CL ISO at 800

[yst]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Anyone compared the Leica CL set at iso 800, vs at 400,  400 vs at 200, would the image quality difference be obvious?  Or not too big?

The reason is when using the 55-135, due to it's slow speed, might like to set at 400, or 800 for hand held, but not sure if the image quality is acceptable at that? 

[gotium]

oh yea, it's fine at 800. I think it's fine at 6400. More noise, sure, but fine. 

Edited December 6, 2019 by gotium

[Advertisement]

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

[geoffreyg]

I did some testing at 400/800/1600 and then 3200/6400. Found that difference between 400 and 800 weren't so much at all, some minor losses  up to 1600, but still nice. However, at 3200/6400, there is a noticeable change. 

In general, feel comfortable anywhere up to 1600, and then the higher is reserved for "really want the shot, regardless". Others may feel differently, and say the higher up is OK - but it will show in DR and large prints. 

[yst]

How is the differences between  200 vs 400,   as well 200 vs 800?   

[wda]

4 hours ago, yst said:

How is the differences between  200 vs 400,   as well 200 vs 800?   

Barely noticeable and easily corrected in Lightroom or other noise reduction software. I agree with geoffreyg.

[M11 for me]

You will loose some Dynamic Range but as the colleagues write this is barely noticeable.

But measurable: Camera T instead of CL as CL is not in Database. But its the same picture for any sensor.

https://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Leica-T-versus-Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-IV___954_1106

[bags27]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

When using a tele, I will always sacrifice a bit of ISO for faster shutter speed to avoid any possibility of shake.