scott kirkpatrick Posted November 2, 2006 Share #41 Posted November 2, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) How do I meter to get the base exposure level? I do the same thing I usually do for my own work which is to get an exposure that gives a histogram graph that almost kisses the right side of the graph edge. ie: I hold the highlights. Again, that's how I test because that's how I really work. Thanks, that's what I wanted to know. At each ISO, the highlights in a moderate range scene like the vegetables come out placed at the right. And stay there each time you double the ISO and halve the shutter speed. When you next check for dynamic range, does the point in each image where detail disappears into the shadows move up as you increase ISO, as it would with film? And by how much? scott Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 2, 2006 Posted November 2, 2006 Hi scott kirkpatrick, Take a look here Sean Reid's M8 Part 3 Review. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
sean_reid Posted November 2, 2006 Share #42 Posted November 2, 2006 "I've been getting trolled all over the place so this is a welcome contrast." I think unfortunatey whenever a discussion on a free site is about a review on a paid site that those left out of discussion do feel a bit diassociated. The same thing I remember happening on a paid news service someone linked too once. So regretably some of that agitation you will have to (and do) take that on the chin. I know one member mentioning that he wont join purely because they wont deal in US currency at the moment as a personal protest against current world events and totally unrealated to you personally. So I wouldnt take it too personally. But you cope better than I could in that situation. I personally dont join because Im unsure being only a film rangefinder user how your lens reviews on cameras with crop factors would ulimately relate to results I would get myself. Maybe they do, just the unknown of it and the troube to deal in a foreign currency prevents me from choosing to subscribe. Im sure prospective M8 users benefit from them emensly. Just my take on things from an unsubscriber anyways. Best wishes with your endeavours though, many appear to enjoy their subscriptions. Thanks. I do try to mostly just roll with it. I do understand your thinking. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted November 2, 2006 Share #43 Posted November 2, 2006 Thanks, that's what I wanted to know. At each ISO, the highlights in a moderate range scene like the vegetables come out placed at the right. And stay there each time you double the ISO and halve the shutter speed. When you next check for dynamic range, does the point in each image where detail disappears into the shadows move up as you increase ISO, as it would with film? And by how much? scott Hi Scott, I am still thinking through what my methodology will be for the DR tests. There are a lot of potential variables and much of the dicussion I read about DR includes some overlooked factors. I need to forge my own path with DR testing that so I'm still thinking that through. Also Leica is starting to get back to me on the 8/16 bit RAW thing and I'll be writing about that as well. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted November 2, 2006 Share #44 Posted November 2, 2006 BTW, Leica is still interested in looking at firmware changes to improve access to ISO, EV and WB and we're discussing things. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott kirkpatrick Posted November 2, 2006 Share #45 Posted November 2, 2006 Also Leica is starting to get back to me on the 8/16 bit RAW thing and I'll be writing about that as well. BTW, Leica is still interested in looking at firmware changes to improve access to ISO, EV and WB and we're discussing things. Cheers, Sean Both are good news. It was reported elsewhere on this site that Leica is putting out a statement on the 16/8 bit issues. I assume you will get it before I see it on television, and can tell the rest of us. scott Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stan Raucher Posted November 2, 2006 Share #46 Posted November 2, 2006 Sean, I would like you to suggest the following ISO firmware change to Leica. When increasing the ISO values with the down arrow button, I would like the the ISO value to stop at 2500 and not roll over to 160. When decreasing the ISO value with the up arrow button, I would like the the ISO value to stop at 160 and not roll over to 2500. This way you could easily change the ISO value without looking at the back of the camera. For example, if you didn't remember what ISO you had set but wanted ISO 160, you could push the set button to get into the ISO menu (assuming that was the last setting you viewed or changed), and then push the up arrow four times. Regardless of what your inital ISO setting was, you would have scrolled and stopped at ISO 160. Press the set button again, and ISO 160 would be entered. Or press the down arrow button once, then press set and you would be at ISO 320. Obviously you could use this approach to set other ISO values as well. All with no peeking. Cheers, Stan BTW, thanks for all you're doing to help everyone with questions and concerns about the M8. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted November 2, 2006 Share #47 Posted November 2, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) I'm getting more than a statement and I'll discuss more when I can. Best, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted November 2, 2006 Share #48 Posted November 2, 2006 Sean, I would like you to suggest the following ISO firmware change to Leica. When increasing the ISO values with the down arrow button, I would like the the ISO value to stop at 2500 and not roll over to 160. When decreasing the ISO value with the up arrow button, I would like the the ISO value to stop at 160 and not roll over to 2500. This way you could easily change the ISO value without looking at the back of the camera. For example, if you didn't remember what ISO you had set but wanted ISO 160, you could push the set button to get into the ISO menu (assuming that was the last setting you viewed or changed), and then push the up arrow four times. Regardless of what your inital ISO setting was, you would have scrolled and stopped at ISO 160. Press the set button again, and ISO 160 would be entered. Or press the down arrow button once, the press set and you would be at ISO 320. Obviously you could use this approach to set other ISO values as well. All with no peeking. Cheers, Stan BTW, thanks for all you're doing to help everyone with questions and concerns about the M8. Hi Stan, You're welcome and thank you. I already have a design that I'm discussing with Leica but thanks for the input. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnll Posted November 2, 2006 Share #49 Posted November 2, 2006 Sean has done us all a great service with these reviews of the M8 (not to mention all the others) and for me at least it was $26 extremely well spent. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted November 2, 2006 Share #50 Posted November 2, 2006 Sean has done us all a great service with these reviews of the M8 (not to mention all the others) and for me at least it was $26 extremely well spent. Thanks John. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dimfinder Posted November 2, 2006 Share #51 Posted November 2, 2006 Sean, I've got a question regarding the method you chose to compare the M8 with the RD1. By using the same lens on both cameras, from the same distance, you changed the framing on both shots, efectively showing less field of view with the RD1. However, in practice, one would want to know how both compare when framing the same scene. I believe your method resulted in less difference than there really is in actual use. Can you explain your rationale for doing so? Thanks Ignacio Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodyspedden Posted November 2, 2006 Share #52 Posted November 2, 2006 Thanks. I do try to mostly just roll with it. I do understand your thinking. Cheers, Sean I think that whoever "blew the whistle" on this one really cheated the many people on the forum who DID NOT subscribe to Reid Reviews. They were getting the benefit of the many conclusions drawn but of course without all the photos, text etc. But for heavens sake that is way better than nothing. The original griper (and I assume the one who "turned Sean in" wanted the full review to be available to members of the free FM forum. So now this "dope" and all the others he has consequently affected by his actions are without any of the knowledge of the best reviewer on the web IMO. Hope he is happy Sean your M8 review is wonderful. I am getting my M8 next Wednesday and will start at full speed by virtue of your time and energy spent bringing us up the learning curve. Molto Grazie Woody Spedden Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve_l Posted November 2, 2006 Share #53 Posted November 2, 2006 Woody - Exactly! How many other camera testers actually post on other sites than their own? Sean was willing to work with everyone - actually, Fred Miranda should have given him free advertising to get Sean to participate in Fred's site! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
c6gowin Posted November 2, 2006 Share #54 Posted November 2, 2006 In the M8 Part 3 high ISO comparisons, it appeared to me (at least on my monitor) that the M8 color shifted toward magenta in some areas (e.g. potato) as the ISO was increased and as compared to the R-D1. I haven't seen anyone mention anything about this magenta cast due to ISO increases. Am I imagining this? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted November 2, 2006 Share #55 Posted November 2, 2006 Well I can say this over here they cut my signature and i called them on it and there is no response worth my time to invest my time on that thread so i said i will delete it and before I had the chance it was locked. Sorry guys the day I get censored is the day i tell people to kiss my big white arch. I am a freelancer for a reason , I take no orders or stipulations from anyone. if i don't like there issues i simply won't work for someone. So not sure how much time i will invest there again, had enough of peoples politics, I put a lot of effort out there to help people and It comes from my heart and if that is challenged than i will come up with something else or a different place to put my effort in. they just lost out on my DMR Vs M8 comparision. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sreidvt Posted November 2, 2006 Share #56 Posted November 2, 2006 Sean,I've got a question regarding the method you chose to compare the M8 with the RD1. By using the same lens on both cameras, from the same distance, you changed the framing on both shots, efectively showing less field of view with the RD1. However, in practice, one would want to know how both compare when framing the same scene. I believe your method resulted in less difference than there really is in actual use. Can you explain your rationale for doing so? Thanks Ignacio I've gotten a few questions about this and so I'll add a section explaining this in the review. There are specific reasons that I now do it that way. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robsteve Posted November 3, 2006 Share #57 Posted November 3, 2006 It would be interesting to compare the 5D and 50mm macro against the M8 and a Leica 35mm lens like the 35mm Summicron ASPH. This should give relatively the same angle of view between the two cameras. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sreidvt Posted November 3, 2006 Share #58 Posted November 3, 2006 Well I can say this over here they cut my signature and i called them on it and there is no response worth my time to invest my time on that thread so i said i will delete it and before I had the chance it was locked. Sorry guys the day I get censored is the day i tell people to kiss my big white arch. I am a freelancer for a reason , I take no orders or stipulations from anyone. if i don't like there issues i simply won't work for someone. So not sure how much time i will invest there again, had enough of peoples politics, I put a lot of effort out there to help people and It comes from my heart and if that is challenged than i will come up with something else or a different place to put my effort in. they just lost out on my DMR Vs M8 comparision. You know how I now feel about FM. Hopefully the M8 vs. DMR thread will have a new home. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sreidvt Posted November 3, 2006 Share #59 Posted November 3, 2006 It would be interesting to compare the 5D and 50mm macro against the M8 and a Leica 35mm lens like the 35mm Summicron ASPH. This should give relatively the same angle of view between the two cameras. Hi Rob, Similar FOV but different DOF which greatly complicates things. I'll add a section explaining this in the article but I'm moving more towards testing same focal length lenses for comparisons that are looking at the cameras themselves. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted November 3, 2006 Share #60 Posted November 3, 2006 Hi Rob, Similar FOV but different DOF which greatly complicates things. I'll add a section explaining this in the article but I'm moving more towards testing same focal length lenses for comparisons that are looking at the cameras themselves. Cheers, Sean Should add that it may be a couple of days before that can be added. I've got to move away from writing for a bit and get some pictures out to clients. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.