Jump to content
didier

M10M - iso 25000 photos

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Many of us have already noticed it, but shooting¬†@ iso 25000 is now a non-issue¬†ūüėä

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@didier - Thanks for posting these. 

For ISO 25,000 these look really good - just a tiny hint of grain, much less than what I have had when printing from Kodak Tri-X negatives shot at ISO 400. 

I have not yet dug into the higher ISO settings with my M10M, but I have found ISO 3200 to be usable.  These shots show the M10M to have a lot more to offer in terms of ISO than what I have tried so far. 

With the M10M's bespoke B&W sensor, we are in a different realm.

Edited by Herr Barnack

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Herr Barnack said:

@didier - Thanks for posting these. 

For ISO 25,000 these look really good - just a tiny hint of grain, much less than what I have had when printing from Kodak Tri-X negatives shot at ISO 400. 

I have not yet dug into the higher ISO settings with my M10M, but I have found ISO 3200 to be usable.  These shots show the M10M to have a lot more to offer in terms of ISO than what I have tried so far. 

With the M10M's bespoke B&W sensor, we are in a different realm.

Yes, we are in a different realm :) all the more so the photo I posted is a OOC jpeg pic, just quickly adjusted in the iPad Photos App... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/5/2020 at 6:00 PM, didier said:

Many of us have already noticed it, but shooting¬†@ iso 25000 is now a non-issue¬†ūüėä

 

Who cares what the ISO is when you can take photos like thisūüėä

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/10/2020 at 6:14 PM, stefanusj said:

from my experience, iso 64K is the limit for M10M. 

Show us some pics ! ūüėä

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I've mentioned elsewhere, I find that the images at 50,000 and above tend show some sensor banding (those fine horizontal lines you'll see crossing the entire image) but that application of a plugin like Nik DFine 2 (it has an option for this) can more or less sort the issue. As such I've used 100,000 a few times and am perfectly happy with the output.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am using the M10M up to ISO25000 (and sometimes above) without any issue, I even like the "grain" like the Ilford HP5 in film time.

Edited by strohscw

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/13/2020 at 5:01 PM, convexferret said:

As I've mentioned elsewhere, I find that the images at 50,000 and above tend show some sensor banding (those fine horizontal lines you'll see crossing the entire image) but that application of a plugin like Nik DFine 2 (it has an option for this) can more or less sort the issue. As such I've used 100,000 a few times and am perfectly happy with the output.

agree. DNG files with iso 50K and 64K is better than JPEG files. because the JPEG Files tends to decrease highlight and increase the shadows (this means exaggerates the banding)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting results.  Reading the thread at my desk, I picked up my M10M (+ 50mm Summilux-M ASPH) I turned to my left take a photo diagonally across the room, the only light being a 40W desk-lamp behind me.  The result below is at ISO 64000 (yes 64000 not 6400!) - amazingly clean.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Another at ISO 64000.  Yes, 64000. Having neither a black cat nor a coal-cellar I had to find a dark corner of the garage to experiment with very high ISO settings.

M10M, 50mm Summilux-M ASPH.

