Jamie Roberts Posted September 10, 2009 Share #81 Posted September 10, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hhhhmmm, perhaps have been too long before a monitor during the last days...Banding? I don't see it. Can you give an example - perhaps in the other thread? Me either--haven't seen any banding on any M9 shots yet. Tim, care to post? BTW--all digital cameras will band at the extent of their ability to amplify the sensor information. But from what I've seen so far at ISO 1250 - 2000 there's nothing like that on a normally exposed shot yet (which means a response out to ISO 6400 in shadows at least). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 10, 2009 Posted September 10, 2009 Hi Jamie Roberts, Take a look here M9 ISO comparison. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Aldophoto Posted September 10, 2009 Share #82 Posted September 10, 2009 LOL!! I use it all the time, and to me it's totally fine, and completely comparable to a d3 at ISO 1000 (in terms of light gathering too).Interesting Jamie, I guess if you could post a comparison it would be helpfull.Thanks, Aldo Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ulrikft Posted September 10, 2009 Share #83 Posted September 10, 2009 I actually think that people have to remember that this is a 100% crop from an 18MP file. It retains detail well and looks suprisingly good imo. Resize it down to d3 size and compare, and I don't think you are left with a 2 stop difference, closer to 1 maybe? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackal Posted September 10, 2009 Share #84 Posted September 10, 2009 this is internally done by Nikon/Canon/Sony and cannot be entirely switched off.So when doing noise-comparisons keep that in mind and don't compare RAW-conversions directly. BINGO ! DSLRs have a lot of noise reduction going on in camera so compare like with like Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nugat Posted September 10, 2009 Share #85 Posted September 10, 2009 They're because of the combination of glass, the Kodak CCD (which has Kodak color filters, after all) and the lack of anti-alias filter on the sensor. The tradeoff with CCDs has always been noise compared with the Canon and Nikon / Sony CMOS designs. But the medium format backs are all still CCD to the best of my knowledge. Read this writeup from several years ago-CMOS was still the poor cousin then. HowStuffWorks "What are CCD or CMOS image sensors in a digital camera?" Hard work by Canon and Sony elevated CMOS to no 1. Inherently CCD have higher fill ratio (percantage of active lightgathering surface), in CMOS every photosite is additionally blocked from the front by circuits. Indeed, Medium Format is CCD, the big problem is heat though which increases with amplifier gain. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tashley Posted September 10, 2009 Author Share #86 Posted September 10, 2009 Hhhhmmm, perhaps have been too long before a monitor during the last days...Banding? I don't see it. Can you give an example - perhaps in the other thread? Sure, for you and Jamie look at this one Toke posted - look at the top left area. Clear banding IMHO... http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/attachments/leica-m9-forum/161100d1252536136-i-have-m9-l9995255.jpg Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ennjott Posted September 10, 2009 Share #87 Posted September 10, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) But CCD-based cameras usually don't use noise-reduction in RAW-files while this is internally done by Nikon/Canon/Sony and cannot be entirely switched off. That's incorrect. Canon raw files are not noise reduced, and Nikon files only in certain cases. ACR on the other hand applies NR to all raw images. Anyway, I think the M9's high ISO is not stellar but alright. The 5D2 is better at 3200 (its sensors' top ISO speed), but pushed to 6400 it's already showing banding. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
georg Posted September 10, 2009 Share #88 Posted September 10, 2009 "That's incorrect. Canon raw files are not noise reduced, and Nikon files only in certain cases." No, CMOS-sensors have to use internal filtering/correction the achieve usable results, the pixels have a too small light-sensitive area and some other effects due to the different amplification-process. This is not the NR that can be switched off in the menus, some of it is even done before AD-conversion. That's why high-iso with CMOS-cameras always looks more like filtered CCD-images - they are filtered. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thehouseflogger Posted September 10, 2009 Share #89 Posted September 10, 2009 the D3x has a 1.5-2 stop advantage over the m9. but i had expected that (kodak CCD after all).peter People I am going to own up and say that I do not fully understand what is meant by 1 or 2 or whatever stop improvement. Could somebody please explain very simply what is meant here for me. I am trying to come to terms with my decision making process over selling my DSLR kit and going completely M digital (I already own a M8 and I cannot use this solely for my work). Best wishes to all, Guy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted September 10, 2009 Share #90 Posted September 10, 2009 Guy,two stops improvement means that you can use 1600 like you would use 400 and get the same noise (OK M9 steps run a bit differently but that is the general idea.) From what I know of your work and what I have seen here of the camera (waiting for mine) I think it would suit your needs perfectly. I think Morgan will even be able to supply pink leather (just kidding) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nugat Posted September 10, 2009 Share #91 Posted September 10, 2009 Guy, it means that you can use 1600 like you would use 400 and get the same noise (OK M9 steps run a bit differently but that is the general idea.) That's two stops to be precise. DPreview claim that 1250ISO on M9 looks like 640ISO on M8--one stop. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted September 10, 2009 Share #92 Posted September 10, 2009 ACR on the other hand applies NR to all raw images. Only if you accept the presets, which can be easily changed. Has anybody tried noise-handling like on the M8 yet? ( switch NR nearly off in ACR, switch sharpening off in ACR etc) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
