The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

leica m9 iso 800 vs 640

douglasf13

New member
Daniel can certainly correct me if I'm wrong, but it looks to me that he boosted shadows in those photos quite a bit, along with boosting the overall exposure, which would mean a pretty high ISO in the shadow areas. I'd imagine that the banding would have been an issue with either technique, unless it is an SD card issue. Oddly enough, it was the banding that I noticed when using ISO 2500 that initially led me to investigate whether the M9 was ISO-less in the first place.

I'm certainly going to keep an eye on the banding. I usually push from ISO 640 in lowlight.

p.s. Of course, this all depends on your raw converter, too. I've only tried it with LR4. Other converters may be more or less successful.
 

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
Btw, only in the latest firmware version 1.196 has Leica attempted to properly control the battery/voltage of the M9. So, depending on which memory card you use, and which activities happen simultaneously in the M9, for example storing an image and chimping, and using a higher ISO all may have an effect on the banding.

Let's hope that doesn't become an issue again in the M-240.
 

thrice

Active member
Daniel can certainly correct me if I'm wrong, but it looks to me that he boosted shadows in those photos quite a bit, along with boosting the overall exposure, which would mean a pretty high ISO in the shadow areas.
...
p.s. Of course, this all depends on your raw converter, too. I've only tried it with LR4. Other converters may be more or less successful.
Hi Douglas,
Yes, I pushed the shadows a fair bit to retain highlight detail.
I'll check the firmware and card out as this is a new M9P, I was also using an LED flash in the shot with the banding so maybe that has some EM noise :(
 
V

Vivek

Guest
I was also using an LED flash in the shot with the banding so maybe that has some EM noise :(
What kind of a LED flash were you using? If it is continuous light, you may want to check if it uses a PWM (pulse width modulator) to power the LEDs. If the pulse frequency of the PWM is not high enough, the effect is like a fluorescent tube light flicker. Many inexpensive LED lights have this problem and are unsuitable for photography (besides that it is better to have LED emitters with high CRI which again jacks up the costs).

It is highly unlikely to be EM noise.
 

thrice

Active member
Just did a quick test and very minimal banding in both cases with or without flash on an ISO160 shot pushed 5 stops. *shrug* who knows but something must have caused interference on the day.

The flash is a Manfrotto ML360HP which has a flash setting 2 stops brighter than the maximum continuous light setting.

Makes an excellent fill light in low light conditions and comes with gels to warm things up. Great in Tungsten especially.
 
Last edited:

gooomz

Member
for highest low light quality and least noise then i am thinking to shoot at iso 160 at night!

i did some initial test shots, and to me my images underexposed by 2-3 stops shot at iso 160 and pushed in aperture3 have less noise then those same images shot at iso 800.

cool stuff.
 

douglasf13

New member
for highest low light quality and least noise then i am thinking to shoot at iso 160 at night!

i did some initial test shots, and to me my images underexposed by 2-3 stops shot at iso 160 and pushed in aperture3 have less noise then those same images shot at iso 800.

cool stuff.
Good to know that this also works in Aperture3.
 

gooomz

Member
in your experience do you achieve higher image quality shooting at 160 and pushing later or is image quality the same for you?
 

douglasf13

New member
in your experience do you achieve higher image quality shooting at 160 and pushing later or is image quality the same for you?
I'd say roughly the same. I believe the pushed the version is technically cleaner, but it is pretty close, from what I've seen so far.
 

gooomz

Member
if the results are the same then why push in post rather then change the iso and me able to preview on the LCD?
 

douglasf13

New member
if the results are the same then why push in post rather then change the iso and me able to preview on the LCD?
It's faster to never change ISO, and you rarely blow highlights, thus maximizing your dynamic range.

Either way, its also proof of concept, and you can use it in more subtle ways. For instance, in the case of the OP's question, you don't have to bother with incremental ISO adjustments from ISO 640 to 800. Just keep it at ISO 640 and push in post.
 

douglasf13

New member
any idea if the monochrom is also "iso less"?
My guess would be yes, since it has the same basic sensor and ADC design, but I don't have any first hand knowledge of it, so I'm not sure.

It'll be interesting to see if the M 240 behaves similarly. If the CMOS design is more like Sony, it probably will. If it is more like Canon, it probably won't.
 
Last edited:

Double Negative

Not Available
Every camera is "ISO less." ISO is a function - be it hardware, software or both. Sensors have a built-in, or "native" sensitivity. Everything else is amplification of the signal (and as a by-product, the noise).
 

douglasf13

New member
Every camera is "ISO less." ISO is a function - be it hardware, software or both. Sensors have a built-in, or "native" sensitivity. Everything else is amplification of the signal (and as a by-product, the noise).
True, although the term "ISO-less" tends to be used in the case of cameras that don't benefit from having the ISO boosted in-camera. I'm sure that we could come up with a better term for it. Any ideas, anyone?
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
This ISO-less idea piqued my curiosity so I pulled out the X2 and did the same test.

The X2's Sony sensor is not so "ISO-less" as the M9. Taking the same sequence of exposures (ISO 100 and ISO 800) and applying +3 EV to the ISO 100 exposure brings in a color shift to the magenta/violet, even after normalizing the WB settings on both images. At 1:1, the "pushed" image's edge and detail quality was slightly degraded from the normal exposure at ISO 800. Other adjustments (to channel color saturation and tonal map) brought them closer together.

The two exposures are close but not quite the same, like the M9's were, so I'd say this technique isn't really the best methodology for the X2. I've found with proper exposure I can make very satisfactory images with the X2 even at ISO 6400 and 128000 so I'll just continue as normal with that camera. The M9 seems more worthwhile to play with this exposure technique for its other possibilities in shooting methodology.
 

douglasf13

New member
That's interesting, Godfrey. I would have guessed that the X2 would work similarly, since I believe that it has an EXMOR sensor, but I guess not. That just goes to show that it really depends on several factors.
 

algrove

Well-known member
I have been following this thread with interest. I am new to all of this so my first question is -- What is banding and where is it in the photos of the band that thrice took? I see grain, but what should I look for as far as banding goes? I know this is a stupid question, but I have to ask it anyway.

If one were to try this out on an MM what should be the ISO settings one would recommend to start with on that camera?
 
Last edited:

douglasf13

New member
I have been following this thread with interest. I am new to all of this so my first question is -- What is banding and where is it in the band photos. I see grain, but what should I look for as far as banding goes? I know this is a stupid question, but I have to ask it anyway.

If one were to try this out on an MM what should be the ISO settings one would recommend to start with on that camera?
If you look at Daniel's (thrice) second pic of the band above, you'll notice horizontal lines going across the image. That's the banding.

With the MM, I would start with trying something like ISO 5000 at the "correct" exposure, and then use the same shutter/aperture at ISO 320. If you push the ISO 320 exposure in your raw converter so that it equals the ISO 5000 file, you can see which one looks better.
 

algrove

Well-known member
Yes, I see them now. Thanks. Strange they do not appear to my eyes in the first photo. Why would it be color dependent?
 
Top