Guest Luis D Posted December 22, 2008 Share #21 Posted December 22, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) Well, if one is going to resort to carrying an incident light meter, one might as well throw an M2 in the bag as well. ......I am missing my M2 (selling mine helped fund the M8) and considering picking one up If one can carry together M8 and M2 one might as well carry a DSLR instead of both. Have you seen Mike Johnson's (Online Photographer) night shots taken on a Nikon D700 @ 2500? If you have not - take a look. No "banding", and no B.S. Just acres of smooth black. Exactly what I was saying. Latest Canon also miles above M8 in this characteristic. How does the Nikon D700 do that anyway....? Not sure, but I bet if Nikon could sell a D100 today just by adding "S" mode and some black enamel they probably would not have now the D700. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 22, 2008 Posted December 22, 2008 Hi Guest Luis D, Take a look here Night scene (banding at ISO 640). I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
pklein Posted December 22, 2008 Author Share #22 Posted December 22, 2008 Peace, brethren. I didn't mean to start a flamefest. My first shots were at ISO 640, which let me get a higher shutter speed. When I saw the banding, I switched to 320, and all was well. Next time I'll know. I was just surprised, because I hadn't encountered this before. I guess the really dark pictures I've taken all had sufficient spill light into the shadows that I didn't get to that point before. I have taken night shots before. This one was particularly difficult as I had a floodlight shining into the lens, plus the black of night. The floodlit areas of the ground were in fact blown, I just knocked them down a bit in the curve. Very wide dynamic range. What's interesting is that the banding extends into the dimmer areas of the "snow swirl." I'm not sure if this is a sensor issue or firmware that can't quite cope (at 640) with Zone 0 right next to Zone I or II, and Zone IX nearby. I'd certainly like a D700-like sensor and electronics in the M8. That plus fast lenses would be an unbeatable combo. Meanwnile, it's nice to know that the M8 I already have isn't broken. --Peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jager Posted December 23, 2008 Share #23 Posted December 23, 2008 With the M8, as all digital cameras, you want to expose for the highlights, not the shadows. More like transparencies, back in the day. Push the histogram as far to the right as you can without clipping. I agree with jaapv re: the brilliant electronics in the D3/D700. They most uncertainly are. Hopefully Leica will be able to plug those kind of electronics into an M-system form factor one day. In the meantime, the M8 does yeoman duty for a lot of us! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted December 23, 2008 Share #24 Posted December 23, 2008 But Jaap - isn't this what digital cameras should be? Under those circumstances, I hate being reminded of how poor the M8 is at higher ISOs. Hi Mani, Yes, all else being equal, it is great when a camera can deliver a really strong S/N ratio (as opposed to smoothing). Cameras like the D3 and D700 do that quite well and certainly have a higher S/N than the M8. So, if high ISO performance is crucial, they're worth thinking about. But...the M8 can do fine at 640, and sometimes at 1250, and it brings other strengths to the table. Its noise performance is an improvement over than of the DMR and I imagine the next gen. Leica DRF will improve again. Meanwhile, I deeply enjoy the M8 for what it is already. Like any camera, it is a question of weighing pros and cons. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted December 23, 2008 Share #25 Posted December 23, 2008 Hi Mani,But...the M8 can do fine at 640, and sometimes at 1250, and it brings other strengths to the table. Its noise performance is an improvement over than of the DMR and I imagine the next gen. Leica DRF will improve again. Meanwhile, I deeply enjoy the M8 for what it is already. Like any camera, it is a question of weighing pros and cons. Cheers, Sean Hi Sean - Indeed I agree with you - I rarely shoot the Epson above 400, and accept that limitation, as I rarely need more. What's more, noise in itself doesn't bother me at all - but artifacts like banding and detail-smudging annoy me in what I'd like to be a perfect camera. Such a thing never exists, I know. And as though to prove the point, when I went back to the dealer to finally buy one of the two M8s I'd looked at last weekend, they were both sold (Schönherrsfoto on Upplandsgatan, for those sceptical, disbelieving souls who may want to check). As I was feeling in a generous mood towards myself, I thereupon impulse-bought a Nikon D90 together with what was supposedly the best Nikon 50mm lens to go with it (I have no idea if this is true). A toy in some respects, but in some ways I was glad not to invest any more money in the M-system right now, and if it's fun I'll exchange the 50 for the Zeiss version and see how it goes from there. Thanks for always being civil and informative - my subscription to your site lapsed more because of a change of job (and therefore email address) than any active choice. I'll surely sign-up again sometime next year - worth every penny! Merry Christmas to all! Mani Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.