M8 does basketball (at iso 2500)

[bayerische]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

This one is at 1/30 s, iso1250 and -1/3 ev. Maybe it depends on your point of reference, but I have never experienced any camera before that allows such low light photography. OK so you get some motion blur & digital noise but nevertheless.

 

Also I have the distinct impression that the latest firmware allows -1 ev which means that our little toy running at iso 2500 in fact can be pushed to iso 5000.

 

I don't agree.

 

And if you would like to see superiour high ISO, buy a 1500 euro Canon 5D. Or any current SLR with a CMOS sensor.

 

It's just that simple. The M8 is not that good at High ISO.

 

The image you posted is 500X500 pixels? At 100% crop it's going to look a bit different.

 

I'm not trying to say that Canon nor Nikon is better. They are better at high ISO. But at lower ISO I think the M8 is as god as it gets.

[Dan States]

It's the total package guys, not just one feature. The M8 is the smallest, best handling, best constructed pro-grade digital camera on the market today. Compared to larger FF DSLR's its kind of noisy at high iso. Each of these products have strong and weak points.

 

I can't get an electric range into my Miata but I'm not trading it for a Land Cruiser.

 

Regarding comments on the original post: Too many have slithered their way here from Photo.net and other bastions of rudeness on the net. Let's treat each other as though we were speaking face to face. ( No, you really wouldn't speak that way to total strangers or you would have been pummeled into better behavior years ago).

[Advertisement]

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

[Jamie Roberts]

I don't agree.

 

And if you would like to see superiour high ISO, buy a 1500 euro Canon 5D. Or any current SLR with a CMOS sensor.

 

It's just that simple. The M8 is not that good at High ISO.

 

{snipped}

 

Andreas, I suspect that Stephen is somewhat correct though; Leica has been messing with noise levels or C1 V4 is just that much better.

 

I just shot a ton of stuff at ISO 1250 and above (NOT sports--where you need high ISO for very fast shutter speeds, often) and I was kind of surprised at how, um, much better it was than with the camera a year ago...

 

And I have a 5d as well; I don't much like its files above ISO 1250 (though for a limited DR, it's great up to 1600, it's true).

 

All I'm saying is that maybe it's just me (and I'm better with the camera) or maybe it's the firmware or something--the M8 seems better than it used to at ISO 1250.

 

For instance, I wouldn't have attempted this a year ago...though there's still but a stop of DR in the extreme shadows.

 

here's a 100% crop from an ISO 1250 shot under tungsten, no flash. Don't you think this is much improved from a year ago? (BTW--the original TIFF is even better, there's some JPEG compression here too). Straight from C1 then saved for web in PS... I'm not so sure my 5d is *that much* better (though actual ISO rating is more conservative on the 5d, so it has that going for it too).

 

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!

 

Here's the whole scene for reference... not a great shot or anything, I was just messing around

 

[plasticman]

Without wanting to offend anyone - I honestly think the first shot in the thread is awful.

 

Without a doubt the M8 has its merits and strengths, but to champion its palpable weaknesses is to do both Leica and yourself a disservice imho.

 

To be frank, the person who sat in the next row holding a Fuji P&S, and with less status anxiety attached to their camera has secured better memories for their son playing on the court than the OP - isn't that the most important thing?

 

What an excellent idea to have done a b&w sideline-reportage style shoot instead. Explore the possibilities offered by the camera - but boasting that it matches the 'fancy D3' in sport's photography does not withstand any scrutiny.

[bayerische]

James, did you use the Postprocessing noise suppression?

[eekimel]

Hi Rob:

 

I've tried focusing the 75 at 2.5 on subjects that move a lot slower than basketball players, so I can appreciate how well you did.

[DonWeston]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Guess the OP should have just run out during 1/2 time and bought a D3 and 135mm f2 to meet the tech demands of some members here.

I would like to be educated really, can some one who has actually shot high school basketball and is critical post some of their images and show 100% crops. I have looked at mine with Canon dslrs from 1d2, 20D, 40D, NIkon D300, don't have to even look at D200 to know what they look like and find them not perfect either, although some have been printed to 20x40 or 24x32. It is not like shooting just a dark or night scene, really. Would like to see what the critics have to show us. I know I have a lot to learn seriously, please enlighten us. Always love to look at good images...

[Jamie Roberts]

James, did you use the Postprocessing noise suppression?

 

Default from C1 V4 is all. I was pretty shocked, to tell you the truth. No Noise Ninja or anything.

[photogdave]

In an attempt to move away from all the BS about upgrades and problems with the M8, Rob makes a light-hearted post about how he likes the M8 as it is and posts a pretty decent basketball shot to prove its versatility.

He doesn't claim to be a pro sports shooter and doesn't claim that it's a better sports camera than a DSLR, he's just saying he can make do with it.

Then he gets torn apart like a rotting carcass by half-starved jackals! The people who criticized his technique, post processing skills and camera choice are missing the point. The nasty manner in which some of you expressed your view is what makes this forum seem harsh and uncomfortable to visit.

Rob, please cover over to RFF if you're not already there. You will receive a warmer reception and can look forward to encouragement instead of mean-spirited disdain. Don't let those jerks get you down!

[plasticman]

Don't let those jerks get you down!

 

Hi Dave - welcome to the forum.

[pete_g]

In an attempt to move away from all the BS about upgrades and problems with the M8, Rob makes a light-hearted post about how he likes the M8 as it is and posts a pretty decent basketball shot to prove its versatility.

