Jager Posted September 11, 2009 Share #1 Posted September 11, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) One of the biggest questions I had regarding the new M9 was its low-light, high-ISO capability. Shooting a D3 for a couple of years alongside my M8 has given me a deep appreciation for how transformative such a capability can be. When the specs for the M9 were first leaked a week ago, I cringed. 18mp and sensor cell sites the same size as on the M8 suggested perhaps little improvement in restraining noise at high ISO's. Happily, though, it appears that low-light high-ISO performance of the M9 is markedly improved over the M8. Not to D3 territory. But a very significant improvement nonetheless. Take a look at the high iso images in Jonathan Slack's review: highiso - Page 1 I am very, very encouraged by these. And I look forward to consistently shooting higher than iso 640. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 11, 2009 Posted September 11, 2009 Hi Jager, Take a look here M9 & High ISO. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
sean_reid Posted September 11, 2009 Share #2 Posted September 11, 2009 Hi Jeff, I have a more conservative opinion about the improvement in high ISO and I can talk about that more later today after I've finished reviewing my ISO tests. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
futureancient Posted September 11, 2009 Share #3 Posted September 11, 2009 From what I saw of the images by one of Leica's image consultants yesterday, I'd say the mid range ISO are 1-1.25 stops better.. the higher you go the less the improvement. I saw images shot at 640 that looked slightly better than I get at 320 on my M8. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jager Posted September 11, 2009 Author Share #4 Posted September 11, 2009 Sean, I especially look forward to your views on the subject. Like many here, I eagerly jumped on your Part One M9 review when it was posted yesterday morning. Great job, as usual. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Essemmlee Posted September 11, 2009 Share #5 Posted September 11, 2009 It seems the consensus is that there isn't much ISO gain from the M9 (1 stop, maybe 1.5) but is there much image quality gain? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
noah_addis Posted September 11, 2009 Share #6 Posted September 11, 2009 Having looked over my quick and dirty test images after spending an hour with the camera, and also looking at my M8 files shot under the same light, I may also revise my original estimate of two stops of improvement. Sort of. I still think the camera is very usable up to 1600 even for discriminating clients, if (and only if) you expose correctly. I may stretch to 2500 in a pinch, but it wouldn't be ideal. I'm thinking that at the pixel level there is a one stop advantage from the M8, maybe a tiny bit more. For me the real test is in the prints though. If the noise at 100 percent on screen looks similar between, say, the M8 at 640 and the M9 at 1250, the latter will still have some advantage in print quality at a given print size due to the extra resolution. So I need to do further testing, but it seems to me that the M9 is still a large improvement. I've ordered two... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest malland Posted September 11, 2009 Share #7 Posted September 11, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) ...I have a more conservative opinion about the improvement in high ISO... Interesting, Sean. My interest in the M9 is to know how much improvement there has been in high ISO capability, particularly in ISO 1250 and 2500. Reading some of the other threads here the consensus seems to be emerging that there is an improvement of a stop or a bit more. But that is not the the feeling I get from the high ISO pictures so far. On the M8, ISO 2500 is a hit or miss affair, rendering shots unusable even with a slight underexposure. In view of the cost, and some other design decisions of the M9 — including regression to 1m frame lines, elimination of top LCD, low resolution and elimination of sapphire on back LCD and lack of weather sealing — I would only upgrade my M8.2 if the M9 had a significant improvement in ISO 1250 and, particularly, in ISO 2500 because I'm quite happy with the image qiuality of up to ISO 640 on the M8. Look forward to reading your ISO test conclusions. Maybe this is silly, but looking at the Cuban boxer pictures on the M9 brochure with their bravely blown highlight in the extremely harsh light I was optimistic that the M9 might also have some more dynamic range than the M8, but now am not so sure. —Mitch/Potomac, MD Scratching the Surface© Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gravastar Posted September 11, 2009 Share #8 Posted September 11, 2009 One thing I've noticed is when evaluating high ISO performance none of the testers have stated the ambient temperature. CCD imagers are particularly sensitive to this, the dark current (approximate noise) doubles for every 8-10 degree C rise. This could easily account for the different opinions. Bob. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wmspa Posted September 11, 2009 Share #9 Posted September 11, 2009 Hi Jeff, I have a more conservative opinion about the improvement in high ISO and I can talk about that more later today after I've finished reviewing my ISO tests. Cheers, Sean Please just also have a look at the effect of the "automatic lens detection" option (you will probably have noticed already). If enabled, there seems to be more noise in the corners at high ISOs, probably as a result of the vignetting correction. If this is correct, Leica should introduce an option in the menu to reduce vignetting correction also when lens detection is enabled (this would be a nice option in any event). Regards Wolfgang Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted September 11, 2009 Share #10 Posted September 11, 2009 Please just also have a look at the effect of the "automatic lens detection" option (you will probably have noticed already). If enabled, there seems to be more noise in the corners at high ISOs, probably as a result of the vignetting correction. If this is correct, Leica should introduce an option in the menu to reduce vignetting correction also when lens detection is enabled (this would be a nice option in any event). Regards Wolfgang I will indeed. I already have quite a bit to say about that and have had for weeks. <G> You sir, have noted a very key point. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted September 11, 2009 Share #11 Posted September 11, 2009 ...I still think the camera is very usable up to 1600 even for discriminating clients, if (and only if) you expose correctly. I may stretch to 2500 in a pinch, but it wouldn't be ideal... Do we really need better results than this at 2500 iso? http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/1030570-post3.html Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
okram Posted September 11, 2009 Share #12 Posted September 11, 2009 I think we can always use more ISO, but this is good enough for me. Since few years ago, many people have urgent desire to shoot in the dark, handheld. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.