georg Posted September 10, 2009 Share #93 Posted September 10, 2009 We tried to compare noise-performance with stops advantage/disadvantage, so a 1 stop advantage would mean that you could use 800ASA with the same noise as 400ASA or 3200ASA instead of 1600ASA. It's problematic and misleading because it's not a linear function. The M8 for example offers excellent 400ASA (320ASA -1/3EV) but horrible 2500ASA, the internal noise-reduction in CMOS-cameras is part of the problem. The D3X for example behaves similar to the A900 in lower ISOs but beyond that, noise-reduction kicks in giving different results (with the same sensor). From what I've seen from yesterday you can use 800ASA very well and 1600ASA in certain situations, while a D3X can be used up to 3200ASA in certain situations (forget about "clean" and "noiseless" marketing bs). But for very demanding work (also regarding DR) I would be careful with everything beyond 400ASA - with Leica, Canon, Sony or Nikon. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted September 10, 2009 Share #94 Posted September 10, 2009 That's two stops to be precise. DPreview claim that 1250ISO on M9 looks like 640ISO on M8--one stop.Edited one microsecond after your post. I was only explaining the principle. There are posters claiming two stops already, lets see what the verdict is in a couple of months, when we are comfortable with the files. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thehouseflogger Posted September 10, 2009 Share #95 Posted September 10, 2009 Thank you Jaapv and Nugat. So it is the doubling of the ISO which is a stop. Say in another example: A two stop improvement would be 160 to 640 (or vica versa whichever way you look at it!) Jaap - my pink M8 is now lizard grey - looks great. Len said he wouldnt touch it with a barge pole if it was pink! I have a 85mm 1.2 L which lives on a IdMkII. How much will I have to pay to get this kind of low light (or v. narrow DOF) portraiture set up, on an M? Do you think I need to sell my 24mm 2.8 and buy the faster lux, as I am comparing this with a 35mm 1.4L and a 1dsMkII. OH HELL I am in a real quandary here! Guy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted September 10, 2009 Share #96 Posted September 10, 2009 I am the wrong person to ask;) I am over the moon with my 24 Summilux. Having said that, the 2.8 is one of the best lenses Leica ever built and if you don't need/want the speed or the DOF I would save some money there. As for the long lens, a used Summilux 75 should set you back about 1500 GBP if you shop around a bit. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Overgaard Posted September 10, 2009 Share #97 Posted September 10, 2009 People I am going to own up and say that I do not fully understand what is meant by 1 or 2 or whatever stop improvement. Could somebody please explain very simply what is meant here for me. I am trying to come to terms with my decision making process over selling my DSLR kit and going completely M digital (I already own a M8 and I cannot use this solely for my work). Best wishes to all, Guy Basically, all dials on a camera is 1 stop: Every time you change ISO, you change one stop by doubling or halving the sensitivity. ISO 100, 200, 400, 800, 1600 is steps of doubling the sensitivity (ISO is just short of International Standardization Organization why its irrelevant term. It really is about sensitivity). Every time you change shutter speed, you change one stop. Every step from 1/60, 1/125, 1/250, 1/500, etc is reducing the time the sensor is exposed to light. Every time you change aperture, stop change one stop. Every jump from f/1.4, f/2.0, f/2.8 etc is halving the hole through the lens and how much light gets through. As Leica lenses are optimized to work their best fully open, there's no reason to work the aperture unless there's too much sunshine, or you want sharpness in the front and background. That leaves ISO and shutter time the two parameters to work with, and if you keep the ISO set at one place, life will be very easy. Just turn the shutter dial back and forth and occasionally change the ISO if there's very little light and you haven't got a Noctilux f/0.95 in the bag. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thehouseflogger Posted September 10, 2009 Share #98 Posted September 10, 2009 I am the wrong person to ask;) I am over the moon with my 24 Summilux. Having said that, the 2.8 is one of the best lenses Leica ever built. I know you are! I don't want to throw the baby out with the bath water here - plus (and we've been here a million times) I'm in real danger of decreditbusting myself! Anybody want to buy my JLC Grande Date 18CT (?) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thehouseflogger Posted September 10, 2009 Share #99 Posted September 10, 2009 Basically, all dials on a camera is 1 stop: Every time you change ISO, you change one stop by doubling or halving the sensitivity. ISO 100, 200, 400, 800, 1600 is steps of doubling the sensitivity (ISO is just short of International Standardization Organization why its irrelevant term. It really is about sensitivity). Every time you change shutter speed, you change one stop. Every step from 1/60, 1/125, 1/250, 1/500, etc is reducing the time the sensor is exposed to light. Every time you change aperture, stop change one stop. Every jump from f/1.4, f/2.0, f/2.8 etc is halving the hole through the lens and how much light gets through. As Leica lenses are optimized to work their best fully open, there's no reason to work the aperture unless there's too much sunshine, or you want sharpness in the front and background. That leaves ISO and shutter time the two parameters to work with, and if you keep the ISO set at one place, life will be very easy. Just turn the shutter dial back and forth and occasionally change the ISO if there's very little light and you haven't got a Noctilux f/0.95 in the bag. Thank you for your time Guy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nugat Posted September 10, 2009 Share #100 Posted September 10, 2009 I guess the term "stop" coming from the analogue cameras with dials that "stopped" or "clicked" at each step/position?? Basically, all dials on a camera is 1 stop: Every time you change ISO, you change one stop by doubling or halving the sensitivity. ISO 100, 200, 400, 800, 1600 is steps of doubling the sensitivity (ISO is just short of International Standardization Organization why its irrelevant term. It really is about sensitivity). Every time you change shutter speed, you change one stop. Every step from 1/60, 1/125, 1/250, 1/500, etc is reducing the time the sensor is exposed to light. Every time you change aperture, stop change one stop. Every jump from f/1.4, f/2.0, f/2.8 etc is halving the hole through the lens and how much light gets through. As Leica lenses are optimized to work their best fully open, there's no reason to work the aperture unless there's too much sunshine, or you want sharpness in the front and background. That leaves ISO and shutter time the two parameters to work with, and if you keep the ISO set at one place, life will be very easy. Just turn the shutter dial back and forth and occasionally change the ISO if there's very little light and you haven't got a Noctilux f/0.95 in the bag. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.