View Full Version : M8 realities
It's been awhile now since the first digital Leica M has hit the streets, a few of my friends at Magnum are using them among other pros I know. I have had real issues in having my $3,000 Leica glass's peripheral bokeh cropped as well, so this is one of the reasons I have held off, everything I use is full frame and I notice how positive this is in my daily work. But....
As some of you might now, I am shooting a large and long term film project. With the exception of an Xpan, I am doing this almost exclusively on Leica M cameras.
So when I am shooting this project, my Canon gear sits at home until I need to go shoot stock, commercial, deadline editorial, etc.
I am starting to consider the M8 in replacing one of my 5D's and a couple of Canon lenses so I can have a digital with me. But, I have some questions:
1. How is the battery life, what affects it, how is it in the cold?
2. How is the camera in the cold in general? I am not talking 30F, more like 0 and below 0.
3. When using the 28 Summicron ( 6 bit ), what kind of VF obstruction do you encounter?
4. Since IR cut filters are needed, does Leica supply at least one if not more and can I get a 43mm one for my LHSA 50 aspheric?
5. When using film M's and the M8 together, how much of a pain is it to keep swapping filters? This is key for me, because the film M will always come first.
6. How many raw files does one get from a 2 & 4GB card?
7. How does the M8 do in less than ideal weather under pro use, rain, snow, dust?
8. How good is the RF compared to say, my MP-3?
9. How is the long exposure ability of the M8 when in bulb mode, any noise even at low ISO?
10. Would you, a pro, trust this camera for pro use in the photojournalism realm?
Cheers,
KM
greggebhardt
07-27-2007, 15:20
It's been awhile now since the first digital Leica M has hit the streets, a few of my friends at Magnum are using them among other pros I know. I have had real issues in having my $3,000 Leica glass's peripheral bokeh cropped as well, so this is one of the reasons I have held off, everything I use is full frame and I notice how positive this is in my daily work. But....
As some of you might now, I am shooting a large and long term film project. With the exception of an Xpan, I am doing this almost exclusively on Leica M cameras.
So when I am shooting this project, my Canon gear sits at home until I need to go shoot stock, commercial, deadline editorial, etc.
I am starting to consider the M8 in replacing one of my 5D's and a couple of Canon lenses so I can have a digital with me. But, I have some questions:
1. How is the battery life, what affects it, how is it in the cold?
2. How is the camera in the cold in general? I am not talking 30F, more like 0 and below 0.
3. When using the 28 Summicron ( 6 bit ), what kind of VF obstruction do you encounter?
4. Since IR cut filters are needed, does Leica supply at least one if not more and can I get a 43mm one for my LHSA 50 aspheric?
5. When using film M's and the M8 together, how much of a pain is it to keep swapping filters? This is key for me, because the film M will always come first.
6. How many raw files does one get from a 2 & 4GB card?
7. How does the M8 do in less than ideal weather under pro use, rain, snow, dust?
8. How good is the RF compared to say, my MP-3?
9. How is the long exposure ability of the M8 when in bulb mode, any noise even at low ISO?
10. Would you, a pro, trust this camera for pro use in the photojournalism realm?
Cheers,
KM
1. Battery life is good. I was surprised for it's size and have not had to use my backup battery yet.
2. I live in Florida, no cold weather here. If cold enough it might effect battery use but there is more than enough reserve for most.
3. With hood, 25% "partially" obstructed. No hood almost entire falls outside bright lines. This lesn is my absolute favorite and you will love it too!
4. Register your new M8 and you get two free filters of your choice. I picked the 39 and 46mm.
5. I seldom use my cut filters at all. Not really required under normal conditions. Many here use seldom or at all.
6. 187 on a new formatted 2gb card
7. I would not soak it. Use protection. Even my weather resistant D2XS had problems in the rain.
8. I can only compare to my M7, EXCELLENT!
9. Typical.
10. Not a pro hear but have been leaving my DSLR behind with no regrets.
The M8 is not for everyone. I sold my first two but the third is staying and I am quite happy!
etrigan63
07-27-2007, 15:26
I am lurker here, saving up my pennies to buy an M8, but I have read enough here to be able to answer some (if not all) of your questions. I am not a pro photographer per se; I own a technology website and I shoot photos for it and it makes money for me. It was enough to let me join the NPPA.
