Site Sponsors
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 51 to 68 of 68

Thread: leica m9 iso 800 vs 640

  1. #51
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    2,058
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: leica m9 iso 800 vs 640

    Quote Originally Posted by douglasf13 View Post
    That pattern is pretty obvious on my 24" Matte IPS, 15" Macbook Retina, and my smart phone, fwiw. I wonder what is going on with your monitor, if you're not able to see the banding in some of these pics?
    The banding is clear to me with this monitor on the green image, once you told me what to look for. So that is good.

  2. #52
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    2,058
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: leica m9 iso 800 vs 640

    @douglasf13,Vivek and Double Negative--

    Could you kindly look at the same image on the LUF under R lenses "First Try-MM + APO 4/280" and tell me if the same problem occurs with this image on your monitors? Thanks.
    Last edited by algrove; 28th December 2012 at 20:40.

  3. #53
    Not Available
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,864
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: leica m9 iso 800 vs 640

    Yup, I see it on that version also. So I guess that would rule out host-side (forum attachment) manipulation of the image.

    Weird that the Air doesn't show it either.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  4. #54
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    2,058
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: leica m9 iso 800 vs 640

    I sent the same image to 3 different friends with Mac's and they do not see it either. That was why I thought as you say host-side interference. Guess not.
    I also just re-calibrated my monitor, just in case, but no change for me. Thanks for checking.

  5. #55
    Not Available
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,864
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: leica m9 iso 800 vs 640

    I'll double check both on my normal (desktop) monitor tomorrow also.

  6. #56
    Senior Member douglasf13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, California, USA
    Posts
    1,965
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: leica m9 iso 800 vs 640

    Quote Originally Posted by algrove View Post
    @douglasf13,Vivek and Double Negative--

    Could you kindly look at the same image on the LUF under R lenses "First Try-MM + APO 4/280" and tell me if the same problem occurs with this image on your monitors? Thanks.
    Yep, there's still that waffle pattern, at least on my Macbook Retina.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  7. #57
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    354
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: leica m9 iso 800 vs 640

    I shoot a lot at night and for me every stop counts and I know Leica has fast glass and can shoot at a slower shutter speed but I was wondering about the sensor iso compared to nikon/canon/sony?

    seems to me that the m9 is maybe about 2-3 stops behind when talking about usable images and only talking about sensor iso. is that right?

  8. #58
    Not Available
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,864
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: leica m9 iso 800 vs 640

    Checked both on my normal (decent but calibrated) desktop monitor - same pattern.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  9. #59
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    2,058
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: leica m9 iso 800 vs 640

    Quote Originally Posted by douglasf13 View Post
    Yep, there's still that waffle pattern, at least on my Macbook Retina.
    Is the pattern like a screen, like a window screen. Or is it like the pattern like up at the very top of the getDPI screen we all see?
    Last edited by algrove; 29th December 2012 at 18:45.

  10. #60
    Not Available
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,864
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: leica m9 iso 800 vs 640

    Gridded, cubic - like the GetDPI background image, yes.

  11. #61
    Senior Member jstaben's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    291
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: leica m9 iso 800 vs 640

    So does this all really mean the actual images of say the new "M" would look no better at high ISO than the M9 adjusted in post? In other words, that the new "M" with high ISO ability will only get you that ability to view those low-light shots properly in the LCD but other than that you could get to the same image with the M9 and adjusting it later?

  12. #62
    Senior Member edwardkaraa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Bangkok
    Posts
    1,470
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: leica m9 iso 800 vs 640

    Not at all. If the M is 2 stops better than the M9 as claimed, whatever PP you can do with the M9 files, you can do the same with the M files with 2 stops advantage.

    Quote Originally Posted by jstaben View Post
    So does this all really mean the actual images of say the new "M" would look no better at high ISO than the M9 adjusted in post? In other words, that the new "M" with high ISO ability will only get you that ability to view those low-light shots properly in the LCD but other than that you could get to the same image with the M9 and adjusting it later?
    M262 ZM 25/2.8 35/1.4 50/2 85/2

  13. #63
    Senior Member jstaben's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    291
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: leica m9 iso 800 vs 640

    Ah I see now that makes more sense. Is there some point with possible differences with the CCD vs. CMOS sensor though?

  14. #64
    Senior Member edwardkaraa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Bangkok
    Posts
    1,470
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: leica m9 iso 800 vs 640

    Quote Originally Posted by jstaben View Post
    Ah I see now that makes more sense. Is there some point with possible differences with the CCD vs. CMOS sensor though?
    If anything, CMOS are better in noise performance, while CCD are better in low iso tonality and color. There are many variables though.
    M262 ZM 25/2.8 35/1.4 50/2 85/2

  15. #65
    New Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    19
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: leica m9 iso 800 vs 640

    Interesting.

    I am not sure what the advantage is though if the result is the same, or is pushed better ?

    I get the don't over expose point but if you are significantly under with your target exposure how do you pick the right setting ? Set the EV to - something, like 1, 2 or 3 stops ?

    I tend to pick ISO for a shoot and that's it

  16. #66
    New Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    19
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: leica m9 iso 800 vs 640

    PS why are the M9 noise graphs non linear and will this non linearity be matched by the LR exposure increase process ?

  17. #67
    New Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    19
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: leica m9 iso 800 vs 640

    PPS won't lifting exposure in LR also bring an emphasis on the mid tones, it would be interesting to try a grey scale for the test

  18. #68
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,931
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: leica m9 iso 800 vs 640

    Quote Originally Posted by IWC Doppel View Post
    ... I get the don't over expose point but if you are significantly under with your target exposure how do you pick the right setting ? Set the EV to - something, like 1, 2 or 3 stops ?

    I tend to pick ISO for a shoot and that's it
    You just adjust until you get the results you want. Your eye is the discriminator. You can work pretty much as you do now, except that when light values become such that you are underexposing by a couple of stops the LCD review display will show you a very dark image and the histogram won't be useful. There's obviously a range in which this technique is viable ... I think 3-4 EV underexposure is getting close to the limits of the sensor for good results.

    The thing to test to your satisfaction is whether whatever raw process you are using does a better job in boosting the ISO than the in-camera ISO setting does. If it does, then use the technique. If the camera proves better, or you want the LCD review to be viable, use the camera setting. Always be mindful of the limits of the sensor AND the raw processor that you use.

    Quote Originally Posted by IWC Doppel View Post
    PS why are the M9 noise graphs non linear and will this non linearity be matched by the LR exposure increase process ?
    No idea. I never looked at any noise graphs. I'm not sure whether the question makes sense.

    Quote Originally Posted by IWC Doppel View Post
    PPS won't lifting exposure in LR also bring an emphasis on the mid tones, it would be interesting to try a grey scale for the test
    The Exposure (EV compensation) adjustment is a linear bias offset of all values in the image. The Contrast, Highlights, Shadows, Whites, Blacks, and Clarity adjustments change the shape of the curve within the black point and white point settings: these are non-linear adjustments.

    I didn't shoot a gray scale, just used the two test images I already showed to test this.

    Making the same exposure at the ISO 1250 setting and again at the ISO 160 setting, and then applying +3 EV via the Exposure slider to the ISO 160 exposure, nets the exact same result, with output histograms that are so close as to be identical (they're not exact as I didn't have the camera on a tripod so the scene is shifted slightly).

    G

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •