Post your ISO 2500 Shots

[tmfabian]

Ok, What started out as me just being curious of the limits you could push the m8 to in terms of high ISO has turned into an obsession of shooting at 2500 ISO...I love it and haven't shot on a lower ISO for this entire week.
Hopefully this thread will spark some truthfulness into the m8's high ISO capabilities rather than the rubbish that's been circulating around.

all shot at ISO 2500, PP in Lightroom.
http://lh4.ggpht.com/tmfabian/SJJ_llMXnYI/AAAAAAAAA_0/y0wa9WT8rzg/L1005470.jpg?imgmax=640


http://lh6.ggpht.com/tmfabian/SJJ_npQ1XaI/AAAAAAAAA_8/oDK5_0_t8B4/L1005521.jpg?imgmax=640


http://lh5.ggpht.com/tmfabian/SI-6zINpQAI/AAAAAAAAA_E/xtSVPIstDII/l1005400.jpg?imgmax=640


http://lh6.ggpht.com/tmfabian/SJKuMpzFGAI/AAAAAAAABAY/tC53Jr1UKs0/l1005455.jpg?imgmax=640

[quadtones]

Ok, I agree...iso 2500 -1 1/3 ev. 15mm C-V wide open. Some PP in CS3, mainly adjustment layers, no sharpening.

[quadtones]

Hello Thomas--

By the way, I really like the first shot. Lots of folks don't seem to have considered, in all their moaning about high iso noise, what pushed HP5 or Tri-X look like--blown out highlights, grain, gritty midtones--wonderful stuff. Here's another: iso 2500 - 1 2/3 ev/ 28mm Summicron @ f2.8. PP includes DXo Tri-X grain emulation.

Cheers,
Norm

[tmfabian]

Hello Thomas--

By the way, I really like the first shot. Lots of folks don't seem to have considered, in all their moaning about high iso noise, what pushed HP5 or Tri-X look like--blown out highlights, grain, gritty midtones--wonderful stuff. Here's another: iso 2500 - 1 2/3 ev/ 28mm Summicron @ f2.8. PP includes DXo Tri-X grain emulation.

Cheers,
Norm

Bah, computer crashed while editing my reply to this...something went screwy.

Anywho, Thanks...and yeah I love that gritty grainy look of pushed tri-x...heck lately i've been upping my concentration of rodinal to 1+25 and am less than gentle about agitating to bring out a little extra grit.

I'm curious...are your shots at 2500 with the extra 1+ stops or are you shooting at a lower iso and using the minus compensation to up it to 2500?

If it's the first one...WOW, you're really pushing the limits of the ISO capabilities....and nicely done.

[Speenth]

Hello Thomas,

At ISO 2500 I get Jackson Pollock on a bad day. Even 1250 is pretty hopeless. I can't come even close to the low noise of your images. I'm a reasonably competent photographer and thus I'm approaching the conclusion there is something wrong with my M8.

I know a bad workman blames his tools, so before I incarcerate my M8 in Solms for the next several months, I'd be really grateful if you'd post one more of your excellent images and provide a full tech spec with it - all camera settings, ambient light conditions and the pp etc.

Then, if I can't reproduce the technical qualities of your image, I will be waving a damp hanky at the DHL ambulance taking my beloved M8 for intensive care in Solms.

Steve'

[louisb]

Hello Thomas,

At ISO 2500 I get Jackson Pollock on a bad day. Even 1250 is pretty hopeless. I can't come even close to the low noise of your images. I'm a reasonably competent photographer and thus I'm approaching the conclusion there is something wrong with my M8.

I know a bad workman blames his tools, so before I incarcerate my M8 in Solms for the next several months, I'd be really grateful if you'd post one more of your excellent images and provide a full tech spec with it - all camera settings, ambient light conditions and the pp etc.

Then, if I can't reproduce the technical qualities of your image, I will be waving a damp hanky at the DHL ambulance taking my beloved M8 for intensive care in Solms.

Steve'

Hmmm, I wouldn't be too worried. Firstly, these are not very large pictures and I'd be interested to see the results at a decent print size. Secondly, they are black and white so the colour noise has been converted to grain, which you can see clearly in Dunkin Donuts cup. This makes it more pleasing to the eye.

I have also rarely gotten any good results at iso2500 and my M8 is fine. I have got very good and useable results at 1250 but the key is the exposure has to be absolutely spot on.

LouisB

[Speenth]

Hmmm, I wouldn't be too worried. Firstly, these are not very large pictures and I'd be interested to see the results at a decent print size. Secondly, they are black and white so the colour noise has been converted to grain, which you can see clearly in Dunkin Donuts cup. This makes it more pleasing to the eye.

I have also rarely gotten any good results at iso2500 and my M8 is fine. I have got very good and useable results at 1250 but the key is the exposure has to be absolutely spot on.

LouisB

Thanks for this, your comments are reassuring, although rather confirm the common complaint about the M8's poor performance at high ISOs.

This is an interesting topic, because it demands a real understanding of the technicalities of the digital imaging system and operation of the (deceptively) simple M8. A great area for experimentation - it would be nice to see other forum members posting their high ISO successes (or failures).

Steve'

[dcsang]

Hmm.. I'm curious about the statement regarding the exposure being spot on.

Can we not garner some exposure latitude by shooting in DNG?

I'm not saying you can blow your highlights out and still have a good photo but if you're just slightly off, can you not use the fact that you have shot in DNG to "help" you out in such a situation?

Cheers
Dave

[fdigital]

Hmm.. I'm curious about the statement regarding the exposure being spot on.

Can we not garner some exposure latitude by shooting in DNG?

I'm not saying you can blow your highlights out and still have a good photo but if you're just slightly off, can you not use the fact that you have shot in DNG to "help" you out in such a situation?

Cheers
Dave

I'd assume that the situation is similar to my olympus e-3... At max ISO (2500 or 3200 equiv/3200 on the e-3) there is very little latitude without sacrificing the quality of the picture.

On the E-3, at 1600 and 3200, it's really important to get the exposure right on and as such the noise isn't distracting from the image. If it's underexposed I can say bye bye. I don't own an m8 but I'd say that it's the same. From observation, the E-3 and the M8 are very similar at high ISOs

[ChipNovaMac]

Hello Thomas--

By the way, I really like the first shot. Lots of folks don't seem to have considered, in all their moaning about high iso noise, what pushed HP5 or Tri-X look like--blown out highlights, grain, gritty midtones--wonderful stuff. Here's another: iso 2500 - 1 2/3 ev/ 28mm Summicron @ f2.8. PP includes DXo Tri-X grain emulation.

Cheers,
Norm

Sadly digital has raised the expectations. That can be good or bad. :)

[tmfabian]

Hmmm, I wouldn't be too worried. Firstly, these are not very large pictures and I'd be interested to see the results at a decent print size. Secondly, they are black and white so the colour noise has been converted to grain, which you can see clearly in Dunkin Donuts cup. This makes it more pleasing to the eye.