1. Batteries in general discharge much more quickly in the cold. This is plain old physics. The M8 is made of mostly metal so I assume it does not have much in the way of insulation for the battery (outside of the battery's plastic shell.
2. 0F should not be an issue for the M8. I live in Miami, FL so freezing for us is 50F.
3. Sean Reid of Reidreviews.com can best answer this.
4. Leica supplies 2 filters of the size you specify with the purchase of an M8.
5. These are screw-on filters. How much of a pain is it to you to unscrew, transfer, then screw them on normally?
6. M8 DNG files are about 10Mb in size. 200 for a 2GB card, 400 for a 4GB card (when supported - expected in firmware 1.2)
7. Other, more experienced folks can better answer this.
8. See answer #7.
9. See answer #7.
10. Many photojournalists used Leicas. They could take the beating. Leicas have been the tool of choice for many photographers who have won Pulitzer Prizes. Granted those were film Leicas. Give the M8 a chance. Take the time to learn it and it will serve you well.
Harry Lime
07-27-2007, 16:16
>1. How is the battery life, what affects it, how is it in the cold?
Appears to be good for about 400 shots. How it is affected by cold should be in line with every other camera battery (same technology)
>3. When using the 28 Summicron ( 6 bit ), what kind of VF obstruction do you >encounter?
It's not horrible and depends on what hood you use.
>4. Since IR cut filters are needed, does Leica supply at least one if not more and >can I get a 43mm one for my LHSA 50 aspheric?
If I remember correctly Leica will supply you with two. I assume that also means a 43mm
>6. How many raw files does one get from a 2 & 4GB card?
M8 RAW files are 10MB each. 1GB = 1024MB
>7. How does the M8 do in less than ideal weather under pro use, rain, snow, >dust?
That's a very good question. Pro shooters have taken the M8 to Iran and Iraq and they had no problems. I asked a Leica rep if the camera was weather sealed and he said "no, but we sell a lot of units in the Asian market that can be extremely humid." Translation: The camera is not sealed.
This is one of my M8 pet peeves. I just think it's a little nuts to design a $5000 professional digital camera that isn't sealed against dust and moisture. The M8 is not like a mechanical M or Nikon F, that you simply set out to dry and keep shooting till you get home and can have it cleaned. Once the blue smoke gets out of the M8 it's curtains and you have a $5000 paperweight on your hands. Stupid move on Leica's part.
>8. How good is the RF compared to say, my MP-3?
The RF itself is a fairly standard M-type RF unit with .68 magnification, so you can see the framelines of the wideangle lenses. BUT the area of coverage that the framelines indicate is stunningly inaccurate. I've spoken to several people who are/were test shooters for Leica and apparently they gave Solms an earful.
Personally I've tried everything but a 28mm on the M8 and framing accuracy stinks. Supposedly the 28mm (x1.3=37mm) markings are by far the most accurate, but I haven't been able test it myself. Be prepared to crop.
According to one of the testers Leica may have a tweak in the works to solve this problem.
>10. Would you, a pro, trust this camera for pro use in the photojournalism realm?
Not sure. I haven't shot with one long enough, but there are pro shooters out there doing so. Obviously a back up camera of some sort is a must. Maybe a small Nikon D40 or Canon Dig. Rebel? A second M8 would be expensive. ;-)
There was a massive thread on LIGHTSTALKERS about the M8. Lots of pros, inlcuding some folks from Magnum chimed in.
http://www.lightstalkers.org/leica_m8___is_it_any_good
HL
Cheers,
3. When using the 28 Summicron ( 6 bit ), what kind of VF obstruction do you encounter?
4. Since IR cut filters are needed, does Leica supply at least one if not more and can I get a 43mm one for my LHSA 50 aspheric?
5. When using film M's and the M8 together, how much of a pain is it to keep swapping filters? This is key for me, because the film M will always come first.
