yanidel Posted October 4, 2008 Share #21 Posted October 4, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) To me, ISO2500 is unusable. I'd rather shoot at 1250 under-exposed by one stop and post-process if needed Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 4, 2008 Posted October 4, 2008 Hi yanidel, Take a look here ISO 2500 anyone?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Woody Campbell Posted October 4, 2008 Share #22 Posted October 4, 2008 Here are a few. Secrets to success are (1) convert in C1, and (2) expose properly - if you have to dig for shadow detail in post you're lost. Key issues are focus and camera and subject movement because you are typically up against the camera's and your own limits. I have a bit of astigmatism which complicates split image focusing. Low level available light is typically harsh and hard to control. Available light at ISO 2500 is fine for personal work (or work where you can plan and re-shoot or to supplement flash work) - you can produce some sensational images. If you're being paid to bring home images in an event or other similar setting, flash makes more sense. I haven't used noise reduction heroics in any of these images - just the tools in C1. 35mm 'lux wide open: 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! Ditto: Nocti wide open exposed by candlelight. One of my rare keepers with this lens, which I've sold. Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Ditto: Nocti wide open exposed by candlelight. One of my rare keepers with this lens, which I've sold. ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/64390-iso-2500-anyone/?do=findComment&comment=675280'>More sharing options...
SJP Posted October 4, 2008 Share #23 Posted October 4, 2008 I find it is usable but with a very low hit rate, these two recent ones I like. In this case I was also using -2/3 EV which is not clever at 2500 ISO (the beer stabilised the shots but not my remaining brain cell). Maybe the new firmware makes some difference in that respect. For 160-640 ISO I am now using 0 EV compensation & that seems to work better than before. Cafe Ancien Cinema, Vianden, Luxembourg Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dpattinson Posted October 5, 2008 Share #24 Posted October 5, 2008 I use it quite often at night. Generally I convert to black and white. I process the raw files in C1, and convert to BW in CS3. I usually dial in +1/3 comp when shooting at night if using AE, however in the street I often just set exposure manually. Some examples: Flickr: Search travelight's photostream I have noticed that in general the noise is much less apparent in prints than on screen, and that I get better results if I allow light sources to blow out and try for correct placement of skintones. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Ash Posted October 5, 2008 Share #25 Posted October 5, 2008 There is a related topic at the rangefinderforum showing impressive possibilities when proper workflow is applied: Post your ISO 2500 Shots - Rangefinderforum.com Regards Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SJP Posted June 17, 2009 Share #26 Posted June 17, 2009 Frank, Some examples here at 2500 ISO and -2/3 EV and these were the "best" of the bunch. Click "slideshow" for viewing the whole lot. Basically this is not a pretty sight although some are +/- OK for atmosphere. Maybe further tweaking in C1 4.8.1 would help somewhat but I doubt it. (This was processed via C1 3.7.4 or whatever the version is that comes with the camera). Lesson 1: use +1/3 EV or 0 EV at 2500 ISO (Note & concede: this was operator error and has nothing to do with the M8 per-se) Lesson 2: 2500 ISO is only marginally useful Lesson 3: the rejection rate at 2500 ISO is very high, except possibly for a small "snapshot" size print Lesson 4: if possible avoid ISO 1250 as well Does that make the M8 a bad camera? No way, but high ISO is pretty challenging and AFAIK only a few much more experienced photographers than I have managed to produce useful results. The rejection rate will remain high I expect. I would propose you experiment further and you will find out for yourself that it is not at all easy. Succes! Stephen Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shootist Posted June 17, 2009 Share #27 Posted June 17, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) My biggest problem with ISO 2500 is not the overall noise but the loss of sharpness and clarity at that ISO. Yes it is the amount of noise taking away that sharpness/clarity. I've also found if you shoot JPEG only in B&W the images aren't that bad. Better then converting to B&W afterwards. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicoleica Posted June 17, 2009 Share #28 Posted June 17, 2009 At the risk of being tied to a stake and lightly roasted, I have to comment here. Go back a few years, and how many of us would even use ISO 400 colour film unless we absolutely had to? Yet now we seem to get all upset when ISO 2500 gives us a result that is far better in most cases! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted June 17, 2009 Share #29 Posted June 17, 2009 Nicole, high ISO performance is the new pixel count. With film I'd shoot maybe a dozen rolls of Neopan 1600 a year. Never anything faster than that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicoleica Posted June 17, 2009 Share #30 Posted June 17, 2009 Nicole, high ISO performance is the new pixel count. With film I'd shoot maybe a dozen rolls of Neopan 1600 a year. Never anything faster than that. I had guessed that it was a 'My ISO's faster than your ISO.' kind of situation. My favourite B&W film was Agfa Ortho. (ISO 12) Then you needed a fast lens and a steady hand, but the results were worth it. I've never used any film faster than 400, and even with digital cameras I very rarely go over 160/200. But I'm an old bat who grew up with slow films. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SJP Posted June 17, 2009 Share #31 Posted June 17, 2009 I agree completely that instead of complaining we should be very happy with what we can do. I recall using Agfa dia-direct B&W slide film in the same low iso ballpark which was great fun especially inside a church at 1s handheld Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted June 17, 2009 Share #32 Posted June 17, 2009 Take a look at the original un-noise reduced image. You can see the banding(I call it griding) in the blacks of the window. There is a distinct pattern. I've brought this up before but noone can explain to me why it's in such a regular pattern. Nor why Leica cannot solve this in firmware since it's such a regular pattern. Does anyone know if there is a third party software that addresses the griding / banding directly? This is probably ACR or in-camera jpg. C1 is far better at this. Another essential: Switch off ALL sharpening in RAW conversion. That alone will halve the noise in the end result, even with post-sharpening. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rondeb Posted June 17, 2009 Share #33 Posted June 17, 2009 OK. Saw this thread and it really peaked my interest for the iso 2500 quality. I shoot with a Canon 1D MK3 along with my M8u and, as you know, the Canon has amazing high iso ability. Well.... hold the phone. I shot a couple quick snaps with the M8 at 2500 and intentionally over exposed just a tad to make sure shadow detail was present and I got a very surprising result. My initial impression is that 2500 is MUCH better than I expected when exposed this way. Very close to the Canon even. I'm going to do a little side by side later to see what results are head to head. Here's a 2500 sample - in color - to show color noise and luminance noise. Best, Ron 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/64390-iso-2500-anyone/?do=findComment&comment=935403'>More sharing options...
yanidel Posted June 17, 2009 Share #34 Posted June 17, 2009 I would suggest doing the same experiment in low light, I am pretty sure you will not get to the same conclusions. When light is sufficient like in your shots, this is less of an issue but of course, there is then no need to use ISO2500. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fotomiguel Posted June 17, 2009 Share #35 Posted June 17, 2009 I always try to adapt my way of shooting to the different conditions. If I use the M8, I can't use more than 640 iso. In this case I help myself with the small leica table tripod but over my chest. If I want to print it, I can do it big size. I don't like to shoot for tiny prints or just for computer view. I would like to have the new shutter (I still have the M8 not upgraded) but I think I will wait until the M9!!!! 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/64390-iso-2500-anyone/?do=findComment&comment=935445'>More sharing options...
jaapv Posted June 17, 2009 Share #36 Posted June 17, 2009 Yes, but you might be still, and the subject moving. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dpattinson Posted June 17, 2009 Share #37 Posted June 17, 2009 I don't think it's so much a matter of the amount of light, as it is the contrast range. If the light is dim and low contrast, then you are in trouble. If it's dim, but there is contrast, then 2500 works out pretty nicely (for me at least). I have quite a few high iso shots up on flickr. The older ones not so good before I realized that underexposing was a bad idea. The later ones much better when I realized that I needed to let some highlights blow out to get good detail where I wanted it. If anyone is interested, the majority of them are here. I'm happy to answer any questions about post processing Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fotomiguel Posted June 17, 2009 Share #38 Posted June 17, 2009 If the subject moves, no shot. For me is better to find a possible subject for my real limitations. I like to enjoy the files. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptarmigan Posted June 17, 2009 Share #39 Posted June 17, 2009 Well I'm totally 'new boy' here as I haven't had the M8 for more than a few days. I was intrigued by this thread/subject as my D2x has no chance at even 1600. Here is a snap-shot in my home office. I used CS3/ACR and I haven't got to grips with CS1 yet M8, 35 cron - ISO 2500 1/45th sec @ f2.5 (handheld). No NR, minor WB adjustment and mild sharpening for web. Impressive retention of detail, colour pretty good 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! 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/64390-iso-2500-anyone/?do=findComment&comment=935477'>More sharing options...
plasticman Posted June 17, 2009 Share #40 Posted June 17, 2009 At the risk of being tied to a stake and lightly roasted, I have to comment here. Go back a few years, and how many of us would even use ISO 400 colour film unless we absolutely had to? Yet now we seem to get all upset when ISO 2500 gives us a result that is far better in most cases! But if your attitude is that there should be no technological progress then why use digital at all? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.