zenfo...pBE1wbakLiON5Y= M10 + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/4.0 @1/2000 sec. DNG file: https://cc2032.zenfo...Ism3ydH9DttY4k= α7R III + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/2.0 @1/1000 sec. ARW file: https://cc2032.zenfo...HqEmngYtscf2E8= M10 + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/2.0 @1/1000 sec. DNG file: https://cc2032.zenfo...xwR9O2YURhy-Ec= α7R III + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/2.0 @1/2000 sec. ARW file: https://cc2032.zenfo...N47VeOTZW79bcM= M10 + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/2.0 @1/2000 sec. DNG file: https://cc2032.zenfo...rH_JZQP8e4ylC0= α7R III + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/5.6 @1/1000 sec. ARW file: https://cc2032.zenfo...lRHHQ3KBLIpfjI= M10 + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/5.6 @1/1000 sec. DNG file: https://cc2032.zenfo...fXoZohILY5BKvY= α7R III + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/2.8 @1/2000 sec. ARW file: https://cc2032.zenfo...x6_vdmVRc4n7lo= M10 + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/2.8 @1/2000 sec. DNG file: https://cc2032.zenfo...uR4Xv0BRRivZTk= α7R III + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/4.0 @1/2000 sec. ARW file: https://cc2032.zenfo...OUUYWhQlfkd6Jc= M10 + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/4.0 @1/2000 sec. DNG file: https://cc2032.zenfo...Udwqlc2XhGsiMw= α7R III + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/2.0 @1/2000 sec. ARW file: https://cc2032.zenfo...Q3I7yqIlU-yLl8= M10 + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/2.0 @1/2000 sec. DNG file: https://cc2032.zenfo...WZPlkVxfGirIWw= α7R III + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/5.6 @1/1000 sec. ARW file: https://cc2032.zenfo...PKcAv8I-UUXRgE= M10 + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/5.6 @1/1000 sec. DNG file: https://cc2032.zenfo...sE81WG1Zab27NE= α7R III + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/2.8 @1/2000 sec. ARW file: https://cc2032.zenfo...30oz7OIGjgE4zM= M10 + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/2.8 @1/2000 sec. DNG file: https://cc2032.zenfo...UenxnZTGcCPkH0= α7R III + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/2.0 @1/4000 sec. ARW file: https://cc2032.zenfo...wuKOea2zyW2Ja0= M10 + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/2.0 @1/4000 sec. DNG file: https://cc2032.zenfo...DUkSR9UD5tWXF4= α7R III + 35 Summicron-M ISO 200 f/4.0 @1/4000 sec. ARW file: https://cc2032.zenfo...Y2jCKoyrLF7ZxE= M10 + 35 Summicron-M ISO 200 f/4.0 @1/4000 sec. DNG file: https://cc2032.zenfo...YMwjWdlyXDtsoQ= α7R III + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/2.0 @1/4000 sec. ARW file: https://cc2032.zenfo...EZ_f0t4LJ9EL6Q= M10 + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/2.0 @1/4000 sec. DNG file: https://cc2032.zenfo...0tbZd68Uv-5IO8= α7R III + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/2.8 @1/2000 sec. ARW file: https://cc2032.zenfo...RtaC4RQeKDOp3E= M10 + 35 Summicron-M ISO 640 f/2.8 @1/2000 sec. DNG file: https://cc2032.zenfo...kxVhbj5zrG7SB8= ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/288283-high-iso-m10-vs-q/?do=findComment&comment=3606546'>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.