7. How does the M8 do in less than ideal weather under pro use, rain, snow, dust?
8. How good is the RF compared to say, my MP-3?
10. Would you, a pro, trust this camera for pro use in the photojournalism realm?
Cheers,
KM
Although the 28 hood does not intrude much into the finder you could replace it with a smaller hood as the sensor is cropped. This is a great lens on the M8.
Most of the Zeiss lenses take 43mm and Popflash carries 43mm IR/cut filters. I would not want to be changing filters in the field as its more of a pain then changing lenses. As others have said you get 2 filters free from Leica.
You will find the finder the same as the current film finders
The M8 is not weather sealed but then neither is the Canon 5D as far as I know, for real world experience in adverse environments try asking the question on www.lightstalkers.org (http://www.lightstalkers.org) there are a couple of pro photojournalists there with some experience with the M8 in the field.
As the camera is 10MP you might have a problem with some of your stock agencies. However I think you will find the image quality in print equal to any DSLR and I'm sure clients will be suitably impressed.
If you like your film M's I would expect that you will probably like the digital M as it has in large part ported the M RF experience to digital.
I would add one other point in agreement with the above poster. Leica in it's infinite wisdom decided to change the focus point for the frames choosing the closest point for each focal length. Having to learn different compensation for accurate framing at various distances for your film M's and your digital M could be a real pain as they will be different.
Harry Lime
07-27-2007, 16:29
Damn it I'm going to miss Kodachrome...
If Kodak ever discontinues Tri-X, someone is going to get hurt.
;-)
Tell us what your friends at Magnum telling you about the M8 ?
grduprey
07-27-2007, 19:28
I agree with most of the above. The 26/2.8 asph lens is terrific and the hood covers only the right lower corner, not a problem. As for temperature, mine has worked in -10F very well with no problems, even after soaking in this temp for 8 or more hours. Buy one, youll love it.
Gene
Damn it I'm going to miss Kodachrome...
If Kodak ever discontinues Tri-X, someone is going to get hurt.
;-)
Harry: Fly on over, our guest room is yours. We will march on the head office ensemble.
Harry Lime
07-28-2007, 00:24
I agree with most of the above. The 26/2.8 asph lens is terrific and the hood covers only the right lower corner, not a problem. As for temperature, mine has worked in -10F very well with no problems, even after soaking in this temp for 8 or more hours. Buy one, youll love it.
Gene
Typo: 2.8/28mm ASPH ;-)
Very nice lens. It's tiny, like the pre-ASPH v4 2/35 Summicron
Typo: 2.8/28mm ASPH ;-)
Very nice lens. It's tiny, like the pre-ASPH v4 2/35 Summicron
The question was about the 28/2 summicron, which is bigger then the 28/2.8 but not to big. I especially like this lens because you get the sharpness of the ASPH without the harshness. Sort of the best of the old and new. For me a 28 and a 50 make a perfect M8 kit.
You can use the 35 Summilux hood on the 28 on the M8.
You might find this link useful on the subject of lens choice moving from film Leica to M8:
http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m8-forum/19358-my-personal-lens-set-m8-finally.html
On the subject of reliability.
If I was betting on which camera would survive a driving rain for hours on end I'd be putting my money on a weather sealed camera like the Canon 1D. How do cameras that are not weather sealed do? No one is doing a scientific consumer report style test resulting in the failure of a bunch of expensive camera equipment. So you are left with anecdotal stories on the internet. 'I had my M8 in Namibia, Amazonia, Iraq, tec., and it didn't miss a beat'. Of course you will also find experiences just as easily of the guy who is on his 3rd M8, never left his house and has not got a reliably working one yet.
So I would take normal precautions to protect the camera and would expect it to work in most situations. My own anecdotal experience? No problems at all with the M8 in 6 months. But I don't expose my cameras (or myself) to nasty conditions plus I'm often working with strobes and the power packs would blow up long before the cameras had a problem.
Thanks to all who wrote in. The Lightstalkers thread was really good.
The framing issues with the 50 bother me a bit, but seems as though my 28 Summicron is going to be a joy to use on the other hand.
