28mm F 2.8 ASPH & M8--impressions

[lars_bergquist]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Gentlemen (of all sexes):

 

All this is looking really hopeful. I think that with the upgrades, the M8 will be useful without filtering and much post-processing in normal daylight situations. This is important for us who use non-Leica glass occasionally. And if I have to use an IR-cutting filter under incandescent lighting -- so be it. I am in any case using a blue correction filter with neg film in those cases.

 

Which brings me to the matter of WB. That filter above is the only WB available to me with neg film. With slide film, I had the choice of daylight or tungsten -- period. So a useful manual WB with Kelvin adjustment is OK by me. The only thing I want to know now is (heresy! rank heresy!) how the M8 performs with flash.

 

The old man who remembers Kodachrome

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Jamie Roberts]

Hi Jamie,

That is a fun picture. The 28/2.8 Asph is a fine little gem, isn't it?

The image data depth of the M8 reminds me of the Oly E-1 that I have been using for three years, so I trace that to the Kodak KAF family of sensors. At times it seems that you just can't run out of image information. Those with the DMR might agree, too. My point of comparison has been the Sony sensor in the KM5D, where I have had to learn to be careful pushing images around.

BTW, thanks for all your fine profile work.

Bob

 

Bob--the M8 is different than the DMR in that while it doesn't run out of detail (it is sharp) the DMR hits a noise floor very, very quickly. The M8 doesnt't, which, well, I'm still figuratively scraping my jaw off the floor!

 

(Thanks for the kind words on the profiles--a new set is coming one of these days soon!)

[Jamie Roberts]

Jamie,

 

Unless you worked a lot on your mom in PS, she looks more like 54 than 84!

 

Did you expose normally - say a zone 6 or so for your mom’s face, then dig for the shadow detain in curves?

 

The ability to use a lower, less noisy ISO is very appealing - I hope my M8 is back on Monday.

 

Thanks,

 

Bill

 

Bill--thanks for the comments! Yes, my mom looks very young for her age No PS here...(and the shot is redder than it could be, but you get the exposure info).

 

Here's the weird thing. I didn't really expose for neutral grey at all; the camera's meter (I checked) wanted this at least another stop, maybe two, more exposed. So off to M we go .

 

Yes, I wanted the highlights, but I purposely undereposed here to retain some of the drama of the shot. I didn't expect it to be so good, though, shooting this way: I don't shoot digital this way with other cameras!!

 

So in effect, yes, just by opening up the exposure I'm getting shadow detail, but I didn't have to go messing with curves; if anything, I compressed the shot a lot with a contrast curve (this is the key to me that the camera is doing wild and wonderful things...)

 

To sum up... more than a stop under according to the meter, then just opened up in C1 like it wasn't dark, or something

[deltoid1]

Could this simply be due to the better contrast and flare performance of the Leica M lenses? I'd love to see that test done with a bad lens. Or, try your test with an uncoated filter. Love to see if there is any difference, (aside from outright flare images of the diagram.)

 

One more quick proof point, in case people think I've gone crazy or something...

 

Here is two develops of the SAME DNG above

 

1) the original develop

2) this time exposed "+2.5 stops" in C1 AND opened up more with a tone curve! I think the fact you see anything at all is astounding.

3) 100% crop of the second shot. Yes, it's breaking up, but the DMR would have gasped a lot earlier and the 1ds2 would be a bandy mess, both in direct sun highlights and shadows...