M8 PHOTOGRAPHS, POST THEM HERE

[drdannn]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Andy, I found that my pictures quickly rolled out of view, often with no comments - constructive or otherwise. I adopted a fresh approach by resurrecting some members' pictures which had disappeared without comment and deliberately finding something constructive which I could add. Feedback is important to many members and much of what is posted are pleasing platitudes which, frankly, are not very helpful to those seeking to improve their work.

 

The risk of copyright infringement is also a factor. That accounts for why some professionals are reluctant to post anything with market value. So we see a lot of innocuous, but often competent and pleasant, personal family album or photo-club-type pictures.

 

I agree there are some stunning pictures and I will budget more time to visit more frequently. I sympathize with your pleading.

 

+++++++++++++++++++

[Advertisement]

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

[zombii]

Rod - I've deleted your oversized image and replaced it with one that meets forum rules. The image you linked in here was 2 1/2 times the file size of the rules, and too large by pixel count (no side may be longer than 960 pixels). Why? Unlike here in the US where high speed Internet is very inexpensive, in much of the world Internet service is quite expensive, and charges go up in proportion to the data being downloaded. You were able to get this one through because there was not a filter for linked images, but that has since been shut down. Please post images that meet the rules, placing them directly on the Forum. Stuart Nordheimer

 

Cron 28 @2.8

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 May 23, 2011 by stuny

[WestMichigan]

Zombii,

that's a lovely image, quite lovely. May I inquire as to what your ISO was for the shot? It looks a bit 'high' in the shadows, but the areas in the glow of the candle are quite pleasing in your posted image. The M8 gets docked for high iso quality, but I think I'd be happy with 'poor' imaging ability such as you've demonstrated.

Richard in Michigan

[zombii]

Thanks! It was 1250. It always looks better in adequately exposed areas which isn't too surprising but how much worse it looks in underexposed areas can be surprising.

[drdannn]

Thanks! It was 1250. It always looks better in adequately exposed areas which isn't too surprising but how much worse it looks in underexposed areas can be surprising.

I can't believe all the things so many people say about noise in a photograph. I am not speaking of this thread, but in general, so no offense meant to anyone. Noise can be quite pleasing actually. In the 70s I used to shoot ASA 800 and 1600 intentionally so I would get noise. But now people are so noise aware because their digital sensors just aren't perfect at high ISO.

 

Always I would rather get the photograph than choose to miss it because it might be noisy. Your photograph is properly exposed for what you wanted to show, and as you said, in properly exposed areas noise is not usually a proplem anyway. Most cameras at ISO over 1250 are noisy no matter what the brand or what the sensor. I shot w/ a Sony DSLR while at a local camera store. The salesman boasted an ISO up to 12500 ! So I shot it within the shopping mall at 12500 and it's all noise, as I expected. With my m8 I am not ever afraid of ISO 640, and 1250 with the right exposure is not a problem either. Just my opinion.

[zombii]

I can't believe all the things so many people say about noise in a photograph. I am not speaking of this thread, but in general, so no offense meant to anyone. Noise can be quite pleasing actually. In the 70s I used to shoot ASA 800 and 1600 intentionally so I would get noise. But now people are so noise aware because their digital sensors just aren't perfect at high ISO.

 

Always I would rather get the photograph than choose to miss it because it might be noisy. Your photograph is properly exposed for what you wanted to show, and as you said, in properly exposed areas noise is not usually a proplem anyway. Most cameras at ISO over 1250 are noisy no matter what the brand or what the sensor. I shot w/ a Sony DSLR while at a local camera store. The salesman boasted an ISO up to 12500 ! So I shot it within the shopping mall at 12500 and it's all noise, as I expected. With my m8 I am not ever afraid of ISO 640, and 1250 with the right exposure is not a problem either. Just my opinion.

 

Dan, I was shooting in the 60's and 70's too and you pretty much didn't have any other choices. I do think my 5D2 has better noise performance than the M8. And as you recall, photography magazines back then were filled with articles comparing grain in different films and suggesting ways to reduce it. I'm okay with a certain amount of grain but I'm not as comfortable with imager noise, particularly color noise. The problem I have with it is that it tends to smear and that's a lot worse than discreet film grain to me. But I agree, when you have to get the shot, I'll take the noise rather than not get the shot. The more discretionary the shot is, the more you have to decide what you can live with. As you pointed out, correct exposure makes a very noticeable difference in imager noise. Film grain was pretty much there across the frame at what ever level the film/processing combination gave.

 

One thing that has surprised me about Leica shooters is how many have said they don't want to shoot above ISO 160 because of the noise. To each his own, but you're pretty much limiting your shooting to daylight or strong artificial light if you take that approach and I, for one, like to shoot in low light way too much to let that limit me.

[wilfredo]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Eddie:

 

Sorry to hear your M8 is off to Allendale. I hope it is nothing serious.

[wilfredo]

Glad to see this thread remains alive. I need to do more shooting. :-)

[Lax Jought]

One thing that has surprised me about Leica shooters is how many have said they don't want to shoot above ISO 160 because of the noise.

 

I've tried to push my M8.2 in very low light conditions, I've been sort of happy so far with the results. What level of noise are we talking about though?

[ezc203]

Well I think the problem people have with the M8's (or M8.2) low light performance is that it is far inferior to the other cameras in its price range.