I am going to give this some more thought, even though B&H has them in stock, I might wait until a big commercial gig in Cabo is done next month since I will be selling one of my 5D's, one of my FM3A's and about 4 lenses to get this...
I'll keep an eye out...
By the way, Anne Holms images with the M8 are really the first ones to truly wow me:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/anne_holmes/
Thanks!
Harry Lime
07-28-2007, 17:08
[QUOTE=HAnkg]The question was about the 28/2 summicron, which is bigger then the 28/2.8 but not to big. I especially like this lens because you get the sharpness of the ASPH without the harshness. Sort of the best of the old and new. For me a 28 and a 50 make a perfect M8 kit.
I understand that. Re-read the post. There is no 26/2.8. I believe Gene was offering the 2.8 as a much smaller alternative.
Cheers,
HL
>Originally Posted by grduprey
>I agree with most of the above. The 26/2.8 asph lens is terrific and the hood covers >only the right lower corner, not a problem. As for temperature, mine has worked in >-10F very well with no problems, even after soaking in this temp for 8 or more >hours. Buy one, youll love it.
>
>Gene
I enjoy using my M8. However, the sensor gets dirty very easily. I clean prior to each day that I plan to do a fair amount of shooting but I still get dirty images. This can be very frustrating.
Eric
I used my M8 in sub-zero for three weeks. I noticed a slight decline in battery life, but not more that I was used to with other cameras. Say, 300 shots instead of 400.
grduprey
07-29-2007, 21:37
[quote=HAnkg]The question was about the 28/2 summicron, which is bigger then the 28/2.8 but not to big. I especially like this lens because you get the sharpness of the ASPH without the harshness. Sort of the best of the old and new. For me a 28 and a 50 make a perfect M8 kit.
I understand that. Re-read the post. There is no 26/2.8. I believe Gene was offering the 2.8 as a much smaller alternative.
Cheers,
HL
>Originally Posted by grduprey
>I agree with most of the above. The 26/2.8 asph lens is terrific and the hood covers >only the right lower corner, not a problem. As for temperature, mine has worked in >-10F very well with no problems, even after soaking in this temp for 8 or more >hours. Buy one, youll love it.
>
>Gene
Sorry everyone, I ment the 28/2.8 Asph. Guess I was tired and hit the wrong key.
Gene
My M8 in black gets here Thursday. While I am excited, I am a bit concerned about some of the reports of back focus issues with the 50 1.4 asph.
How many have had that happen to them?
I had all the problems under the sun, unfortunately, including massive back focus with my lenses longer that 50mm before I gave kup. Hope you enjoy yours, which I'm sure you will. It's a pleasure to shoot with. Perhaps you're getting in at the right time.
I had my M8 and three lenses (including the 50/1.4 asph) sent to Germany for focusing issues. 5 months later there is still a back focus with the 50 (but not as bad as before) and the 90 is still in NJ. 35/2 pre-asph focus has always been spot on.
Gabriel M.A.
08-04-2007, 13:17
If Kodak ever discontinues Tri-X, someone is going to get hurt.
I'll be right behind you waiting my turn.
Interesting. Tri-X looks the way it does, because technology could not do better and was unable to strain out the lumps at the time. Now it has been elevated to an art form...:p
Tri-x is constantly changing and improving. The tri-x of today is a very different film than from when it came out.
But anyway, it will be horrible if they discontinue it, but there's always Neopan 400!
Not even one week later and I have already shot one commercial job and two editorial jobs plus stock with the M8. C1 is the best raw converter with Jamie Foulds magenta fix, works really well, no sharpening needed.
The camera is excellent, no problems at all, even works well with my 1954 collapsable ( I do not collapse it on the M8 ).
Battery life is right at 400 shots, the little 2 GB cards fill up too fast though, wish I could use a 4GB.
iView needs to get off of their rear and update the software so I can properly import, re-name and archive my M8 files. This could be the one big hold up in putting the M8 into full blown pro mode.
Great camera overall..
And how does it compare to Kodachrome 25?
Tuolumne
08-08-2007, 20:06
Thanks to all who wrote in. The Lightstalkers thread was really good.