Edited by Keith (M)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing ¬†¬†0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By onasj
      I obtained a customer-release‚ÄĒnot pre-release/beta‚ÄĒM10-R and compared it¬†side-by-side with the M10 Monochrom (hereafter referred to as the M10-M) on a test scene at high ISO values. ¬†The firmware version for both was the latest firmware currently¬†available to the public: 10.20.27.20 for the M10-R (upgraded from the initial released 10.20.23.49 firmware that was pre-installed in the new camera), and 2.12.8.0 for the M10-M.¬†
      Methodology: all shots were taken on a tripod with a 2-second delay to minimize vibration.  The same Leica 50 APO lens was used for all tests.  The aperture was set to f/5.6 for all tests, at which the resolving power of the 50 APO is about as high as possible among commercially available 35-mm format lenses.  The ISO value and shutter speeds were as follows:
      ISO 6400, 1/60 s
      ISO 12500, 1/125 s
      ISO 25000, 1/250 s
      ISO 50000, 1/500 s
      ISO 100000 (M10-M only), 1/1000 s
      To the best of my ability, the M10-R and the M10-M were treated equally.  The test shots were taken in one sitting, with the same tripod position 2.2 m from the target, and under the same lighting.  The images were focused by rangefinder and confirmed by live view for each camera.  The subject distance (2.2 m) was farther from the test scene than my earlier M10-R tests (1.3 m) because I anticipated that the M10-M might have no trouble resolving all the details of the scene from 1.3 m, even at absurdly high ISOs.
      To keep the test as pure as possible, all the test shots were taken as DNG files, then transferred and opened in Adobe Photoshop 2020 with Camera Raw 12.3 (which has native M10-R support) with no corrections or adjustments to the default image settings, other than clicking ‚ÄúB&W‚ÄĚ to convert the M10-R images to monochrome.¬†¬†Therefore, this test does not really answer the question of how the performance between the cameras compares if one were to bring the full power of modern post-processing, noise removal, AI-driven scaling and sharpening, etc. to bear on the images. ¬†It also does not exploit the important ability of adjusting the levels of different colors when converting color files to monochrome files‚ÄĒarguably the largest advantage of using the M10-R to generate monochrome photos instead of the M10-M.¬†¬†Instead, the purpose of this test is to compare the acuity and noise level of the two cameras at ISO 6400 to ISO 50000.
      Overall, both cameras take remarkably good monochrome photos, even at ISO levels such as 12500 that would previously be considered out-of-reach.  Here are 100% crops from a small portion of the center region of both cameras (M10-R on the left, M10-M on the right).  Click on the image below to view it at 100% to avoid scaling artifacts.  I would have no hesitation using ISO 12500 monochrome images from either camera for virtually any application.  But of course there are substantial performance differences.

