High ISO M film versus M8 exposures

[Rolo]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Can anyone illustrate/demonstrate the difference between high iso film, say 800, 1600 and 3200 iso with a Leica M film camera versus similar exposures using the M8 ?

 

I've an assignment to shoot a people event, with Leica M, without flash, without tripod, in a low light, tungsten illuminated environment.

 

I'll need several hundred quality exposures. B&W and colour will be necessary and the end media is print, via Photoshop.

 

My initial thoughts are that the M film shots will be superior, but sharing your experience would be welcome.

 

Rolo

[Advertisement]

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

[andybarton]

Do you have an M8 to use yourself, Rolo?

 

Must be talking B&W only, at those ASA levels, yes? If so, which film? Which film for the lower ASA colour work?

 

Maybe we could get together with Steve, and do some experimentation.

[Rolo]

Do you have an M8 to use yourself, Rolo?

 

Must be talking B&W only, at those ASA levels, yes? If so, which film? Which film for the lower ASA colour work?

 

Maybe we could get together with Steve, and do some experimentation.

 

Colour is a pre-requisite, unless the answer is - it can't be done with a Leica without flash. I'm not looking to repeat Eugene Smith's Minemata portfolio here.

 

Yep, I'll be shooting the event with an MP and an M7, or 2 M8's fitted with 35/50/75 Summilux and 24 Elmarit lenses.

 

I have a substantial collection of high iso M8 shots, but not much in the way of high iso film - hence the post. Obviously, I can shoot some film and will, but a little direction from members would be interesting to me.

 

Rolo

[Kasimir]

I found High ISO B/W films (Neopan, TMax 3200) difficult to scan (Nikon 5000).

I like the results of the M8 more. Besides the M8 gives You the option to decide later if You will use the picture in color or in B/W

[mongrelnomad]

I use high-ISO film very often - my MP is pretty much dedicated to low-to-no-light situations with either a Summilux or a Noctilux attached. They are always hand-held, and no flash is used.

 

First, the M8. I can't remember what the ISO was set at, but it was at four digits. M8, 35 Summilux ASPH. To me, it just seems a little flat and crisp, and personally, I don't like digital noise, as it is too 'random', but you can make your own mind up:

 

 

OK, to B&W. These are taken with Fuji Neopan 1600. I love the film as it is not too contrasty, with quite fine grain for the ISO. This was taken with the MP and the Noctilux wide open:

 

 

For colour, I usually use Fuji Pro 800Z. It is very fine grained, and the noise, whilst obvious, is less 'random' than digital, leading to a smoother, more progressive image. That, coupled with the remarkable colour rendition of the 800Z makes it my favourite low-light colour film. This, again, was shot with an MP and the Noctilux:

 

 

And so to the ultra-high ISO. I've never pushed the 800Z, but I recently tried a roll of Superia 800 pushed to 1600. I was quite impressed with the results. Not too noise, nice colour handling (if a little saturated) and not bad grain. When the supplier in Israel gets more 800Z in - they've been out for nearly a month now - I'll definitely be giving that a push... Again, MP and Noctilux:

 

 

Anyway, hope that helped. The cloth shutter and the flexibility of the films is another reason why the M8 lounges at the back of the cupboard :-)

[Rolo]

Thanks to Ewald and Julian. Appreciate the effort thats gone in to posting those images.

 

Had hoped for a little more input, but early days yet. Maybe Neil Ambrose will find it later.

 

Rolo

[Adrian Lord]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I think Julian's examples sum up perfectly why I have gone back to film, thanks for posting!

[andym911]

Julian

 

very nice color film images...I like the look a lot, quite inspiring.

thanks for sharing

 

Andy

[chris_tribble]

Rolo - a lot of experience in low light with 35mm (shooting EOS 1n/1v and M6/M7) Some examples at Theatre - performance. The first five in this set were shot using Fuji 800 negative film - I was happy with the results but scanning and colour balance were a pain. I then went across to digital (Canon 20d > 1Dmk2 > 5D) and then eventually have settled on the combination of M8 + 5D - which suit me fine. Low light from this combination can be seen at Enrico Rava & Stefano Bollani. This was shot with M8 and 5D at 640 / 800). The set here was shot mostly at 1250 / 1600 with the same combination - the light was very poor, but the shoot worked well. Bethan / Steve

 

My 2 cents is that if you've got a LOT of images to shoot, you're better off with the M8. If you're only producing a small amount, then you can get very acceptable results with 800 iso colour negative film. My experience with high iso slide film in low mixed light has been ... mixed.

 

Hope this helps.

 

Best

 

C:

[ndjambrose]

Thanks to Ewald and Julian. Appreciate the effort thats gone in to posting those images.

 

Had hoped for a little more input, but early days yet. Maybe Neil Ambrose will find it later.