The framing issues with the 50 bother me a bit, but seems as though my 28 Summicron is going to be a joy to use on the other hand.
I am going to give this some more thought, even though B&H has them in stock, I might wait until a big commercial gig in Cabo is done next month since I will be selling one of my 5D's, one of my FM3A's and about 4 lenses to get this...
I'll keep an eye out...
By the way, Anne Holms images with the M8 are really the first ones to truly wow me:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/anne_holmes/
Thanks!
The subjects totally overwhelm the camera. Those would have been great with a Kodak Brownie.
/T
Battery life is right at 400 shots, the little 2 GB cards fill up too fast though, wish I could use a 4GB.
Transcend 150x 4GB works no problem. Just make sure you have a relatively new card reader the old ones will not work with anything over 2 GB.
Make sure it's the 150x not the newer SDHC.
Tiger Direct has them for 69.99:
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/category/category_slc.asp?MfrId=1519&Nav=|c:380|c:2412|&Sort=3&Recs=10
And how does it compare to Kodachrome 25?
You'll have to wait a bit for that comparison, I don't have a ton of that, so I shoot it sparingly.
I would imagine the K-25 would pull ahead quite a bit of any digital.
The subjects totally overwhelm the camera. Those would have been great with a Kodak Brownie.
/T
All the more reason to use a Leica..:-)
Transcend 150x 4GB works no problem. Just make sure you have a relatively new card reader the old ones will not work with anything over 2 GB.
Make sure it's the 150x not the newer SDHC.
Tiger Direct has them for 69.99:
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/category/category_slc.asp?MfrId=1519&Nav=|c:380|c:2412|&Sort=3&Recs=10
Thanks! I'll consider it.
...So here I am nearly a month later wondering how everyone else is getting that "Incredible image quality" that is "Better than my 5D/ D2X". Sure, the color and contrast is really nice, but...when it comes to giving consistently sharp and clean files to clients who are used to that from me, I am pulling hair that I don't have out of my bald head.
I have been pulling, poking, prodding and doing more damn work in front of the computer than shooting with this camera. Sometimes I get great shots with no jaggies, artifacts, weave pattern noise or moire, but most of the time, this is what I am dealing with.
The Geographic shooter that told me he thought this camera was ready for "Prime-time" has apologized and sold his two, he too is tired of jumping through hoops to get files consistently that clients can actually use and play with in PS to suit their specific output.
I am still waiting on IR/Cut filters so this is part of it. I find C1 gives the best sharpness output and does a decent job at getting rid of the insane moire problems. But the color is weaker, the weave pattern noise at any iso even with pattern noise reduction on at any setting is not good. The artifacts I see when applying any sharpening at all, even after outputting to tiff is bad as well, had one client that thought I sent them an image from a point and shoot due to it.
ACR-4 puts out the best color, but really softens up the image and does not do well at all with the moire.
And with either of these programs, when it comes to the very finest details when using aspherics in mid to high contrast situations, the fine details break up and look very point and shoot like.
Is it the sensor?
Is it the processing engine?
Is it the lack of a more refined raw output program?
The one thing it is not is consistent enough to use for paid work for anything other than 1/2 page or smaller editorial.
So as much as I love everything about it, two to three more weeks of this *massive* time-wasting, hoop-jumping and then it is up for sale for a loss of at least $700...:bang:
I'm easy to please, but it has to be better than this to keep it for the long haul...
Wait until October - the price raise will compensate your loss...;)
Wait until October - the price raise will compensate your loss...;)
Thats what I am telling myself - I'll keep it at least till then to try to reduce the loss a little.
I am not totally convinced I'll sell it, but we'll see...
Makaveli45
08-28-2007, 06:11
I have been pulling, poking, prodding and doing more damn work in front of the computer than shooting with this camera. Sometimes I get great shots with no jaggies, artifacts, weave pattern noise or moire, but most of the time, this is what I am dealing with.
to please, but it has to be better than this to keep it for the long haul...
It would be great if you could provide a link to some samples. We're always seeing samples of "great" images, but we never get to really see problem images. For someone like myself who is contemplating buying the camera, it's' important to see both types of images in order to make the right decision when it comes to purchasing.
I've only had my M8 a short time but I'm not seeing those horrible problems at all. Given the number of professionals who seem to be pleased overall, I'm fairly sure it isn't a lack of perceptiveness on my part, and I'm wondering if some of these problems couldn't be attributable to a small sample of defective cameras.
I'll wait until after the October price increase, I'll just take care to not scratch it and see if I can't eek out some of these problems. I have a really busy next couple of weeks so after that, I will post some samples. I know a lot of people are seeing some great work out of the M8....but are you seeing it at 100%? Most of what have seen is web sized stuff that does not really show me the finest of details.
I've only had my M8 a short time but I'm not seeing those horrible problems at all. Given the number of professionals who seem to be pleased overall, I'm fairly sure it isn't a lack of perceptiveness on my part, and I'm wondering if some of these problems couldn't be attributable to a small sample of defective cameras.
Is there a way you can post a 100% version of what you believe to be your technically best set of M8 shots then? I would be real interested in seeing those fine details look better that what I am getting some of the time..
Also, I hope that when you say the number of professionals, that you don't mean some of the ones on the Leica Forum..especially Mr. Mancuso. They just say how much better the M8 is than the rest of the world and don't ever show why, all talk, no proof.
Here is a 100% example that I think does a good job of showing the M8 details. There is some moire in the eyebrow, but it can be dealt with. Is this the extent of the problem you are dealing with, or is it deeper?
http://www.stuartrichardson.com/noelle-relish2.jpg
http://www.stuartrichardson.com/noelle-relish2-crop.jpg
Apologies to others who have probably seen this before. It is the only good photo I have with the crop uploaded.
The biggest I've done is what fits on the 13x19 paper that's the largest my printer will hold. Even that's bigger than I really need or have wall space for. Those were full-frame, not crops. Prints seem to look much better than what I see on screen. That might be my crappy screen or my lack of PS skills or both. I don't hold myself out as an expert and don't offer you any advice. I also am on a dial-up connection so I can't upload anything larger than a small .jpg, and I don't subscribe to FLickr (yet). I apply the same paradigm to the M8 as I did to the M6. I consider it a replacement for 35mm equipment, so if it outperforms 35mm I'm happy, but if it just equals it, I'm still happy. It's like the story of the 2 photographers in Africa being chased by a lion. One suddenly turns around and stops to take a shot of the approaching beast, and the other one is frantic, "keep running or you won't outrun the lion!" "I don't have to outrun the lion" comes the reply "I just have to outrun you" ;) But I understand those who expect the M8 to be a replacement for MF, and I might be disappointed too if that was my hope. I don't know.
Seriously, before you throw in the towel, you might want to get in contact with one of these guys--no, not "Guy"--( I don't have their e-mails, sorry, but I believe they appear on the LUF) who seems like are extremely adept at digital processing and the M8 : Jamie Roberts (pro), Marc Williams (pro and graphic arts guy), Jack Flesher (amateur but very digital-savvy and sophisticated PS'er).
There is a very good thread on this going on in LUF right now, with comparisons between the various settings in raw converters, and comparisons to the 1Ds??. I see Dan already found it :) I'm staying well out of the discussion, as I am certainly not expert enough. I will say one thing though: out of 5000 shots, two that would have been real keepers have been totally ruined by uncorrectable moire, and I do check at 100% and I do print at up to 1 metre wide. But to me it is just annoying, a pro has his evening meal riding on it....
Is there a way you can post a 100% version of what you believe to be your technically best set of M8 shots then? I would be real interested in seeing those fine details look better that what I am getting some of the time...
I'm no pro, but I've been quite pleased with the detail whenever I've cropped. Here's a virtually untouched example (M8; 75mm 'cron; UV filter; Lightroom) from this morning.
Regards,
Tony C.
http://mtanga.com/tp4.jpg
http://mtanga.com/tp5.jpg
Here is a 100% example that I think does a good job of showing the M8 details. There is some moire in the eyebrow, but it can be dealt with. Is this the extent of the problem you are dealing with, or is it deeper?
