fotografr Posted October 15, 2007 Share #1 Posted October 15, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) I've had this experience before, but just got another illustration over the weekend of how good the M8 really is. I shot an event using both the M8 and my Canon 5D. Lighting was horrendous (mixed) and low. The M8 was set at ISO 640, the 5D at ISO 800. After going through nearly 700 total images, my conclusion is that the M8 images were superior in nearly every way. I used an Expodisc to get manual WB settings on both cameras, but the M8 got consistently better skin tones and overall color accuracy. It also produced images with better exposure latitude and better definition. Virtually the only area where the 5D excelled was in noise suppression, however the M8 noise was in no way objectionable and the images are all quite usable. I know this is all just personal preference and totally unscientific. Also, it is not my intention to start a M8 versus Canon discussion. I just wanted to point out that in spite of a few flaws, our M8s are damn fine pieces of equipment. The only reason I don't just dump all of my Canon equipment and go completely M8 is that I often need to shoot subject matter that requires long (200mm and over) lenses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 15, 2007 Posted October 15, 2007 Hi fotografr, Take a look here Clear Difference. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
fjmcsu Posted October 15, 2007 Share #2 Posted October 15, 2007 I did a similar shoot for a client who needed an image for a magazine advertisement. Again mixed lighting, no flash though again Expodosc for WB adjustment in RAW. I shot also with D2x just to see the difference. I then presented them to the client without his knowledge of the cameras & darn if he didn't choose 100% the Leica files.Again validation of great quality in a small form factor! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shootist Posted October 15, 2007 Share #3 Posted October 15, 2007 I too did a similar type of shoot this weekend with M8 and Nikon D200. The D200 images are mostly useless even with AF on Continuous mode to capture the subject moving. These shots where done with a Nikon SB 800 flash on both cameras. The flash didn't fire with every shot on the M8 and did fire with every shot on the D200. Most of the D200 shots are blurred, I had shutter speed set at 1/250 for both cameras. The AF in the D200 just couldn't keep up. But with the M8 I focused on a spot and raised the f/stop and most all shots are acceptable with some spot on and better color. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_tribble Posted October 15, 2007 Share #4 Posted October 15, 2007 Brent - it's difficult. They're both good. I give below two images + 100% crops from the same piece of documentary work on Ordinary Lives that I've been doing in Northern Ireland. One shot's with the 28/f2 cron on the M8 (ISO 320) and the other's with the 5D (ISO 400) + 16-35 L / f2.8. They're both good from where I stand - and NB - neither of the 100% crops are sharpened... I get similar results from theatre work. I find myself being delighted with what I get from my 5D, 1D2 AND my M8. They get used for different purpose which link up with the need longer lenses, the need for zoom on some occasions, the need to use something that's unthreatening. I for one don't want to stop using my old first series Canon L series 85 / f1.2. I LIKE having autofocus so I can just spot the eye, compose and shoot. I LOVE having my M8 so I can be quiet, reflective and discrete... I'm not getting rid of any of the kit as I keep on finding I have a need for different things (just got a 1.4 extender that I use with my Canon 70-200 - it's useful) And in the end, aren't we lucky! PS - the first shot's the 5D, the second shot's the M8... 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! 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/35784-clear-difference/?do=findComment&comment=377193'>More sharing options...
garyvot Posted October 15, 2007 Share #5 Posted October 15, 2007 I could probably post examples of 5D output that are "superior" to the Leica in one characteristic or another, though that should certainly not be taken as a challenge to your own personal findings. One possibly more useful comment: In my experience, color from the 5D is far better when CR2s are processed in DPP than in ACR. I think many Canon photographers have never gotten beyond the Adobe workflow, so they don't always get the best from the camera. Best, Gary Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotografr Posted October 15, 2007 Author Share #6 Posted October 15, 2007 Chris--Like you, I use the 5Ds for theater work and couldn't get along without them. When I think about how much better the images are than back in the Ektachrome-360-pushed-one -stop days, it is staggering. "And in the end, aren't we lucky!" That just about sums it up. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotografr Posted October 15, 2007 Author Share #7 Posted October 15, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) I could probably post examples of 5D output that are "superior" to the Leica in one characteristic or another, though that should certainly not be taken as a challenge to your own personal findings. One possibly more useful comment: In my experience, color from the 5D is far better when CR2s are processed in DPP than in ACR. I think many Canon photographers have never gotten beyond the Adobe workflow, so they don't always get the best from the camera. Best, Gary You could probably find an equal number of people who would say the 5D images look best when processed in Lightroom. I was in no way saying the 5D images weren't good--just that the M8 images looked better to me (all processed using the same raw converter). Again, this wasn't meant to be an anti-Canon thread at all. I get very good results from my Canons. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted October 15, 2007 Share #8 Posted October 15, 2007 I constantly use both my 5d and my M8 for events (throw the DMR in there too sometimes). I still have my share of 1 series bodies and shots too. I have to say I still really, really like the Canon 70-200 on the 5d, especially from 135 up, which is just out of the M8's reach. But (as everyone here knows) there's absolutely no question about the quality of the M8 stuff. It still surprises me just how good it is in adverse lighting conditions, and in my workflow, it has some advantages over the 5d (of course, the 5d is more forgiving if I goof up or need higher ISOs). But the raw potential in the selection of M8-compatible lenses alone is frankly astonishing (if bad for your bank balance! LOL!! On the other hand, once you buy them, they're bought for a long time...) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wparsonsgisnet Posted October 15, 2007 Share #9 Posted October 15, 2007 Sean Reid did a comparison of the M8 and an equivalent Canon (full-frame) and concluded that though Canon owns the low-noise prize, that the M8 owns the image prize. That is, of course, Sean's opinion, but I feel personally that the "roundness" of images from Leica glass is unbeatable. If I needed long lenses, I guess I'd have a Canon, too, as Brent indicates. I just pretend those shots don't matter. A friend of mine tried an M8 during a trip to Antartica earlier this year and almost bought one. He decided not to do so in the end because he shoots primarily sports stuff and needs those long, anti-jitter lenses that Canon also owns. But, you can tell there's a burr under his saddle. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.