charlesphoto99 Posted September 10, 2009 Share #21 Posted September 10, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Says 2500 on the exif. Here's one at 1250 of the Leica rep trying to get me a camera for next week! (crossing fingers). These are with the 50 Lux asph. I think it's also important to keep in mind that the Leica M is essentially an editorial camera. If one expects MF quality at high iso then this isn't the camera (or maybe any camera, film or digital). I haven't printed these yet but I have a feeling they will look nice as the noise is very uniform, film like, sharp, and much like one might add with Alien Skin. Overall I'm excited to take pics where I couldn't before with the M8 though within reason. I definitely won't hesitate to use 640-1000 as I would 320 with the M8. 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/96164-hope-this-banding-is-just-pre-release/?do=findComment&comment=1027525'>More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 10, 2009 Posted September 10, 2009 Hi charlesphoto99, Take a look here Hope this banding is just pre-release.... I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
kalina Posted September 10, 2009 Share #22 Posted September 10, 2009 The banding doesn't show up in any of the other photos, so there's something about the picture itself. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kalina Posted September 10, 2009 Share #23 Posted September 10, 2009 After reviewing the pics a few times, I must say that the concert pics really stood out for me. I would be proud to show pics like that to my friends and they would be frickin' amazed if they saw pics like that. The portraits are okay. I'll let the artist have final say as to what he or she was intending there. The row of buildings at night scene is very nice. If this is all handheld photography, it's amazing. The M9 is really starting to approach film-like quality for me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted September 10, 2009 Share #24 Posted September 10, 2009 Hopefully everyone has updated the shipping firmware to a new 1.02 . I think many of folks are shooting without the latest firmware and not getting the results they are looking for. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlesphoto99 Posted September 10, 2009 Share #25 Posted September 10, 2009 Hopefully everyone has updated the shipping firmware to a new 1.02 . I think many of folks are shooting without the latest firmware and not getting the results they are looking for. My examples are with latest FW. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
35mmSummicron Posted September 10, 2009 Share #26 Posted September 10, 2009 what is the difference? I handled a few M9's with fw 0.922 the FW that's downloadable on the leica site doesn't list what's changed. Hopefully everyone has updated the shipping firmware to a new 1.02 . I think many of folks are shooting without the latest firmware and not getting the results they are looking for. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted September 10, 2009 Share #27 Posted September 10, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Thats the question of the day and the M9's may have been packed for shipping a month ago and continued to work on the firmware. One fella had .0992 I believe and now it is up to 1.02 . There had to be some change and as a beta tester on the M8 firmware , lot's of things can change in a short period of time, Without a camera in my hands i could not begin to tell you. But if there is a number change than something was added or tweaked. All I am saying is get on a level playing field with the latest software, this way you know whatever change was made you have it. Charles thanks for letting me know that. I see a lot of red in some files and I have a feeling some of that maybe from the shipping firmware and not 1.02 reason why I am questioning things Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted September 10, 2009 Share #28 Posted September 10, 2009 Charles looking back at your image I do see some red in the skin tones but more importantly that Rebel sign looks like a false red. Is that sign true to form in color. Obviously also none of the raw converters are updated either and that can be the reason as well and maybe more the issue Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
eldelbo Posted September 10, 2009 Share #29 Posted September 10, 2009 Got to agree with the comments about the colours. But the high ISO performance is looking extremely encouraging. Those 2500s seem pretty useable and that's most definitely not the case with the M8. Now just have to hope that stock levels start to fill out soon... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlesphoto99 Posted September 10, 2009 Share #30 Posted September 10, 2009 Charles looking back at your image I do see some red in the skin tones but more importantly that Rebel sign looks like a false red. Is that sign true to form in color. Obviously also none of the raw converters are updated either and that can be the reason as well and maybe more the issue Who knows? Yeah early days with it. I did notice quite a bit of the "M8 red" in images. As well the AWB was all over the place from shot to shot Still didn't stop me from ordering it. . Also, camera stores would do themselves a big favor to install decent lighting! About a half dozen different light sources and temps going on here. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted September 10, 2009 Share #31 Posted September 10, 2009 What's clear from the high ISO shots in flat light, btw, is that you've got *at least* a stop more shadow detail there that is not encumbered with noise. I'm hoping that's 2 stops soon My quick impression too, also seeing at other pics in other threads... regarding the above pic...to be sincere, would it be a M8 shot, I'd say it's at 640... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
devils-advocate Posted September 10, 2009 Share #32 Posted September 10, 2009 My first impressions are that 400 and under are functionally free of noise (it's visible in zone 1 areas with smooth textures, but no offensively). Nosie apepars with some force at ISO 800, but it is mostly luminance noise. Manageable in colour, but actually fairly attractive in B&W. In real-world shots of shrubbery and such, there is no noticeable noise at 800 -- only in smooth, dark tones. ISO 1600 is noisy. It cleans up OK in LR, but it's not competitive with a D700, for example. ISO 2500 is useable. That's a big improvement over the M8. There is a lot of both colour and luminance noise at this level, however. Again, even LR's primitive noise reduction makes it passable. I suspect Noise Ninja or Noiseware would do well on it. IN B&W, it looks like TMZ (the film, not Harvey Lewin). Is it a stop better than the M8? From a very early view, I'd say so. No banding or other nonsense (except for some colour-wierdness, which si not surprising given that all conversions are down without a profile). I would guess that there is a LOT elss on-chip noise reduction going on here than in most dslrs. I am thinking of the 5DII specifically, which I have found unusable at 2500 on a number of occasions, and very 'clean', but a bit smeary at 1250. Perfect? Far from it. Better? For sure. Good enough? That's personal. - N. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.