Apologies to others who have probably seen this before. It is the only good photo I have with the crop uploaded.
Which RAW converter was that?
POINT OF VIEW
08-28-2007, 10:59
So many questions for a pro? As a pro photographer you just buy the camera and right it off. If you don’t like it, sell it. Nothing lost everything gained. Bill http://www.pbase.com/leicalight/galleries
Which RAW converter was that?
That was capture one LE. It was with an IR filter and it was firmware 1.2 I believe...perhaps 1.1. The lens was the 35/1.4 ASPH. ISO 320 (admittedly, by mistake).
OK, I think I will have some crow for lunch...
I just shot some outdoor scenes on my backyard with the 28 cron on the M8 and the 35L on the 5D. This time, in C1, I put all the settings at zero, no sharpening, no noise reduction of any kind, nada.
Enter the crow: The M8 files out resolved the 5D files by about 2-4% and had zero noise at ISO 160. The 5D had a trace of noise, which might be attributed to using a incremental ISO. But either way, there was no noise, moire or any of that from the M8 with the settings put to zero. When I tried to apply even a setting of 1 to the noise reduction, the weave pattern started up again.
So it really boils down to the M8 needing raw conversion that is entirely different than any other camera.
So this is the way I will approach it for now, nothing but color and tone corrections, no default noise, nothing. Unfortunately that puts the moire reduction in a strange place again..
So the M8 stays for now..and no, I was not looking for a replacement for medium format...
it might be dumb proposal but how about to try older lenses? :D maybe it'd encounter less "artifacts"? :D
I remember someone suggested lenses with lower contrast for high contrast scenes and vice versa for M8.
OK, I think I will have some crow for lunch...
Eating the loss on selling the M8 is a much costlier meal :D
This time, in C1, I put all the settings at zero, no sharpening, no noise reduction of any kind, nada....
So it really boils down to the M8 needing raw conversion that is entirely different than any other camera.
That's been my finding. I used to (still do) run all my 20D and RD1 files through Miranda sharpening plugins (and the 20D's through DxO as well), not the M8's. I haven't used noise reduction, I just try to shoot as low ISO as possible and accept the "digital grain" (I find the M8's noise less digital-looking than some) as it comes at higher oness. To put it another way, once again I approach the M8 more like 35mm film. If I really must have plastic-smooth @ ISO 800 to please someone else's taste who likes the digital look, I can always grab the 20D.
I'm probably going to get either Noise Ninja or Neat Image to salvage any shots I might have to take above ISO 100 on my D-Lux-3, so I'll give it a go on high-ISO M8 files just to see how it handles them.
grduprey
08-28-2007, 22:11
I'll wait until after the October price increase, I'll just take care to not scratch it and see if I can't eek out some of these problems. I have a really busy next couple of weeks so after that, I will post some samples. I know a lot of people are seeing some great work out of the M8....but are you seeing it at 100%? Most of what have seen is web sized stuff that does not really show me the finest of details.
I never got 100% from film either, who does? No one I know. I get far more consistant pics from my M8, than my Nikon D200, and the results are always sharper, clearer and better color saturation.
Gene
Eating the loss on selling the M8 is a much costlier meal :D
That's been my finding. I used to (still do) run all my 20D and RD1 files through Miranda sharpening plugins (and the 20D's through DxO as well), not the M8's. I haven't used noise reduction, I just try to shoot as low ISO as possible and accept the "digital grain" (I find the M8's noise less digital-looking than some) as it comes at higher oness. To put it another way, once again I approach the M8 more like 35mm film. If I really must have plastic-smooth @ ISO 800 to please someone else's taste who likes the digital look, I can always grab the 20D.
I'm probably going to get either Noise Ninja or Neat Image to salvage any shots I might have to take above ISO 100 on my D-Lux-3, so I'll give it a go on high-ISO M8 files just to see how it handles them.
I gave up on Neat Image (which served me well for other digitals like the Digilux2) for the M8. I found it too destructive of fine detail. Try Noise Ninja first.
it might be dumb proposal but how about to try older lenses? :D maybe it'd encounter less "artifacts"? :D
I remember someone suggested lenses with lower contrast for high contrast scenes and vice versa for M8.