 

M8 - 50mm - f2.5 - ISO640

 

Canon 5D Mark II - 50mm - f2.0 - ISO4000

 

You know what I'm saying?

[Lax Jought]

Well I think the problem people have with the M8's (or M8.2) low light performance is that it is far inferior to the other cameras in its price range.

 

M8 - 50mm - f2.5 - ISO640

 

 

Canon 5D Mark II - 50mm - f2.0 - ISO4000

 

 

You know what I'm saying?

 

hmm... yes I can see that there. I suppose in B&W it wouldn't be too bad for a bit of film-like grain.

[SiOnara]

barbicanacibrab - m8 with elmarit 28mm asph @ f5.6.

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!

[zombii]

Cron 28 @f/2 ISO 1250

[andybarton]

Can I once again remind members of the maximum size for photographs shown on the forum, please?

 

Maximum length on longest side 960 pixels. Maximum file size 300kb (unless you are a sponsoring member, in which case it's around 500kb)

 

This includes photographs linked from external sources, such as Flickr, Smugmug etc etc

 

Thank you.

[ezc203]

Wilfredo - No it's really nothing serious. It's just a routine (15month) check-up: a bit of sensor cleaning and recovering in vulcanite! Yay! Can't wait to get her back, my 24 Lux is feeling mighty lonely.

 

Lax - The example I provide was actually quite deliberately BAD for the M8, but you get my drift. Here are some examples comparing black and white images, the M8 fares substantially better in high ISO and B&W.

 

M8 @ f/1.4 and ISO1250

 

5D Mark II @ f/2.0 and ISO1250

 

Again, the 5D performs much better, but I do enjoy the "grain" the M8 provides as opposed to the "noise" that the 5D has. Does that even make sense? Either way, guess I'm just trying to say that the B&W images the M8 produces at higher ISOs seem to give off a more film-esque noise, which can be quite desirable sometimes.

[menos I M6]

Eddie, I too refer to "noise" with photographs, taken with an DSLR and "grain" for those, made with a Leica ;-)

 

Seriously, I think, most times on average exposures, ISO2500 M8 photos look like TX400 pushed @ 3200, slightly underexposed - means, lacking.

 

Lightroom 3 really pushed the limits and improved a lot, so images, shot @ ISO2500 can more often be used, than before.

 

As usual, there are the beautifully exposed, nice 2500 shots as well, but when I use 2500, it is really out of desperation (still underexposing), as the light is simply not there.

[Lax Jought]

Lax - The example I provide was actually quite deliberately BAD for the M8, but you get my drift. Here are some examples comparing black and white images, the M8 fares substantially better in high ISO and B&W.

 

Again, the 5D performs much better, but I do enjoy the "grain" the M8 provides as opposed to the "noise" that the 5D has. Does that even make sense? Either way, guess I'm just trying to say that the B&W images the M8 produces at higher ISOs seem to give off a more film-esque noise, which can be quite desirable sometimes.

 

I've been thinking about our little conversation here about ISO performance for the past few days, I'm not sure how to articulate what is ruminating in my mind though.

 

In terms of grain and noise, and the film-esque grain that the M8 produces, I like it but as someone else was saying above there are people who refuse to use the M8 at higher ISO settings. I assume that film grain is not subjectively desirable for them, I take it?

[zombii]

Can I once again remind members of the maximum size for photographs shown on the forum, please?

 

Maximum length on longest side 960 pixels. Maximum file size 300kb (unless you are a sponsoring member, in which case it's around 500kb)

 

This includes photographs linked from external sources, such as Flickr, Smugmug etc etc

 

Thank you.

 

For openers, I don't remember seeing these limitations anywhere. They're certainly not displayed nor are the images checked when linked in. Secondly, I don't know of another forum that is so restrictive on linked images. Third, where did the 960 pixel limit come from? This isn't a standard size for anything I'm aware of. Since my images were only 1024 on the long side, it wasn't like I was posting a full size image. Fourth, you could have sent me a PM and asked me to replace them rather than rudely deleting them and disrupting the thread in the process. I would have done so with no complaint. Finally, when I first got on this forum, I had an issue that caused me to msg the moderators and nobody ever answered but now after I've posted several images, you suddenly pop up in slash and burn mode. I like a lot of the people on this forum but I'm not impressed with your attitude or behavior. If you're going to have those restrictions on linked images, I suggest you make the effort to check them when the post is submitted rather than doing this kind of stuff after the fact. Other forums do checks on images, why can't you?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[menos I M6]

I've been thinking about our little conversation here about ISO performance for the past few days, I'm not sure how to articulate what is ruminating in my mind though.

 

In terms of grain and noise, and the film-esque grain that the M8 produces, I like it but as someone else was saying above there are people who refuse to use the M8 at higher ISO settings. I assume that film grain is not subjectively desirable for them, I take it?

 

Lax, actually, I looooove film grain ;-)

 

This (and a certain level of lazyness) is one reason, why I shoot Kodak TX400 standard on ISO3200 speed.

 

I like the looks of it.

 

ISO 2500 on the M8 generally just can't come close to the look of pushed BW film at those speeds - it is not just about grain, but the film - even at these pushes - just holds highlights a lot better.

 

ISO2500 on the M8 is a safety speed for me, while I generally just pull out a film body, when the light goes too dim for ISO640/ 1250.

[zombii]

Reposting following the "rules". Sorry for the disruption.

 

Cron 28 @ 2.8 ISO1250