He doesn't claim to be a pro sports shooter and doesn't claim that it's a better sports camera than a DSLR, he's just saying he can make do with it.

Then he gets torn apart like a rotting carcass by half-starved jackals! The people who criticized his technique, post processing skills and camera choice are missing the point. The nasty manner in which some of you expressed your view is what makes this forum seem harsh and uncomfortable to visit.

Rob, please cover over to RFF if you're not already there. You will receive a warmer reception and can look forward to encouragement instead of mean-spirited disdain. Don't let those jerks get you down!

 

If this is the kind of language used in RRF, this isn't much of an invitation is it?

[photogdave]

If this is the kind of language used in RRF, this isn't much of an invitation is it?

 

You are absolutely right! Actually, like any internet forum RFF can get pretty heated occasionally but nothing like the outright brutal attack on the OP of this thread.

Even though I haven't posted very much here I've been visiting enough to see there are plenty of nice level-headed people here but also a pretty high ratio of insulting hot-heads.

Unfortunately for everyone it's this type of hot-head jerk (I said it again! ) who keep attacking innocent people that make this place kind of uncomfortable to hang out at.

I mean c'mon, go back and read some of the initial responses to the first post - absolutely uncalled for no matter where you are from and what you do for a living.

[bayerische]

You are absolutely right! Actually, like any internet forum RFF can get pretty heated occasionally but nothing like the outright brutal attack on the OP of this thread.

Even though I haven't posted very much here I've been visiting enough to see there are plenty of nice level-headed people here but also a pretty high ratio of insulting hot-heads.

Unfortunately for everyone it's this type of hot-head jerk (I said it again! ) who keep attacking innocent people that make this place kind of uncomfortable to hang out at.

I mean c'mon, go back and read some of the initial responses to the first post - absolutely uncalled for no matter where you are from and what you do for a living.

 

We are not mean.

 

I think the pic looks like it was taken with a cameraphone. A cooked JPG.

 

Didn't say anything about the skill of the photographer. It's a fact with the M8, that high ISO photography is best when avoided.

[charlesphoto99]

I think the photo had no interest, technical or otherwise, to anyone except the op. It should have been posted in the photo section as well. I think we've all come to an agreement about threads in this part of the forum. Personally I would like to see more links posted to full projects done with the M8 vs the my kid plays sports. A link to a project that shows the strengths of the M8 is much more educational.

 

But really there should be no tolerance for name calling. I have everyright to say your photo is not very good and state the reasons but no need to insult ( of course to some saying anything negative about anothers work is an insult. Too bad as you'll never get better that way).. I also think every poster on this forum should have a link posted to their own work. Then the commentary becomes fair IMO. Too many people bragging about this and that piece of new gear and no sign that they ever use it. Why all the need for anonymity?

[plasticman]

I can afford any 35mm-digital I want, from the flagship Canon to the fancy new D3...

 

Too many people bragging about this and that piece of new gear...

 

Hi Charles

 

I agree with you that the tone of comments shouldn't be personal - but in fact the tone of the OP suggested a certain amount of hubris in his choice of 'gear' and the image itself certainly looks like it was taken with a phonecam. I think it was that combination which led to what was maybe an over-reaction by some other posters - I'm sure no serious offence was meant.

 

For me - I personally think it's sad that what would have been a worthwhile set of memories of a family member's sport's event are sacrificed because of an allegiance to a status item of equipment.

[charlesphoto99]

Hi Charles

 

I agree with you that the tone of comments shouldn't be personal - but in fact the tone of the OP suggested a certain amount of hubris in his choice of 'gear' and the image itself certainly looks like it was taken with a phonecam. I think it was that combination which led to what was maybe an over-reaction by some other posters - I'm sure no serious offence was meant.

 

For me - I personally think it's sad that what would have been a worthwhile set of memories of a family member's sport's event are sacrificed because of an allegiance to a status item of equipment.

 

I fully agree. If sports are truly what someone wants to shoot probably best off spending the same $ as a 75 for a dslr and fast tele. Better yet take a nice portrait of your son all sweaty after the game with the 75 - what it was truly made for. Every type of gear has its purpose and limitations. Its nice when one can push and repurpose those limits but one has to be very very good to do that.

[photogdave]

I didn't want to personally insult anyone so that's kind of why I aimed it collectively at those who insulted the OP with their rude comments. Either way it's uncalled for and I apologize.

But if you don't like his photo then ignore it. No need to be insulting.

I understand that there is a separate forum for posting images but I believe the intention of the OP was just to add a little levity and make an observation that he is enjoying his camera as it is and it suits his needs. No need to jump all over him!

If anyone wants to see some of my recent images please check out my RFF gallery:

photogdave Gallery - RangeFinderForum Gallery

[SJP]

Rob,

 

after all of the comments & flack I hope that you will not feel disheartened. I guess some members are more direct than others in their comments, which is good but unpleasant if on the receiving end.

 

Anyway, I was wondering about your basketball picture as I have manged to live with iso 2500 on occassion. Using iso 2500 is not my first choice I must admit but sometimes that is the way it is. In those cases I find shifting to underexpose in the DNG processing works (maybe ½EV) also converting to grayscale helps a lot, the chroma noise turns suddenly into a pleasant grainyness. I have the impression that you might have pushed the EV in the other direction and cropped? If so I hope you can tweak the picture further.

 

Oh I forgot to mention - I like the picture

 

regards

Stephen