Sean Reid suggests this as well in his 90 mm test.
I gave up on Neat Image (which served me well for other digitals like the Digilux2) for the M8. I found it too destructive of fine detail. Try Noise Ninja first.
Will do. I was leaning toward NN vs NI based on input from others, plus NN's website looks a lot more professional :D Mostly I want it for RAW from the DLUX-3, which really needs help with noise, and the in-camera JPEG processing seems a case of the cure being worse than the disease. So far I haven't felt any desire to de-noise the M8. The noise is there but it looks a lot like film grain.
Sean Reid suggests this as well in his 90 mm test.
I thought of the same person lol :D
I have thought more of the problem. I did read somewhere member's post from MF forum that medium format backs which don't have AA filter at default, don't exhibit moire, jagged lines that easily since they have high mpx so they are almost invisible. It might sound as a good solution to extract files from C1 at no sharpening then upresize with a nice upresize program as Genuine Fractals then sharpen files with another program. Yeah it sounds a lot PP work hehe but I'd try this metod and see if it works. It is not enough to judge this in the monitor though, because some ugliness might be gone in prints.
Km is right, it is up on software processing otherwise MF backs could suck that badly lol
That was capture one LE. It was with an IR filter and it was firmware 1.2 I believe...perhaps 1.1. The lens was the 35/1.4 ASPH. ISO 320 (admittedly, by mistake).
The pixel artifacts in the eybrow are perhaps symptomatic for C1. Attached are some 200% crops from an image I shot with an R-D1 (sorry, no budget for an M8). The first is developed with C1 and standard import settings. The second also comes from C1, but with sharpening and noise reduction completely off. To be continued in the next reply...
That was capture one LE. It was with an IR filter and it was firmware 1.2 I believe...perhaps 1.1. The lens was the 35/1.4 ASPH. ISO 320 (admittedly, by mistake).
... The first one in this post was created with Lightroom 1.1 and standard import settings, the second also with noise reduction and sharpening off. You may look at them at 200% zoom to better see the difference.
That was capture one LE. It was with an IR filter and it was firmware 1.2 I believe...perhaps 1.1. The lens was the 35/1.4 ASPH. ISO 320 (admittedly, by mistake).
Another two which IMHO show that rendering diagonals isn't done very well by C1. This all is perhaps irrelevant for the M8 since these shots have been taken with the R-D1, but I don't think that the demosaicing algorithm in C1 is different for every single camera model in C1.
I haven't tried to adjust the files to look very similar in terms of color and brightness, so the Lightroom sample looks a little dark.
That's pretty interesting Michael. The C1 does have artifacts that Lightroom does not, but it definitely appears to have more detail and sharpness. In the second photo in particular, despite the artifacts it appears to reach deeper in the shadows (not just the brightness) and it has higher sharpness. Anyway, they are interesting results. I would be interested to see whether they are the same with the M8 files. Unfortunately, I don't have lightroom...
Ok, now it comes to real pixel peeping. I've attached another LR example which has been slightly adjusted regarding brightness, white balance and sharpness to be more close to the C1 example. That was done very quickly, I didn't try to be absolute perfect here. In the other examples I've set every gauge to zero just to be fair. Normally I keep the default values in LR. My impression is that LR in some areas of the image seems to a be very little bit softer but my impression is that the drawing is slightly more realistic and precise. But that perhaps is more a matter of taste.
I think the example shows that LR very well is capable to reveal detail in dark shadows. Another conclusion for me is that in some cases it seems to be better to turn off default sharpening and noise reduction in C1.
Examples:
[C1 default] [C1 zeroed'] [LR adjusted]
Stefan R.
09-05-2007, 11:02
the most important thing is the feeling… working with the M8 you have the M feeling, no big black shoe box in front of your face. it is a camera you can carry with you everywhere.. I never did it with my canon 5D.
P.S. I don't care about all these technical issues: if cyan in the corners, if IR problem, if back focus ..... its the picture that counts.
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.