leicajh Posted September 26, 2006 Share #21 Posted September 26, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) Bad photographer, bad photographer. I nearly canceled my order. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 26, 2006 Posted September 26, 2006 Hi leicajh, Take a look here First M8 Shot!!!. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
ptomsu Posted September 27, 2006 Share #22 Posted September 27, 2006 Hm, if this is the reality of an M8 shot, then please say this is NOT true !!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptomsu Posted September 27, 2006 Share #23 Posted September 27, 2006 Herbert, Albert and Leica Mage... Yes the shot is ghastly. It's INTENTIONALLY so. Utterly destroyed on photoshop. (Even if it WAS shot with an LX1 and a DC Vario Elmarit lens!) But this whole thread was created as a joke. I posted a confession and an apology earlier but it appears you may not have read it. So please accept my apologies if I offended you or caused you any grief, visually, about the potential of what may turn out to be the hottest camera of the year. P I absolutely DO NOT LIKE THESE TYPE OF JOKES !!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
waterlenz Posted September 27, 2006 Share #24 Posted September 27, 2006 ÎÞ¼ÉÂÛ̳ - Photokina£¨µÂ¹úÊÀ½çÓ°ÏñÆ÷²Ä²©ÀÀ»á£©ÎÞ¼ÉÏÖ³¡Í¼ÎÄÖ±²¥ Apparently someone has posted some jpegs taken with the M8 at Photokina at ISO 160 and ISO 1250 in the above thread, which was posted on FM. Not in true focus. There is some nasty aliasing near around the out of focus lights. Looks like the jpegs were over-sharpened, which may have contributed to the aliasing. EXIF data do not include the ISO however. Tom Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotografr Posted September 27, 2006 Share #25 Posted September 27, 2006 Worst D2 shot I've ever seen! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotografr Posted September 27, 2006 Share #26 Posted September 27, 2006 ÎÞ¼ÉÂÛ̳ - Photokina£¨µÂ¹úÊÀ½çÓ°ÏñÆ÷²Ä²©ÀÀ»á£©ÎÞ¼ÉÏÖ³¡Í¼ÎÄÖ±²¥ Apparently someone has posted some jpegs taken with the M8 at Photokina at ISO 160 and ISO 1250 in the above thread, which was posted on FM. Not in true focus. There is some nasty aliasing near around the out of focus lights. Looks like the jpegs were over-sharpened, which may have contributed to the aliasing. EXIF data do not include the ISO however. Tom Exif data shows the first photo was taken with a Canon 20D and the other two with a Nikon D70s, or am not looking at the right images? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rvaubel Posted September 27, 2006 Share #27 Posted September 27, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) Exif data shows the first photo was taken with a Canon 20D and the other two with a Nikon D70s, or am not looking at the right images? The EXIF data of the photos I downloaded saya the camera was a M8 from Leica Camera AG. The ISO was 1250. the lens was a 21mm with a maximum aperture of F2.8 All this EXIF data rings true. The files were a little noisy (!SO 1250) but cleaned up nicely in photoshop. I am not an expert in photography hoaxes but these 2 pictures looked crediable to me. Rex Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotografr Posted September 27, 2006 Share #28 Posted September 27, 2006 The EXIF data of the photos I downloaded saya the camera was a M8 from Leica Camera AG. The ISO was 1250. the lens was a 21mm with a maximum aperture of F2.8 All this EXIF data rings true. The files were a little noisy (!SO 1250) but cleaned up nicely in photoshop. I am not an expert in photography hoaxes but these 2 pictures looked crediable to me. Rex Are you referring to the pair of shots that say M8 at 1250 ISO on the left with the Sigma at 1600 ISO to the right? If so, I have to say the results are hideous and not at all acceptable. It looks like something one of my Canons would produce at 3200. Thanks, Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rvaubel Posted September 27, 2006 Share #29 Posted September 27, 2006 Are you referring to the pair of shots that say M8 at 1250 ISO on the left with the Sigma at 1600 ISO to the right? If so, I have to say the results are hideous and not at all acceptable. It looks like something one of my Canons would produce at 3200. Thanks, I downloaded the pictures last night and can't find the reference anymore but I think you've got the ones I got. Lieca's 1250 ISO is sort of a dead giveaway. I didn't find the files to be hideous at all. They did look like Canon 3200 ISO files, but that is the gold standard. I would be happy if the M8 produced files that are within one F stop of Canon's best. The other factor is, we don't know if there was any noise reduction software employed at all. Basically, the file looks OK for what it is, a grab shot with unknown firmware and software. It even looked to me like it had been oversharpened. Still, with all the unknowns (like is this picture even real), I was encouraged with the results. But then, I felt the same way about the Puts photos Rex Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
vic vic Posted September 27, 2006 Share #30 Posted September 27, 2006 i think it is really from m8.... peter just dont want to disapoint here people, so he tells us that it is tweaked in photoshop. peter - we can handle the truth even if it is painful. but... when i think about it now.... maybe now, the m8 will create new style of photography... your first example will be a classic soon and a referance to this style :-)))))))))))) tell me - what lens is it... maybe part of the beauty here is the lens??? maybe other lenses will create different effect... is this th ecoded lens or not....??? :-)))))))))) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_murray Posted September 27, 2006 Share #31 Posted September 27, 2006 . I was feeling a little silly today and wanted to have a little fun. Don't give up your day job...... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotografr Posted September 27, 2006 Share #32 Posted September 27, 2006 Rex--I'm having a hard time beleiving we're talking about the same image. Is this it? If it is, I will definitely not buy the M8 unless a later firmware shows considerable improvement at high ISOs. The noise shown here is totally unacceptable for a $5,000 digital. By the way, Rex, the photo posted to the right of this one was supposedly taken with a Sigma SD 14. 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/5845-first-m8-shot/?do=findComment&comment=59631'>More sharing options...