LouisB


Yes, You are right that these are small web sized images and they certainly don't give you the same experience as a full sized print but I can assure you that I have printed many of these and from monitor to printer some of the noise disappears further (which to be honest really ticked me off and I'm looking into grain emulators to add some grit back in)
While Color definitely shows nose significantly more than B&W, I have to just point out that this is still by far leaps and bounds above what a High ISO color Film will deliver.

http://lh5.ggpht.com/tmfabian/SJM1swpGJAI/AAAAAAAABAw/KeTVD949JJ0/L1005303.jpg?imgmax=640

[Gabriel M.A.]

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/178/369478491_5856a7b46c.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/gabrielma/369478491/)
M8 + 50mm f/1.4 Summilux pre-asph E46 @ ISO 2500

[dcsang]

Another illusory ISO number. Take a spot reading of anything in the image that is actually properly exposed and then tell me what the effective ISO really is.

Isn't that the case with all digital cameras though (that is, not just the M8)?
It was my understanding that all digital camera ISO values were merely "placeholders" or estimates.

Please correct me if I'm wrong on that.

Dave

[jmarcus]

This is a great thread. Looks to me when need it ISO 2500 can be used

[dont45]

I remember discussion some time ago about how to expose for high iso but can't seem to find it. Is it as simple as setting a -1 2/3 or so EV compensation?

LouisB mentions exposure must be spot-on. How do you achieve this? I have done this a lot with film-developer speed testing to arrive at an effective speed, which is 250 for my TriX-HC110 combo. Is this process in digital equivalent in that you 'determine' your effective film speed (EI), thus the exposure compensation? If I understand the math, a -1 1/3 exposure compensation places the EI at 6400 for an ISO 2500 setting.
This must be similar to film in that your exposure should be just enough to exposure shadows on the toe of the film curve to record the detail. Is this the same for the digital sensor or are we more concerned with the other end of the curve?

I'd like to experiment this weekend so any tips would be appreciated.

[feenej]

By way of comparison, HP5 at about 2500 exposure index. (I can delete this from this thread if you like)

[tmfabian]

By way of comparison, HP5 at about 2500 exposure index. (I can delete this from this thread if you like)

no no....in fact I would go so far as to ask you to post a larger image of that so that we can see and compare....it certainly doesn't hurt the conversation.

[dcsang]

That's why I said what I did.

The ISO values in a digital camera are arbitrary - or at least that's my understanding of it.

Dave

[Philippe D.]

I never shoot pictures over 1250 Iso,
so here one at candle light with Summilux @f/1.4

62190

[dont45]

I'm by no means an expert in this area, but I agree the ISO has not changed, just the EI (I think). Just as in the case of TriX exposed at 250 does not change its ISO. My interest is how the sensor compares to film. It surly has a 'film-curve' analogous to film, and that curve must have toe and heal where detail is no longer recorded. With digital development of the raw file this curve can be modified significantly but still there has to be limits. The reality is I want a picture which meets my 'requirements'. That includes consideration of grain but for me, more importantly, it means my photo should match my visualization in regard to shadow and highlight detail. If this is recorded at both ends to my satisfaction, I can expand or compress the film curve to produce the desired print. I hate this technical stuff but am fascinated by it and wish I understood it better.

[feenej]

Oops, here it is again bigger, also one I took the same night that has an incredibly limited tonal range. These were HP5, 7-hours in Rodinal, 8 mls Rodinal in 1000 mls water. 1/30 second, f4, 45mm Rokkor.

[POINT OF VIEW]

You can discuss the technical aspects until death do us part. For me it’s about having the image to make my judgment. Do you think any photo contest to judge a picture, the judges have conversations about whether the ISO in the candle is the same as the ISO in the dark. Bottom line you either like the posted photos or you don’t. I for one, see all of Tmfabian’s work outstanding. I’ve said many times in the M8 thread, one more example of the M8”s potential.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3095/2722441605_73e38667dd.jpg?v=0

[tmfabian]

You can discuss the technical aspects until death do us part. For me it’s about having the image to make my judgment. Do you think any photo contest to judge a picture, the judges have conversations about whether the ISO in the candle is the same as the ISO in the dark. Bottom line you either like the posted photos or you don’t. I for one, see all of Tmfabian’s work outstanding. I’ve said many times in the M8 thread, one more example of the M8”s potential.


Thanks, and you're right...I even got a bit carried away with all the technobabble, I deleted all those silly posts because after all this is a thread about posting your pictures not about silly billy technical conversations.

I was just whacked out on all sorts of sealant chemicals since they're repairing a busted pipe in my place (nasty bathwater and who knows what else is leaking into my place from the person upstairs...ewww.)

Beautiful image by the way

[tmfabian]

3 more from a week or so ago

http://lh6.ggpht.com/tmfabian/SJN12wy7dMI/AAAAAAAABCI/vnZUUlC6Kjs/L1004578.jpg?imgmax=640



http://lh5.ggpht.com/tmfabian/SJN13GMlCmI/AAAAAAAABCQ/7OuycFo2Mkg/L1004611.jpg?imgmax=640



http://lh4.ggpht.com/tmfabian/SJN2cfCfFGI/AAAAAAAABCg/FmDT9G_f5cM/L1004673.jpg?imgmax=640

[Gabriel M.A.]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2296/2025253031_68fc0bd69f_o.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/gabrielma/2025253031/)
From DNG in Lightroom

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2348/2051721824_adef545867_o.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/gabrielma/2051721824/)
From DNG, in Lightroom

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3103/2651938826_f6a9ee206a_o.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/gabrielma/2651938826/)
From JPEG, in Lightroom

[Artorius]

Not a fantastic pic, but useable at 13X19. All pertinant stats in the EXIF info.

http://www.rcartworks.com/images/Posted/Alone.jpg

[quadtones]

Lots of great stuff. Am shooting a jazz concert tonight in a hall with terrible light, but at least I'll be close [on stage with the musicians, who seem to have accepted that I'm there, so long as I don't trip over any mike cables--a two year project now]. The following is from a couple of weeks ago. iso 2500 - 1 1/3 ev. This seems to be approaching the absolute limit for me. PP was to convert in CS3 after filtering color noise. in order to preserve the highlight areas, shadows are [big surprise] noisy. On the other hand, I was on top of these musicians, so supplementary light would really be out. I could use the healing brush on the hot spot on the top of one fellow's head, but didn't bother. It will go to about 8x8".

Cheers,
Norm

[quadtones]

Whoops, lost the attachement. Here goes.

iso 2500-1 1 /13 EV. Reduced color noise in ACR, then converted to B&W, also in ACR. Levels, increased brightness and contrast somewhat in CS3.

