Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2014/01/28

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Monochrom high iso test
From: john at mcmaster.co.nz (John McMaster)
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 06:36:42 +0000
References: <52E73787.3070602@jayburleson.com> <CAF8hL-F-wZhCJJykfCfvsmVfSjKDwwvyQDtcZ0-ovO0LmyPn5A@mail.gmail.com> <CABmfTOX7J8V0YC4p0S4fJY7i7tCUfGkBDOxdrmH02Opf6JrcKQ@mail.gmail.com> <80F9701439F20347874CE5E4E03C22E9E68429D7@WhizzMAIL01.whizz.org> <CAF8hL-Ejz4tx3NvMvgrP0PxOC6=3E2mty_5qzN7qy0QE21yWuw@mail.gmail.com> <80F9701439F20347874CE5E4E03C22E9E6847AA5@WhizzMAIL01.whizz.org> <CAE3QcF5qDi7nTb_=wgRPc_q_uoqmzQAKR6YXNUPQc=ZYro-+_A@mail.gmail.com> <E7AEF0CE-D2E9-481A-8758-5B28D1C3838A@gmail.com> <CAE3QcF7L_pF35dbHf0VznJkp48u9hj0RnP7ZuNFQ5XZg6ct-7A@mail.gmail.com>

The 120mm is better......

john

-----Original Message-----

I can fix that Bob. I will send you a file from the Leica S and the Summarit 
70. The quality is ridiculously good!


Cheers
Geoff
http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman


On 29 January 2014 15:28, Bob Adler <rgacpa at gmail.com> wrote:

> It's killing me...
> I keep telling myself the M is close enough... Then John goes and 
> shoves it in my face...
> Grrrrr
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> > On Jan 28, 2014, at 6:57 PM, Geoff Hopkinson <hopsternew at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > I think that these kinds of samples should come with a warning 
> > "Caution May induce symptoms of severe GAS in some viewers".
> >
> >
> > Cheers
> > Geoff
> > http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman
> >
> >
> >> On 29 January 2014 12:55, John McMaster <john at mcmaster.co.nz> wrote:
> >>
> >> A couple of examples:
> >>
> >> http://johnmcmaster.com/PAW/2013/27/content/L2003238_large.html
> >>
> >>
> >>
> http://johnmcmaster.com/PESO/LUG/05-TwilightZone/content/L2003805_HDR_
> large.html
> >>
> >> http://johnmcmaster.com/PAW/2013/41/content/L2004005_large.html
> >>
> >> http://johnmcmaster.com/PAW/2014/02/content/L2004327_large.html
> >>
> >> You can start to see the effect in these 1200 pixel images, it 
> >> looks lovely in the original......
> >>
> >> john
> >> ________________________________________
> >>
> >> OK, THAT is hard core :-)
> >>
> >> // richard <http://www.richardmanphoto.com> // 
> >> http://facebook.com/richardmanphoto
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 2:41 AM, John McMaster 
> >> <john at mcmaster.co.nz>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Ditto, I often use an ND1.8 so I can use 5000 during the day ;-)
> >>>
> >>> john
> >>>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I love the texture at ISO 5000 so much particularly in low light 
> >>> with lower contrast lenses, that I don't do anything to the noise.
> >>>
> >>> Marty
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Tuesday, 28 January 2014, Richard Man 
> >>> <richard at richardmanphoto.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Just out of curiosity, does anyone who do all sort of tricks to 
> >>>> get "better noise behaviors" etc. have good photos to show?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 12:52 PM, Jay Burleson 
> >>>> <leica at jayburleson.com<javascript:;>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> I am more apt to follow Ted's advice and just go out and shoot, 
> >>>>> but
> >>>> enough
> >>>>> interest has been raised here and on other forums for me to 
> >>>>> undertake
> >>>> this
> >>>>> absolutely non-scientific test.
> >>>>> There has been some chatter about deliberately underexposing the 
> >>>>> M9 at a lower iso and then pushing the exposure in post to get 
> >>>>> better noise results, and questions have been asked, since the 
> >>>>> Monochrom shares the
> >>>> same
> >>>>> base sensor as the M9, if that would work with it.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The answer is yes and no.
> >>>>> It is doable, but (to my eye), there is no appreciable reason to 
> >>>>> do
> >> it.
> >>>>> There is a slight (approx. 1/4 stop) gain in the highlight side 
> >>>>> of the histogram, but the overall noise is the same, and when 
> >>>>> fully processed,
> >>>> no
> >>>>> real differences.
> >>>>> It does demonstrate how much detail is available in the 
> >>>>> Monochrom
> >>>> shadows;
> >>>>> a 5 stop push on the underexposed image was just fine.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> #2171: iso 10000, -.3 stop exposure compensation, no other 
> >>>>> Lightroom adjustments.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> #2172: iso 1250, -.3 stop exposure compensation, + 3 stops 
> >>>>> exposure added in Lightroom.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> #2171A: Additional post processing in Lightroom to look correct 
> >>>>> (in my opinion).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> #2172A: Additional post processing in Lightroom to look correct 
> >>>>> (in my opinion).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The images are here:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> http://jayburleson.com/leica/misc_images/mm_iso_test/
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> Jay,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Jay Burleson Gallery
> >>>>> <http://jayburleson.com/leica/gallery/index.php/>


In reply to: Message from leica at jayburleson.com (Jay Burleson) ([Leica] Monochrom high iso test)
Message from richard at richardmanphoto.com (Richard Man) ([Leica] Monochrom high iso test)
Message from benedenia at gmail.com (Marty Deveney) ([Leica] Monochrom high iso test)
Message from john at mcmaster.co.nz (John McMaster) ([Leica] Monochrom high iso test)
Message from richard at richardmanphoto.com (Richard Man) ([Leica] Monochrom high iso test)
Message from john at mcmaster.co.nz (John McMaster) ([Leica] Monochrom high iso test)
Message from hopsternew at gmail.com (Geoff Hopkinson) ([Leica] Monochrom high iso test)
Message from rgacpa at gmail.com (Bob Adler) ([Leica] Monochrom high iso test)
Message from hopsternew at gmail.com (Geoff Hopkinson) ([Leica] Monochrom high iso test)