rvaubel Posted September 27, 2006 Share #33 Posted September 27, 2006 Rex--I'm having a hard time beleiving we're talking about the same image. Is this it? If it is, I will definitely not buy the M8 unless a later firmware shows considerable improvement at high ISOs. The noise shown here is totally unacceptable for a $5,000 digital. Ya, thats it. I quess I am easier to please. I figure this is an example of the WORST this camera can do. This isn't even a RAW file. As it is a JPEG it has been processed somehow by what kind of prelimanary software we don't know. I think it has been oversharpened too. Even considering the sad state of this file, I was still able to coax a reasonable 11x14 out of it. That being said, I would hope that the ultimate product would allow me to use ISO 1200 as my default settings. for indoor low light work . For now I use ISO 800 on my RD1 I can see why Leica doesn't want any photos out on the internet. I would never judge the quality of the file based on a few clandistine photos taken under adverse conditions with pre-release software. Still, I'm not discouraged by the noise that much. While it doesn't come up to the gold standard of Canon, there's still a lot of software development to be done. Hope springith eternal Rex Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotografr Posted September 27, 2006 Share #34 Posted September 27, 2006 For purposes of comparison, I just shot this at 3200 ISO with the Canon 5D. 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/5845-first-m8-shot/?do=findComment&comment=59659'>More sharing options...
fotografr Posted September 27, 2006 Share #35 Posted September 27, 2006 This is a small portion of the above photo at 3200 ISO and it still doesn't come close to the noise from is what is supposedly a photo from the M8 at 1250 ISO. I could probably get an editor to accept this Canon image, but I could never get something like the one from the M8 published anywhere if the file looked like that. 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/5845-first-m8-shot/?do=findComment&comment=59663'>More sharing options...
robsteve Posted September 27, 2006 Share #36 Posted September 27, 2006 For purposes of comparison, I just shot this at 3200 ISO with the Canon 5D. But it is properly exposed and probably in RAW. The sample posted above looked one or one and a half stops under exposed. Shoot the same image with the 5D under flourescent and under expose it 1.5 stops using jpegs not raw and see what you get. The other thing to remember is in the case of the DMR, the RAW files were much better than the jpegs and Leica expected you to do the noise reduction, not the camera as in Canon's case. I expect the M8 1250 shots to look like 1600iso Canon shots. The M8 file will need post processing to get there though. The second thing to keep in mind is the Leica lenses are much faster and sharper than we are used to in the SLR line from Canon. A Leica 50mm Summilux is probably sharper at f1.4 as a Canon 50mm f1.4 is at f2.8. With the Leica lens you could shoot 800iso rather than 1600 or 3200 on the 5D. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rvaubel Posted September 27, 2006 Share #37 Posted September 27, 2006 This is a small portion of the above photo at 3200 ISO and it still doesn't come close to the noise from is what is supposedly a photo from the M8 at 1250 ISO. I could probably get an editor to accept this Canon image, but I could never get something like the one from the M8 published anywhere if the file looked like that. The M8 shot is at 100%. I don't know what a "small portion" is but you have to compare apples to apples. The fact that the M8 shot is underexposed is also very significant. Also your Canon is using the most sophisticated noise reduction software in the industry. As the the Leica, we don't know if it is using ANY noise reduction software. Just don't make a judgement just yet on the basis of one poorly shot photo. Rex Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotografr Posted September 27, 2006 Share #38 Posted September 27, 2006 "The M8 shot is at 100%. I don't know what a "small portion" is but you have to compare apples to apples." You can see from the two images what "small portion" is because one was taken from the other. The idea here was to show that the noise from a significantly cropped section of a 5D (RAW) image shot at 3200 ISO was still vastly less apparent than the noise from the full frame M8 jpeg shot at 1250 ISO. I think I'm clearly giving the great edge to Leica with this comparison--definitely not tipping things the other direction. Rob's point is well taken in that the M8 image was underexposed and the Canon image was properly exposed. Well, this makes me wonder WHY was the M8 image underexposed? Was the meter that bad? I know this isn't final firmware and there isn't noise reduction done in camera with the M8. I'm more than willing to wait for test images from a final version, but I'm right now sitting here thinking about the prospect of applying noise reduction to between 200 and 300 images from a low light shoot and still possibly ending up with a very inferior file. I used NeatImage on the M8 file and it still looked unacceptable for professional application. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicaleica Posted September 27, 2006 Share #39 Posted September 27, 2006 Please note that the LCD shown in the video below indicates firmware 1.04: Digital Cameras - Independent Digital Camera Reviews, Ratings & Comparisons... ...2006-Leica-M8-Digital-Rangefinder.htm I think in view of all we've heard and seen it wouldn't be bad for Leica to release some picture files. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicaleica Posted September 27, 2006 Share #40 Posted September 27, 2006 Repost of link: Photokina 2006 Video Leica M8 Digital Rangefinder - News, Guides, Tips Interesting! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.