[Avotius]

Yikes, I was going to say, I see banding in Gabriel's shot with the laptop and some of the others....though I know that jpg compression does not do these images justice, for it to pop out like this means there is some sort of banding happening when you push the sensor to its limits, though it will not be so noticeable as for instance....my canon 20D.

[Gabriel M.A.]

EOS 5D. Metered at ISO 8000 with Sekonic 358, and then stopped down two stops more than the reading. What ISO would that be?

Is there a prize?

Also, we hijacking another thread?

[Avotius]

I think this is quite interesting, the high iso black and white shots, I use my GRD a lot like this and have got some very interesting results so its neat to see what the M8 is doing in this regard. Lets have some more images!

[tomasis]

I hope you dont mind a shot of Rd1

underexposed -4 stops by mistake at iso 400. so it means pushed 4 stops so iso became 6400. It is something different with digital sensors which you can push a lot when it is underexposed. It is just amazing for me.

http://www.tomasis.com/pix_SA/_EPS3571.jpg

I love gritty look after all :) I loath a lot of clean shots of Canon ;)

[tomasis]

the current shot is for you, tmfabian :D

it is iso 12500 (iso 800 pushed 4 stops).. both shots are processed with ACR.

http://www.tomasis.com/pix_SA/_EPS3467.jpg

Like it even more. I remember there was dark when I did that shot, hehe

[tmfabian]

the current shot is for you, tmfabian :D

it is iso 12500 (iso 800 pushed 4 stops).. both shots are processed with ACR.

http://www.tomasis.com/pix_SA/_EPS3467.jpg

Like it even more. I remember there was dark when I did that shot, hehe

ooh la la.
The more I see from the RD-1 the more I'm considering getting one as a backup/2nd body. Besides...it'd be cool to use an advance lever on a digital camera.

[arnulf]

Hmmm, still scratching my head trying to find a way not to make the 2500 look so noisy. This one turned out ok, but I don't really know why.
http://i96.photobucket.com/albums/l190/aquilalupus/fan.jpg

[tmfabian]

Hmmm, still scratching my head trying to find a way not to make the 2500 look so noisy. This one turned out ok, but I don't really know why.


Try using the color noise reduction...all those little color specks down in the shadows will go away nicely.
though I have to say that image is lacking significant noise and is mighty purdy.

[arnulf]

Thanks.

Actually, it would have been better at a lower ISO. At 2500 I had to push the shutter to 1/8000, so the fan appears to be off, even if it's at full throttle.

[tmfabian]

http://lh4.ggpht.com/tmfabian/SJ9WhMQsCcI/AAAAAAAABHw/E-P_dEI9z24/L1005978.jpg?imgmax=640


http://lh6.ggpht.com/tmfabian/SJ9WhRctT8I/AAAAAAAABH4/zM0eH5Dcx7I/L1005984.jpg?imgmax=640


http://lh6.ggpht.com/tmfabian/SJ9WhSoN8uI/AAAAAAAABIA/-c8N3FmL_Jw/L1005990.jpg?imgmax=640

[parameters]

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3202/2751726714_2498f76ec4.jpg?v=0
st.paul with 28mm F2 cron @ 2500

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2215/2750893417_6a142f0767.jpg?v=0
second pict not as successful... :-(

[jplomley]

M8 + 25/2.8 Biogon

[weser]

Ok, I agree...iso 2500 -1 1/3 ev. 15mm C-V wide open. Some PP in CS3, mainly adjustment layers, no sharpening.

Great shot but it would have certainly benefited from some sharpening. To illustrate my point, I took the liberty and sharpened the shot.

[weser]

For easier comparison, here's the original.

[Ray Nalley]

I would hate to have to print that last one! :eek:

[quadtones]

Actually, it prints fairly well. Most recently, I printed it on Ilford Gold Fibre Silk, and with [a little] sharpening, I am fairly happy with it. It's hard to take a bad photo of this bass player, Walter Savage, originally from San Francisco, and now here in Arkansas [Thought he deserved a plug]. Actually, I like the version with the sharpening [more than I'd used in the original post-processed version] added.

Here is another shot in the same club. i.e. 1250 - 2 1/3 EV, which I am coming to consider as on the ragged edge. I find I am getting a bit better results with these ratings than by increasing to i.e. 2500 - 1 1/3, although in this light, it seems to not matter. The "gesture" and the sense of the moment for these young musicians seems more important. 28mm Summicron @ f2. Shutter speed probably 1/24 sec.

Thanks to all for their comments.

Norm

[jmarcus]

I have been meaning to bring my R-D1s to Jacque's. Its a wild place isn't Thomas?
Nice pics.
James

[napoleonesq]

At Universal City Walk with my wife and baby boy

http://www.tonyforberg.com/wordpress1/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/l1003346-12.jpg

[weser]

Actually, it prints fairly well. Most recently, I printed it on Ilford Gold Fibre Silk, and with [a little] sharpening, I am fairly happy with it. It's hard to take a bad photo of this bass player, Walter Savage, originally from San Francisco, and now here in Arkansas [Thought he deserved a plug]. Actually, I like the version with the sharpening [more than I'd used in the original post-processed version] added.

Here is another shot in the same club. i.e. 1250 - 2 1/3 EV, which I am coming to consider as on the ragged edge. I find I am getting a bit better results with these ratings than by increasing to i.e. 2500 - 1 1/3, although in this light, it seems to not matter. The "gesture" and the sense of the moment for these young musicians seems more important. 28mm Summicron @ f2. Shutter speed probably 1/24 sec.

Thanks to all for their comments.

Norm

Another great shot. great mood. makes me feel I'm right there.
Again, it could benefit from some sharpening. particularly the blurry guy in front.
Don't get me wrong, it's great that he's out of focus. Gives the photo nice depth. Yet you don't want him to disappear either.

[quadtones]

Thanks so much for the support. Sometimes folks look at this "stuff" and complain about the grain. I spent too many years pushing Tri-X and HP-5, getting absolutely no shadow detail, completely blown highlights. I love the gritty, grainy look. In fact, I think I prefer the look of my 60's and 70's vintage lenses [field curvature? coma?] to the current crop of Leica optics. These were shot with the 28mm Summicron. I think I prefer my 35mm v4 Summicron for the "look" if not the field of view on the M8. I know I'm pretty happy with the results I'm getting from these files. By the way, was that last shot from Toronto--it's been years since I've been there. LIved there in the early 70's and about half the family is from there. Somehow, I think Toronto really ends at Davenport Ave. Like the shot.

--Norm

[weser]

By the way, was that last shot from Toronto--it's been years since I've been there. LIved there in the early 70's and about half the family is from there. Somehow, I think Toronto really ends at Davenport Ave. Like the shot.

--Norm

yes, it's in Toronto at the Distillery District.

[Jim Evidon]

Tom,
Thank you for starting this thread. It has been a real eye opener. I am convinced now that very high ISO color is not a good idea unless you are after high contrast color shifts. That can be very effective on some subjects such as some of the ones you took. However, for B&W, your results absolutely blew me away.