      Hello guest! Please register or sign in to view the hidden content. Hallo Gast! Du willst die Bilder sehen? Einfach registrieren oder anmelden! Finding #1: The M10-M captures higher acuity levels than the M10-R across the ISO range tested (6400 to 50000).
      As expected, given the lack of a Bayer color filter array (CFA) and no need to de-mosaic the red-, green-, or blue-filtered pixels, the M10-M offers significantly higher acuity than the M10-R.¬†¬†To my eye, the advantage persists even if you give the M10-R an advantage of one or two stops: compare the sharpness of the fine features of the scene as captured by the M10-M at ISO 25000 vs. the M10-R at ISO 6400, or the M10-R at ISO 25000 to the M10-M at ISO 100000‚ÄĒa remarkable testament to the M10-M‚Äôs ability to capture a scene down to the smallest details, even zooming in to 100%.¬†¬†Notice also that at the same ISO level, aperture, and shutter speed (chosen by each camera‚Äôs auto-shutter speed setting to be the same at all ISO levels!), the M10-M images are only modestly brighter than the M10-R; I was surprised that the Bayer CFA didn‚Äôt dim the M10-R images more strongly.¬†¬†Perhaps the M10-R firmware partially compensates for the loss of light due to the Bayer CFA.
      Finding #2: The M10-M offers about a 1- to 2-stop advantage in high-ISO noise levels over the M10-R.
      Compare the M10-M at ISO 50000 to the M10-R at ISO 12500, or the M10-M at ISO 25000 to the M10-R at ISO 6400.¬†The M10-M continues to blow me away with its high-ISO performance.¬†¬†Indeed, Bill Claff‚Äôs measurements at¬†https://photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm¬†rank the M10-M‚Äôs high ISO performance as fourth among all cameras tested to date, behind the Phase One IQ4, the Phase One IQ3, and the Fuji GFX-100‚ÄĒthree current or recent top-of-the-line medium format cameras.
      Overall, Leica has created in the M10-M and the M10-R two current-generation sister cameras with outstanding overall performance.  If acuity or high-ISO performance is more important than color for your particular application, than the M10-M outperforms the M10-R and is among the very best cameras to my knowledge, even joining some medium-format monsters.  And if color is needed, either in the final image or to enable creative conversion to black and white images that allows easy sky darkening, face lightening, etc. during post-processing, the M10-R remains an option worthy of its current flagship status among Leica M cameras.
    • By onasj
      With the important caveat that this post is largely speculation, let's anticipate the performance characteristics of the M10-R sensor.
      The Leica S3 sensor is 45x30 mm (1350 sq mm) and the DNG files are 9816 x 6512, for a total pixel count of 63,921,792 pixels, or 47,349 pixels per sq mm
      The Leica M10 Monochrom sensor is 36 x 24 mm (864 sq mm) and the DNG files are 7864 x 5200 = 40,892,800 pixels, or 47,330 pixels per sq mm.
      The pixel density of the two sensors is so similar that I assume the discrepancy comes from non-scaling edge usage factors, and/or small 0.01 mm-scale rounding errors in sensor size.
      So if we assume that the S3 sensor and the M10 Monochrom sensor come from the same process, differing only in size and the presence of the Bayer color filter array in the former, then it's reasonable to assume the M10-R sensor also comes from the same process, and is basically a 36 x 24 mm crop of the S3 sensor (as others have hypothesized in this forum previously).  
      If this reasoning is correct, then you can expect the M10-R sensor to be the same as the M10M sensor, plus a Bayer CFA, and to perform more or less the same as the S3 sensor on a per-square-mm basis.  Therefore, I would expect:
      - DNG files that are 7864 x 5200 = 40,892,800 pixels
      - Dual gain design
      - 4.6 ¬Ķm pixel pitch
      - Base ISO = 100
      - ISO range = 100-50,000 (basically one stop lower than the 160-100,000 ISO range of the M10 Monochrom, as one might predict from the lack of the Bayer CFA in the M10M)
      - 14 bits per pixel
      Good ISO 12,500 photos and decent ISO 25,000 photos would be terrific, and a significant improvement over the M10/M10-P, as noted here:
      https://photorumors.com/2019/01/20/mega-shootout-sony-leica-and-phase-one-comparison/
    • By Habbable
      Anybody else running into issues using the Really Right Stuff Base plate ( BM10 B ) specifically on the M10 Monochrom?
      I'm attaching a photo (left: factory fit) showing the issue (only occurring on the side with the circular tab/retainer) where the base plate is pushing on the leatherette to the point where it's bubbling the material. I could certainly file the base plate down, but that's not ideal. According to RRS, they've heard vague rumors of concerns with the M10M. Also, I'm seeing that the rubber pad on the opposite side of the "problem spot" is slightly misaligned.
      Exchanging is complicated by the fact that the item appears to be on backorder and RRS indicated they are not going to do another production run (i.e. it's a discontinued item). I may consider a universal L-bracket, but these base plates are pretty sweet. Incidentally, the L-bracket and grip from my M240 RRS variant appear to line up perfectly with the M10 model.
      I've had great luck with RRS products in the past, but maybe I got a lemon. I imagine the tolerances are likely an issue on the Leica cutting/placement of the leatherette side of things, but that's going to get tricky to sort out.
      Thanks for your feedback!
      (Sorry for duplicating, I started this on the M10 side and wasn't clear on how to migrate to the monochrom world)

      Hello guest! Please register or sign in to view the hidden content. Hallo Gast! Du willst die Bilder sehen? Einfach registrieren oder anmelden!
    • By Habbable
      Anybody else running into issues using the Really Right Stuff Base plate ( BM10 B ) specifically on the M10 Monochrom?
      I'm attaching a photo (left: factory fit) showing the issue (only occurring on the side with the circular tab/retainer) where the base plate is pushing on the leatherette to the point where it's bubbling the material. I could certainly file the base plate down, but that's not ideal. According to RRS, they've heard vague rumors of concerns with the M10M. Also, I'm seeing that the rubber pad on the opposite side of the "problem spot" is slightly misaligned.
      Exchanging is complicated by the fact that the item appears to be on backorder and RRS indicated they are not going to do another production run (i.e. it's a discontinued item). I may consider a universal L-bracket, but these base plates are pretty sweet. Incidentally, the L-bracket and grip from my M240 RRS variant appear to line up perfectly with the M10 model.
      I've had great luck with RRS products in the past, but maybe I got a lemon. I imagine the tolerances are likely an issue on the Leica cutting/placement of the leatherette side of things, but that's going to get tricky to sort out.
      Thanks for your feedback!

      Hello guest! Please register or sign in to view the hidden content. Hallo Gast! Du willst die Bilder sehen? Einfach registrieren oder anmelden!
√ó
√ó
  • Create New...