nugat Posted September 9, 2009 Share #1 Posted September 9, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) So says dpreview in preview...A stop gain. Given that sensor area of M9 is double that of M8 it is not much of an engineering achievement in three years, or is it? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 9, 2009 Posted September 9, 2009 Hi nugat, Take a look here M9 1250 iso = m8 640 iso. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
egibaud Posted September 9, 2009 Share #2 Posted September 9, 2009 If this is right... I am happy about my decision to move onto Canon 5D MKII Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pascal_meheut Posted September 9, 2009 Share #3 Posted September 9, 2009 New firmware already out to give better results with high ISOs. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted September 9, 2009 Share #4 Posted September 9, 2009 So says dpreview in preview...A stop gain.Given that sensor area of M9 is double that of M8 it is not much of an engineering achievement in three years, or is it? Um, with beta firmware, that's pretty good And let me just say this in passing. I've lately done a full meter measured comparison of my Nikon D3 and my M8. The M8 at ISO 640 exposes practicaly the same as the D3 at around ISO 1000+ That doesn't mean the D3 isn't better at higher ISOs; it is. But practically speaking, the M8 is punching way beyond its weight when it comes to light levels. Or my D3 is screwed up LOL!! So I fully expect a printable ISO 1600 from the M9 that is sharp and has full dynamic range (which neither the 5d2 or the d3 has above ISO 2000. They're very good, don't get me wrong, but you don't have as much exposure latitude). A usable ISO 2000 - ISO 2500 (when properly exposed) is all I need in a pinch. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted September 9, 2009 Share #5 Posted September 9, 2009 So says dpreview in preview...A stop gain.Given that sensor area of M9 is double that of M8 it is not much of an engineering achievement in three years, or is it? Sensor size as such doesn’t matter; noise depends on the pixel size which apparently hasn’t changed from the M8 to the M9. A gain of one stop is actually quite an achievement. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mauribix Posted September 9, 2009 Share #6 Posted September 9, 2009 If this is right... I am happy about my decision to move onto Canon 5D MKII If photography was just about sensors... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mauribix Posted September 9, 2009 Share #7 Posted September 9, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) i.e. oh! If only photography was only about sensors... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
egibaud Posted September 9, 2009 Share #8 Posted September 9, 2009 If photography was just about sensors... No it's about money :-( What I mean is that, the results are good, quite good but not enough for me to justify such an investment. My clients' eyes will not see the difference, my pocket will. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted September 9, 2009 Share #9 Posted September 9, 2009 No it's about money :-( What I mean is that, the results are good, quite good but not enough for me to justify such an investment. My clients' eyes will not see the difference, my pocket will. Your client's eyes will not see a difference between the 5d2 and 5d, unless you're printing extremely large or cropping extremely small. It's not always about the direct compare to the client. And, to be sure, some of them will notice the difference from Leica wide glass, which is much less distorted than Canon's wide stuff in any case. Of course, if you're shooting long, then the M isn't an option anyway. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
padraigm Posted September 9, 2009 Share #10 Posted September 9, 2009 Well looking at the DPreview the one shot taken at 1600 ISO looks pretty noisy to me. In my opinion they are still behind the curve. I will wait to see more analysis. It really all depends on the high ISO for me to make my purchase. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted September 9, 2009 Share #11 Posted September 9, 2009 Well looking at the DPreview the one shot taken at 1600 ISO looks pretty noisy to me. In my opinion they are still behind the curve. I will wait to see more analysis. It really all depends on the high ISO for me to make my purchase. Sigh. It's beta firmware on dPreview... so you can't tell anything yet. Why do you think most of the shots you've seen have been at low ISOs? Just hang on. I heard there's a firmware update today that lowers noise... there will be more to come. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.