Once you are no longer concerned with color noise, the pictures look very film like. Consider that the Leica made it's reputation using B&W film in the hands of Fenninger, Capa (both of them) and the like all of whom produced compelling available light photos that were grainy due to the limitations of the film that was then available. Those same photos still grab me every time I look at them.

I guess I am trying to say that you have opened our eyes to the possibility that the M8 can still produce the same type of image. I would be curious to see what results can be achieved shooting with the M8 set on B&W to begin with. I know that we should alway shoot in color to retain as much raw information as possible and do the conversion in post processing. Still, all the same, I wonder how shooting in B&W to begin with would compare when we consider the final images.

Jim Evidon

[tmfabian]

hehe, thanks for the kind words.
It's kind of a weird thing for me...I rarely shoot color...i'm fairly abysmal at composing with colors...so I shoot almost exclusively in b&w. I think that high ISO color shots need to be much more carefully exposed and processed...and i've noticed it helps A LOT if you take careful time to set white balance almost exactly (i've noticed most of the horrible noise in high ISO color shots comes from tweaking WB in PP)

part of the reason for starting this thread was to display a counter point to that over hyped distaste for the noise in the m8's files...especially when there are other issues with the camera that are more important to me (i'm not a huge fan of the battery life, although I realize the battery is sooo tiny that it's actually great battery life for it's size, I suppose that's just a carry over from film...where I only had to worry about the battery perhaps once or twice a year, whereas with digital I have to worry about the battery at the end of every day.)

I'm going to try some proper color 2500 iso shots this week if I can, this thread has been a bit lacking in the color department, and it would be nice to see if I can work in some nice presets and workflow for it in case the need should ever arise for me.
Tom,
Thank you for starting this thread. It has been a real eye opener. I am convinced now that very high ISO color is not a good idea unless you are after high contrast color shifts. That can be very effective on some subjects such as some of the ones you took. However, for B&W, your results absolutely blew me away.

Once you are no longer concerned with color noise, the pictures look very film like. Consider that the Leica made it's reputation using B&W film in the hands of Fenninger, Capa (both of them) and the like all of whom produced compelling available light photos that were grainy due to the limitations of the film that was then available. Those same photos still grab me every time I look at them.

I guess I am trying to say that you have opened our eyes to the possibility that the M8 can still produce the same type of image. I would be curious to see what results can be achieved shooting with the M8 set on B&W to begin with. I know that we should alway shoot in color to retain as much raw information as possible and do the conversion in post processing. Still, all the same, I wonder how shooting in B&W to begin with would compare when we consider the final images.

Jim Evidon

[Jim Evidon]

Tom,
Still, i would like to know if you're shooting with the B&W option in the camera menu or if you shoot color and then convert to B&W in the PP?
Jim

[tmfabian]

Oh sorry...I was really tired when I wrote that last night.
I shoot raw and convert in lightroom using a preset I made up for the m8 for high iso.

I never shoot jpg...ever...not only does it not give me more wiggle room in the pp, but shooting dng also seems to give a wee bit of extra life to battery performance since it's a quicker write time.

Tom

Tom,
Still, i would like to know if you're shooting with the B&W option in the camera menu or if you shoot color and then convert to B&W in the PP?
Jim

[Jim Evidon]

Tom,
In reading Sean Reid's new review of the new Nikon D700, which shares menu choices with my D300 plus some additional one's, he commented that he prefers to shoot B&W and sets the camera for B&W shooting Raw with a B&W jpeg backup. He goes on to comment that Raw retains all the data whether you shoot color or B&W, so I guess it is just as easy to shoot B&W to begin with rather than shoot color and do a PP to B&W. I assume that goes for DNG and NEF Raw. Does that make sense to you? It sound right to me.
Regards,
Jim

[tmfabian]

yeah, that makes perfect sense, however it's just not my method for workflow...i've never seen a point to using a b&w jpeg shot along with raw, although countless other people swear by it. I have my entire system set up to copy all dngs from my card to a folder labeled by date and client/event name with automatic generic metadata including copyright and automatic conversion to either a certain color appearance preset or my various b&w presets, after which all my files are backed up to 2 different 2TB servers (one on site and one offsite) and a b&w contact sheet is automatically printed out as well.

this all occurs regardless of whether I am home or on the road, often times after an event occurs I plug in my cards and my laptop has a high speed 3g wireless card connected to it so by the time I drive home I have contact sheets waiting for me and the files already backed up on the 2 servers.

everyone has their own workflow, and I certainly recommend tinkering until you've found one that works right for you.

Tom,
In reading Sean Reid's new review of the new Nikon D700, which shares menu choices with my D300 plus some additional one's, he commented that he prefers to shoot B&W and sets the camera for B&W shooting Raw with a B&W jpeg backup. He goes on to comment that Raw retains all the data whether you shoot color or B&W, so I guess it is just as easy to shoot B&W to begin with rather than shoot color and do a PP to B&W. I assume that goes for DNG and NEF Raw. Does that make sense to you? It sound right to me.
Regards,
Jim

[Jim Evidon]

Sean Reid wrote that he does it do produce a B&W image on the LCD screen. It helps to visualize the final product. Not having that Ansel Adams eye for previsualization, it makes some sense to me.

For a professional your system sounds very efficient, but as an amateur, it is much to sophisticated for my needs, not to mention budget.

I'll try both methods as I go along and see what works best for me. The bottom line is that since Reid also reconverts his Raw images that survive the cut back to color in PP in order to process with some of the very sophisticated BW conversion programs his method does include an extra step.
Jim

[tmfabian]

http://lh4.ggpht.com/tmfabian/SMCM6_I4r9I/AAAAAAAABKI/Srjq34iRg_g/s800/L1006558.jpg

[tmfabian]

so i've finally gotten around to exporting my presets i use for my high iso shots to my website so any of ya'all who use lightroom feel free to see if they work for you if you want.

http://www.tmfabian.com/presets/

happy shooting folks.

edit: PS these presets only work with raw files...sending a jpeg through these will give you a file that looks like an alligator chewed it up and spit it back out.

[Jim Evidon]

Tom,
I downloaded them but my PC needs to know what program to use to open them.
regards,
Jim Evidon

[tmfabian]

Tom,
I downloaded them but my PC needs to know what program to use to open them.
regards,
Jim Evidon

they're lightroom presets.
so, if you have lightroom you just goto the develop module and where all those presets are you can right click and import presets...then just point the program to where they are on your computer.

[tmfabian]

http://lh3.ggpht.com/tmfabian/SMHesEsxPFI/AAAAAAAABLI/y2rpOzz3D2I/s800/L1006569.jpg


http://lh4.ggpht.com/tmfabian/SMHmDwzvfdI/AAAAAAAABLQ/p1E3RmN_SPY/s800/L1006575.jpg


http://lh6.ggpht.com/tmfabian/SMIZOdbCaCI/AAAAAAAABLg/5v2KV8XgpcM/s800/L1006593.jpg


http://lh6.ggpht.com/tmfabian/SMIedMrHjCI/AAAAAAAABLo/ZNbaAbu96OQ/s800/L1006589.jpg

[jplomley]

M8 + ZM 25/2.8 @ ISO 2500

Workflow involves C1 + PP in CS3.

[tmfabian]

http://lh5.ggpht.com/tmfabian/SMQ0x5md4JI/AAAAAAAABM0/26vGmMTb6tc/s800/L1006808.jpg

[Artorius]

Here is a quickie from last night. Nothing special, resized for web. Shot at 1250 with -2 ev. Converted in ACR, resized for the web
EXIF data embedded in pic.

http://www.rcartworks.com/images/Jerry%20Miller/2_AHJ_M8_L1002032.jpg

[Ray Nalley]

I think the thread is interesting because it shows how meaningless ISO numbers are to digital files and how malleable RAW files manipulated with ACR really are. Throw in a little Noiseware (or your favorite noise reduction software) and digital is just way more versatile than that roll of Tri-X.

[Kensey]

so i've finally gotten around to exporting my presets i use for my high iso shots to my website so any of ya'all who use lightroom feel free to see if they work for you if you want.

http://www.tmfabian.com/presets/

happy shooting folks.

edit: PS these presets only work with raw files...sending a jpeg through these will give you a file that looks like an alligator chewed it up and spit it back out.

Many thanks indeed! Very useful presets
Kind regards
Ken

[MikeL]

I think the thread is interesting because it shows how meaningless ISO numbers are to digital files......

Ray, you would have gotten along great with Sitesniper. It's too bad he left.....

[tomasis]

Ray, you would have gotten along great with Sitesniper. It's too bad he left.....

or Sitemistic :D It would be great gang of same mind-like people.

[doxx]

http://markushartel.com/forums/L1020007.jpg

[sreidvt]

Sean Reid wrote that he does it do produce a B&W image on the LCD screen. It helps to visualize the final product. Not having that Ansel Adams eye for previsualization, it makes some sense to me.

For a professional your system sounds very efficient, but as an amateur, it is much to sophisticated for my needs, not to mention budget.

I'll try both methods as I go along and see what works best for me. The bottom line is that since Reid also reconverts his Raw images that survive the cut back to color in PP in order to process with some of the very sophisticated BW conversion programs his method does include an extra step.
Jim

Actually, I usually use the JFI profiles to go straight from RAW to B&W in the C1 conversions. In many cases, I never even see a color version of my pictures (and don't want to).

Cheers,

Sean

[tmfabian]

No problem, glad they were of use.
I was recently browsing a few photographers websites and saw that they actually SELL their PS actions and Lightroom Presets!!?!?!?!
Anywho, just glad to help out...hope to see some pictures.

Happy Shooting as always,
Tom

Many thanks indeed! Very useful presets
Kind regards
Ken

[tmfabian]

I don't know why but the grit in this intrigues me.
http://lh6.ggpht.com/tmfabian/SMirB3B-EHI/AAAAAAAABOM/Qp5_E6zORRI/s800/L1006577.jpg

[scaryink]

Hey everyone. This is my first post with a new M8.
I purchased it last Saturday. I had a bunch of equipment stolen from my luggage while in transit to Buenos Aires a couple of weeks ago. Soo my Canon 1ds is in the hands of some happy thief.

I love the minimalist approach of this kit I shoot film in 4x5 (arca) and MF (rollei) and this camera fits right in.

This is from last night. I love the look at 2500 - very filmlike. I used the icc phase one sepia profile. No color, luminence, or noise reduction.

[Shadowplay]

I will almost always choose to shoot film, but it was raining tonight and I was too lazy to walk about enough to kill an entire roll at 3200, so I just took a couple with the M8. I thought of this thread when I cranked it up to 2500, so here's my attempt at sharing:

http://www.eek3.us/ot/L1010031.jpg

[Keith]

Never used my M8 at 2500 but couldn't resist ... purely from curiosity I guess. Very unimaginative shot of a bowl of fruit with a 90mm Summicron but it gave me an idea of what to expect and I have to say I don't mind the noise at all ... but then again I've never been a real fan of the rather brutal reality of high end digital images!

http://i56.photobucket.com/albums/g196/wheelie52/RFF%20Storage/L1000012.jpg

[tmfabian]

Never used my M8 at 2500 but couldn't resist ... purely from curiosity I guess. Very unimaginative shot of a bowl of fruit with a 90mm Summicron but it gave me an idea of what to expect and I have to say I don't mind the noise at all ... but then again I've never been a real fan of the rather brutal reality of high end digital images!


I really need to get me a 90 cron one of these days.
Do you use a magnifier at all with that lens keith?

[Ray Nalley]

Off topic but Thomas, since you recently graduated from NESOP, I was just curious how prevalent rangefinders were among students. I've been out of that loop for so long I have no idea what is hot in photography schools. Thanks.

[tmfabian]

Off topic but Thomas, since you recently graduated from NESOP, I was just curious how prevalent rangefinders were among students. I've been out of that loop for so long I have no idea what is hot in photography schools. Thanks.

they weren't unheard of. There were 4 students with leicas, 1 with a bessa, 1 with a contax g2, 1 had a russian of some sort...i forget which, and 1 had an epson rd-1 for a while (all these numbers were from my class of only ~60 people...so that's not too bad). Then there were 3 instructors that shot leicas as well. Believe it or not...and this is way off topic for this thread...but film is making a huge comeback there.

i'd say the breakdown was something like this
1% Sony DLSR
4% MF of some variety
10% 4x5
11% rangefinder
37% Canon DSLR
37% Nikon DSLR

[petepete_seattle]

Oops, here it is again bigger, also one I took the same night that has an incredibly limited tonal range. These were HP5, 7-hours in Rodinal, 8 mls Rodinal in 1000 mls water. 1/30 second, f4, 45mm Rokkor.
Is that Kellie H in the photo?

[Keith]

I really need to get me a 90 cron one of these days.
Do you use a magnifier at all with that lens keith?

It's not normally a lens I would put on the M8 but it was sitting there next to my M3 in the cabinet, which is what I would normally use it on, and I thought why not?

They're a very heavy and large lens (being an early example) but I must admit it felt good on the M8 ... well photographing a bowl of fruit at least! :p Having seen what it does on the M8 I might have to actually consider getting a magnifier and using it more as they truly are a gorgeous bokeh machine. :)

[Ray Nalley]

Thanks, Thomas. Didn't mean to hijack the thread. Was just curious and you were handy. :)

[Way]

Because of this thread 'm really liking iso 2500 with a compensation -1 or -1 1/3.

[Gabriel M.A.]

I think the thread is interesting because it shows how meaningless ISO numbers are to digital files and how malleable RAW files manipulated with ACR really are. Throw in a little Noiseware (or your favorite noise reduction software) and digital is just way more versatile than that roll of Tri-X.

Anything is meaningless when argued as such (like saying "healthy living" is meaningless because you'll end up dead anyway). Or meaningful, when argued as such (like saying "meaningless" is "meaningless" when you've already assigned meaning to how "meaningless" it is)

Then there's the "who cares" bunch, who like a certain president of a certain economically "slowed-down" country, will not be persuaded by facts, no matter how glaringly they stare at their face.

[tmfabian]

from my walk to get chinese.

http://lh6.ggpht.com/tmfabian/SNL2XWAWtzI/AAAAAAAABQs/v3tSuIMTqiM/s800/L1000167.jpg


http://lh6.ggpht.com/tmfabian/SNL2XYXeiLI/AAAAAAAABQ0/0hTJ660TTzw/s800/L1000174.jpg

[ali_baba]

are you using those lightroom presets you posted earlier in the thread still?
and you over expose by what stop?

thanks

[tmfabian]

are you using those lightroom presets you posted earlier in the thread still?
and you over expose by what stop?

thanks

these are straight jpegs right out of the camera shot AT 2500 no over or underexposure...new firmware FTW.

[abenner]

thomas - nice shots, impressive as usual, especially for iso 2500 and especially for M8 jpegs. Curious, what lens are you using?

[tmfabian]

thomas - nice shots, impressive as usual, especially for iso 2500 and especially for M8 jpegs. Curious, what lens are you using?

thanks, but all the credit goes to whoever wrote the new firmware. The lens is a 50 pre-asph lux.

[meven]

http://lh6.ggpht.com/tmfabian/SNL2XWAWtzI/AAAAAAAABQs/v3tSuIMTqiM/s800/L1000167.jpg


Impressive! I can't believe it is ISO2500

[tmfabian]

I dunno what this is...but I can't sleep and I cleaned my sensor and was just checking to make sure there were no smudges and serious flare from those evil sensor swabs.

Has anyone else ever ended up with bad streaking from sensor swabs?

http://lh5.ggpht.com/tmfabian/SNM4FBXNvLI/AAAAAAAABRE/DT6a42EOfuE/s800/L1000259.jpg

[gdi]

ISO 2500 using Lightroom - I think I like C1 better...

http://www.tunachaser.com/modules/pnCPG/coppermine/albums/userpics/10001/2500-1.jpg

[Keith]

I dunno what this is...but I can't sleep and I cleaned my sensor and was just checking to make sure there were no smudges and serious flare from those evil sensor swabs.

Has anyone else ever ended up with bad streaking from sensor swabs?

http://lh5.ggpht.com/tmfabian/SNM4FBXNvLI/AAAAAAAABRE/DT6a42EOfuE/s800/L1000259.jpg


I cleaned my sensor the other night with some swabs and had a hell of a job achieving a streak free surface ... I got through three swabs before I eventually got it right!

I bought the kit recently from an eBay seller in England called 'Digipad' ... the kit with fluid and five swabs was arount $28.00 Australian including post.

[feenej]

film

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2118/2270498630_6267137cdc_o.jpg

[gdi]

Another color shot - this time with C1, all Noise reduction was off. No sharpening and the focus at F1.2 was on the horse's eye...

http://www.tunachaser.com/modules/pnCPG/coppermine/albums/userpics/10001/ISO2500001_2.jpg

[tmfabian]

A combination shot...testing to make sure focus was right but it was also at 2500 iso.
I dropped my m8 from standing position after some dipsh*t on a bike tried to zip by me on the FREAKING SIDEWALK and clipped me. Focus was on the numbers...so hooray no misalignment and oddly no external damage to the camera.

http://lh5.ggpht.com/tmfabian/SNRJR3wNTzI/AAAAAAAABRU/42F7aZ_VuEA/s800/L1000021-1.jpg

[meven]

No the most interesting subject but I quite like the grain.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3005/2870896833_3a2d6cbee9.jpg?v=0

[Keith]

This thead has done a lot for the reputation of the M8 IMO. One of the main complaints about this camera from the time of it's release was the non usability of the higher ISO settings which obviously isn't correct if you browse through the images here. Obviously good 2500 ISO shots are not a 'gimee' and require careful exposure and competent post processing skills but the capability is there which goes against the assumptions made in a lot of prevous threads.

Kudos to Thomas for giving people who are considering the M8 but are put off by some of it's issues the chance to see what it's capable of! This thread has been a shot in the arm in this regard, it's certainly made me look at my M8 in a slightly different light!

[Ray Nalley]

Thomas is a professional. Just wondered if he has done any commercial work at ISO 2500 with the M8 and how it was received by clients?

[Keith]

Thomas is a professional. Just wondered if he has done any commercial work at ISO 2500 with the M8 and how it was received by clients?


That could be stretching the camera's capabilities a little Ray and you make a good point. What keeps us M8 users all happy may not suit the man/woman paying the bills.

I supect that the low light gigs I do at the galleries may be OK at 2500 if I'm careful with exposure ... and luckily for me they (QUT) are not looking for the type of images that other organisations may require.

[benkelley]

A combination shot...testing to make sure focus was right but it was also at 2500 iso.
I dropped my m8 from standing position after some dipsh*t on a bike tried to zip by me on the FREAKING SIDEWALK and clipped me. Focus was on the numbers...so hooray no misalignment and oddly no external damage to the camera.


It's a tough cookie, this camera. I've had some run-ins with hard surfaces, and no problems, 'til I fell on the rocks by the ocean. Ugh–that was bad news. But Leica fixed it, no problem.

Anyway, I think that the sidewalks in Boston are a mighty dangerous place. Anywhere in the city, actually, where you have two or more of: pedestrians, bicycles, or cars. Sometimes I think that the BU/BC students are taking suicide classes, then dressing in dark clothes and jumping out in front of my car at night for their homework.

[tmfabian]

Thomas is a professional. Just wondered if he has done any commercial work at ISO 2500 with the M8 and how it was received by clients?

I have oddly used 2500 on quite a few occasions to pay the bills. But as anyone who makes a living off of photography would suggest, it's a last resort with any camera...everyone I know, even those who shoot the D3 tell me they never go above 800 ISO unless it's absolutely necessary.

I personally believe that ISO 2500 on the m8 is sort of like an expanded ISO range setting since the incremental difference in noise between 160-1250 is actually quite small and the jump from 1250 to 2500 is way out of proportion. That being said...I use any ISO from 160-1250 regularly to pay the bills...i just had a shoot a few days ago where the entire thing was done at 1250 and the client already booked me for another...that should say something of 1250 acceptability in the field.

Also, when you look at images on a monitor you see every glob of noise and grain, but when my images are printed by the client... especially for magazines... the grain/noise disappears soo much it really didn't matter what ISO I set the camera to.

[tmfabian]

It's a tough cookie, this camera. I've had some run-ins with hard surfaces, and no problems, 'til I fell on the rocks by the ocean. Ugh–that was bad news. But Leica fixed it, no problem.

Anyway, I think that the sidewalks in Boston are a mighty dangerous place. Anywhere in the city, actually, where you have two or more of: pedestrians, bicycles, or cars. Sometimes I think that the BU/BC students are taking suicide classes, then dressing in dark clothes and jumping out in front of my car at night for their homework.

Yeah...it's insane now that schools are back in session...summer was so peaceful.

Yeah, I'm impressed how well the camera held up...I've dropped it a few times since I bought it...but both times it landed on soft ground (first time was in a pile of dog ***, second was onto grass) the concrete thump scared the bejesus out of me...

[Gabriel M.A.]

film

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2118/2270498630_6267137cdc_o.jpg

Cool! So you splurged on an M8 and now are testing it with ISO 2500 to look like film, eh? ;)

[Ray Nalley]

"Also, when you look at images on a monitor you see every glob of noise and grain, but when my images are printed by the client... especially for magazines... the grain/noise disappears soo much it really didn't matter what ISO I set the camera to."

Yeah, screens used even in magazines tend to hide some of the noise. Which always helps.

[Gabriel M.A.]

A combination shot...testing to make sure focus was right but it was also at 2500 iso.
I dropped my m8 from standing position after some dipsh*t on a bike tried to zip by me on the FREAKING SIDEWALK and clipped me.

Cyclists in this area also seem to suffer from "everybody else is an idiot" syndrome, and they get in the way of cars, pedestrians. I once pointed out to one where the bike lane is (the ones that remain, because our Incredibly Smart Governor who got dropped as a VP contender for McCain won't pay for infrastructure, unless bridges fall) he told me to "shut up", and ran into a woman as he was looking at me.

A lot of "sense of entitlement" on some of them, making the rest look bad.

[gdi]

This thead has done a lot for the reputation of the M8 IMO. One of the main complaints about this camera from the time of it's release was the non usability of the higher ISO settings which obviously isn't correct if you browse through the images here. Obviously good 2500 ISO shots are not a 'gimee' and require careful exposure and competent post processing skills but the capability is there which goes against the assumptions made in a lot of prevous threads.

Kudos to Thomas for giving people who are considering the M8 but are put off by some of it's issues the chance to see what it's capable of! This thread has been a shot in the arm in this regard, it's certainly made me look at my M8 in a slightly different light!

While I have become more comfortable with 2500 and use it quite often, it pays to understand the power of downsizing to reduce noise. These images at the posted sizes appear almost noise free, but at full size it is apparent and much more difficult to control in color.

And yes, at common print sizes the noise is tolerable but there is a threshold at which it becomes detrimental. It would be interesting to see some 100% crops of color shots, with shadows, in order to compare the advantages of different techniques.

Here is a full crop from raw with no noise reduction (in processing, or Noise ninja,etc.) or sharpening. Suggestions for improvement?

http://www.tunachaser.com/modules/pnCPG/coppermine/albums/userpics/10001/ISO2500005.jpg

[tmfabian]

Some boring shots, but I've finally had some time to do some work with noise ninja and work out some settings. Full image followed by a serious crop. 2500 iso light was a mere 40W lightbulb
full image:
http://lh6.ggpht.com/tmfabian/SNVekq6KmEI/AAAAAAAABRk/0EkVfJE-bwc/s800/L1000107.jpg


crop:
http://lh3.ggpht.com/tmfabian/SNWStUIoRLI/AAAAAAAABTA/WkIJLXV5Sog/s800/L1000107.jpg

edit:oops crop got exported as the wrong dimensions

[gdi]

Whoooa, the resized looks great, but that Noise Ninja does some serious damage! I would compare it with no NR and see which looks better at full crop - it may look better with the noise.

[tmfabian]

So...i'm doing laundry...which is particularly boring and got to thinking about how much people love to compare cameras....SO....
Here are 2 images using the same settings in lightroom with exactly the same dimensions for crop. One is from the m8 the other is from the nikon D3 of which I used the sample images from nikons website. The m8 was set to ISO 2500 and the D3 was apparently set to 3200 according to the website. To keep bias down, I'm gonna give it a while to say which was from which.
Both images were original sizes before the crop as well, the D3 image was the full resolution of 12.1MP (just so there's no confusion about whether or not the original d3 image was downsized prior to the crop.)
http://lh6.ggpht.com/tmfabian/SNWEBg4usZI/AAAAAAAABS4/Y4nJ6U-u8ZU/s800/Corrado_Baseball_Bats_ISO3200.jpg


http://lh6.ggpht.com/tmfabian/SNWBhLTkXNI/AAAAAAAABSg/_7VV-_FcErw/s800/L1000147.jpg

[gdi]

The second is probably the M8 with Noise Ninja?

[Ray Nalley]

These "the M8 high ISO performance mops the floor with any other digital camera" threads are getting silly. It just ain't so. The M8 is a good camera, but tales of its image quality are becoming apocryphal in the annuls of digital photo lure.

[gdi]

These "the M8 high ISO performance mops the floor with any other digital camera" threads are getting silly.

Gotta link? I'd like to read that one myself!

[tmfabian]

These "the M8 high ISO performance mops the floor with any other digital camera" threads are getting silly. It just ain't so. The M8 is a good camera, but tales of its image quality are becoming apocryphal in the annuls of digital photo lure.

I don't think anyone is saying that it mops the floor with any other camera...all I ever tried to do was dispel all the horse *** floating around that it sucks with high ISO.

The point that the M8 is a good camera that's perfectly capable of providing decent high ISO is all I'm trying to convey. There are a ton of reports that it's completely unusable or that camera A makes camera B completely obsolete and I finally just got sick of it all and snapped after reading kambers review, which is why I started this thread. The concept that this camera is completely unusable beyond 640 ISO calls into serious question the competence of anyone who makes that claim.

Listen...it's not perfect, but it's a darn good camera that has received a terrible reputation for no reason.

[gdi]

I don't think anyone is saying that it mops the floor with any other camera...all I ever tried to do was dispel all the horse *** floating around that it sucks with high ISO.

The point that the M8 is a good camera that's perfectly capable of providing decent high ISO is all I'm trying to convey. There are a ton of reports that it's completely unusable or that camera A makes camera B completely obsolete and I finally just got sick of it all and snapped after reading kambers review, which is why I started this thread. The concept that this camera is completely unusable beyond 640 ISO calls into serious question the competence of anyone who makes that claim.

Listen...it's not perfect, but it's a darn good camera that has received a terrible reputation for no reason.

You mean he was criticizing THIS thread? The one he's been posting to for a week?

Odd.

[tmfabian]

The second is probably the M8 with Noise Ninja?

I sent both of them through noise ninja with auto profile.
To be honest, that makes the D3's files a bit better, as after noise reduction they retained more detail and less "smearing" But comparing a camera that's using 2-3 year old technology vs one using brand new, and widely accepted as the best noise reduction technology I was just hoping to point out that a) the m8 isn't half as bad as most believe it to be and b) that buying the latest and greatest won't solve all your problems. Digital camera noise is something that's going to be with us for a long time to come, we just have to figure out proper PP to deal with it, regardless of what camera the files come from.

[tmfabian]

You mean he was criticizing THIS thread? The one he's been posting to for a week?

Odd.

???
i was talking about the review that has been linked to a dozen times on this forum...it made me snap, not on it's own, but in addition to countless other negative reviews of the high ISO performance of the camera

Whoooa, the resized looks great, but that Noise Ninja does some serious damage! I would compare it with no NR and see which looks better at full crop - it may look better with the noise

Yeah, that's why I generally keep away from noise reduction programs...I'm still working out/fine tuning the settings, until now i've only used the color noise reduction settings in lightroom, so if anyone has any tips with noise ninja I'm all ears.

edit:oops figured out what the problem was with that image....I had sharpening set to high in camera and also accidentally set sharpening to 75 in lightroom...wow, i'm not doing that again.

[gdi]

???
i was talking about the review that has been linked to a dozen times on this forum...it made me snap, not on it's own, but in addition to countless other negative reviews of the high ISO performance of the camera


I was joking about Nalley's complaint about a thread proclaiming the M8 the greatest at high ISO.

Yeah, that's why I generally keep away from noise reduction programs...I'm still working out/fine tuning the settings, until now i've only used the color noise reduction settings in lightroom, so if anyone has any tips with noise ninja I'm all ears.

edit:oops figured out what the problem was with that image....I had sharpening set to high in camera and also accidentally set sharpening to 75 in lightroom...wow, i'm not doing that again.

I try not to use it either - I have Neat Image, but I find I am very wary of over doing it, so I end up using just a little now and then. I usually just print and see how it looks first.

I'm sure most people can figure out what is going in the thread - the M8 has been overly criticized for poor 2500 performance. I did it too, before I read and worked a bit at getting the exposure right. I see this thread as being a way to compare results and hopefully share techniques to maximize the utility of the camera - not to claim it as the best at anything....

[tmfabian]

I was joking about Nalley's complaint about a thread proclaiming the M8 the greatest at high ISO.


ahh...haha...sorry, i must be going a little insane, i'm in the middle of doing a months worth of laundry (i've moved twice in the past month, so i've been screwed on getting simple things done lately.)

about printing first...I absolutely agree with you, it's really insane how much we get tricked into thinking an image is overly noisy on these high resolution monitors these days...since in most cases where the image looked terrible on my monitor they looked perfectly fine in print.

Back to folding laundry...:(

[tmfabian]

alright, i've decided to give noiseninja and any other noise reduction program the screw off maneuver in light of recent attempts. I'm much happier with lightroom and a simple color noise reduction...plus it speeds things up eliminating a step.


http://lh5.ggpht.com/tmfabian/SNcVoY0w55I/AAAAAAAABT0/konGAB0LczI/s800/L1000219.jpg


color version thumbnail attached in case anyone likes it better. I'm completely biased towards B&W...but I wouldn't mind hearing which version ya'all like.

[ali_baba]

ill toss this one up in here as well, im quite impressed with the results.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3213/2874213607_27df7d22cf_o.jpg

[tmfabian]

The only thing I accomplished today was to get stinking drunk off a bunch of wine, so I went for a walk and managed to actually snap off a picture with no hand shake.


http://lh5.ggpht.com/tmfabian/SNbpKZBJl1I/AAAAAAAABTg/bYXdVgadASY/s800/L1000353.jpg

[feenej]

Cool! So you splurged on an M8 and now are testing it with ISO 2500 to look like film, eh? ;)

Haha. Nope. Maybe an M2 or M3 in December though. Maybe not.

[tmfabian]

sleep deprivation + oreos for breakfast + weird circular lightbulb thingy =

http://lh4.ggpht.com/tmfabian/SNi2b-VA0OI/AAAAAAAABUE/M2Dkgjflvu8/s800/L1000412.jpg


sleep deprivation + weird door thing =
http://lh6.ggpht.com/tmfabian/SNkLSjFKTMI/AAAAAAAABUU/qv-etVduhuw/s800/L1000471.jpg


http://lh4.ggpht.com/tmfabian/SNweKa3KZ7I/AAAAAAAABU8/q-6IwiyPU20/s800/L1000667.jpg

[tmfabian]

Went to a red sox game tonight with the sister. apparently no one likes to sit on wet seats 'cause fenway was freaking empty.


http://lh6.ggpht.com/tmfabian/SOBZL1ZuxXI/AAAAAAAABVU/-YVyXOH0xxU/s800/L1000766.jpg


also a wide angle shot of a bird flying over our seats (or is it a UFO?!?!?!?)


http://lh4.ggpht.com/tmfabian/SOB3bDu7KRI/AAAAAAAABVc/_NQEMQeVhAo/s800/L1000846.jpg

[Keith]

One thing I've noticed Thomas and it was mentioned earlier in this thread, is the relevance of a bit of noise in an image when you get to the print stage. I've finally started to come to grips with my Epson R2400 and have been printing a few images from my M8 .. one in particular that was a little noisy in the shadows shot inside a house at 2500 really didn't clean up well with filtering at all. When I printed the image, as it was a nice shot and I wanted to give to the owner of the house, I used smooth finish heavy weight matt and it printed perfectly with no trace of the noise at all. That was at A4 admittedly but I was amazed just how good it was! All this pixel peeping is well and good and it's easy to look at noise in an image on your monitor and rate it one way or the other but as a print at a reasonable size it has far less importance!

[tmfabian]

i'm convinced this camera gets better with age/use.


http://lh4.ggpht.com/tmfabian/SOfkEbsrLYI/AAAAAAAABXk/Id3tFlKGtM0/s800/L1000574.jpg


http://lh5.ggpht.com/tmfabian/SOfkEWzYUQI/AAAAAAAABXs/maE3LPwFHv0/s800/L1000594.jpg

[dcsang]

uh huh...
This is from the "Glo Bowl" at the local bowlerama - me and the girlfriend and another couple were there last night - I think the M8 @ ISO2500 performed quite well considering it was extremely low light (they use black light for the "glo")
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3043/2911744263_5d569ee5bf.jpg

a crop of a Voigtlander 28mm f2.0 Ultron image - @ f2.0 - 1/15 - ISO2500
If you want to see the full size, head to my Flickr page - link in my sig

Dave

[tmfabian]

http://lh5.ggpht.com/tmfabian/SOxERAPcPjI/AAAAAAAABYc/T0Mnc5fDWMY/s800/L1000687.jpg