 

Rolo

 

Rolo - I've found it now :-)

 

I have tried a few of my own side-by-side comparisons between high ISO film and the M8. My own findings are that an optical print of high ISO film is far superior to a high ISO shot on the M8. But a scanned negative introduces another level of confusion, since results vary depending on the quality of the scanner, the scan software and the processing of the final scanned image. It's quite possible to have a negative that would make a superlative print, but which is far inferior when scanned.

 

This is a recent example. Both shot at f1 on the same lens in the same light probably less than a minute apart.

 

M8 at ISO 2500:

 

MP with Kodak P3200:

 

The P3200 shot is a scan from the negative, not an optical print. It has nice character but more noise that would be visible if it were an optical print, and some image loss in the highlights. This was the best scan I could get using a Coolscan 9000 ED and is inferior to what could be done in the darkroom.

 

The M8 shot was overexposed to control the banding that would otherwise appear, and required a lot of post-processing to manage the noise and get a pleasing monochrome conversion. With different post-processing it could have turned out to be a very poor result.

 

Whichever one you prefer is largely a matter of personal preference. But I don't think it's easy to draw a conclusive statement about whether film or digital is better at high speed. Too much depends on other variables beyond the original shot - not least darkroom or photoshop skills.

[Kasimir]

ambrose's picture using the Kodak P3200 illustrates what I didn't like about the use of high iso film: it's either black or white - no greys

 

There's nothing wrong about a steep gradation, and I don't wanna judge ambrose's picture as a piece of art, he made his decision on good reasoning - but I'd like to have that choice in postprocessing - not when I choose the medium.

 

Especially the T-Grain films are difficult for me to scan. If using high ISO on film, I take a Tri-X and push it one or two stops. Unfortunately I can't comment on darkroom.

[ndjambrose]

Rolo, just following up on my earlier post.

 

One thing I didn't mention is the time taken to scan and process negatives. The film frame above was in the region of 10 minutes - roughly half and half in terms of scan time and processing time. If you really need 'several hundred quality exposures' then you'll have to factor in the cost of your time and the cost of the media. Unless you have infinite free time I don't think there's anyway you could scan in that sort of quantity yourself, so you're looking at outsourcing to a lab. And a decent pro lab in London is around £18 for a print ready ultra high res ( > 60 MB) scan; probably a little less in high volume.

 

By contrast you could process several hundred digital captures quite easily in a few hours for no added expense ...

[nugat]

How about d-lux3? B&W only at ISO 800, color not advisable. f2.8, 1/20

 

 

[One Pic A Day]

Rolo, check Provia 400X, you can push it to 1600 and it looks amazing! No comparison to the M8. Really amazing film!

[tgray]

Here's three recent shots of mine in B&W to give you a sense of what I think is possible with B&W at least. I've only shot a roll or two of color 800 film but I was happy with them. A lot depends on how you meter...

 

Same subject on all three photos These are all scans - the prints from scans or in the darkroom look reasonably similar... Grain is a bit higher on these scans because they were at a low scan dpi - at a higher dpi (4000) the grain is smaller.

 

First up is P3200TMZ exposed at 3200 developed in XTOL 1:1.

 

 

Next is P3200TMZ exposed at 1600 and developed in XTOL 1:1.

 

 

Last up is Tri-X in Diafine exposed at 1250. I use this combo all the time at concerts and get very usable photos.

 

 

If you go to my concert section on flickr, you'll see a lot of photos shot with TMZ and Tri-X anywhere from 400 to 3200. I think they are perfectly usable.

[JBA]

No experience with the M8, but I reguarly shoot Tmax 3200 with my M6 and love it. That said, the contrast can vary a lot depending on the lighting situation and how it's exposed. I find it really pops in medium-low light. (I do not do my own processing or scanning and usually very little post-processing.)

 

Here are a few examples:

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/people/43733-last-women-standing.html

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/people/40410-ginza-gears-up-christmas.html

 

#s 1 and 8 here:

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/people/47673-leica-day-candidate-photos.html

 

 

Rolo, check Provia 400X, you can push it to 1600 and it looks amazing! No comparison to the M8. Really amazing film!

 

Thanks for the tip. Provia is my go-to color film. I'm definitely going to try this.

[One Pic A Day]

Thanks for the tip. Provia is my go-to color film. I'm definitely going to try this.

 

Yeah, at 800 there's no noticeable increase in grain, at 1600 just a bit and you can even go to 3200 and it's useable. It looks really funky at 3200, very special. The colors are beautiful at all speeds, never saw anything quite like it. Whole different world than the old Provia 400F, which already was pretty good.

 

Try it!

 

Cheers 1pic

[One Pic A Day]

Here are a few examples:

 

Nice shots, just looked at them. Makes me want to board a flight and fly to NRT at once...

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear