Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/12/13
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Mark, I agree, an unfortunate translation. A cultural/linguistic/semantic problem - "Ever" comes over a lot stronger than "Previously". Geschichte can mean both "Story" and "History". And they are not clearly claiming that ISO 2500 alone is doing it either. In my view, a very poor (as are many) Leica translation Douglas G2E Translations, Hannover MARK DAVISON wrote: > Peter, > > I think you protest too much. The claim Leica makes is this, taken > from the M8 brochure: > > "The highest film speed settings of up to > ISO 2500 now allow much more detailed > pictures to be taken than was ever possible > with analog films. As a result, the M8 > opens up a new chapter in the history of > available light photography." > > It is not a clearly worded claim, but you can see how it might set up > the expectation that the M8 has superior low-light performance to all > existing digital cameras. > > I myself have witnessed blotchy blue channel noise in the M8 at ISO > 1250, and strange pattern noise (small horizontal and vertical bars) > in RAW files. You do not see these things in ISO 1600 color negative > film. This new chapter has more twists and turns than you might expect. > > In addition, if you take long exposure (2 to 4 secs) with the lens cap > on, you will see much more dark-frame noise than you would expect, > pointing to a deficiency in the dark frame noise subtraction > techniques. If you run the same experiment with a Nikon D200 with long > exposure noise reduction enabled, you get no visible noise at all! > > I look forward to the return of my M8 from Solms so I can investigate > how the new and improved M8 performs at high ISO. > > Mark Davison > > > >> From: Peter Klein <pklein@2alpha.net> >> Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug@leica-users.org> >> To: lug@leica-users.org >> Subject: Re: [Leica] lurker speaks re: High ISO thread >> Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2006 15:50:42 -0800 >> >> Leica never said any such thing. But there is a body of Internet >> noise out there, to the effect that unless the M8 was significantly >> superior to the 5D or IDS Mk II in all aspects, especially ISO 1600 >> and 3200 noise performance, that the M8 and Leica did not deserve to >> exist, and should deservedly go down in flames to the derision of >> digiterati everywhere. >> >> If this is the case, why are Nikon, Pentax, Olympus, Sony, etc. >> allowed to exist? >> >> The whole idea is, quite frankly, bovine effluent. It's a combination >> of anti-Leica reverse-elitism and the hegemony of Canon marketing. >> Whether the M8 is suitable for one's style of photography or too >> expensive for your budget is another matter. But a rangefinder is >> not an SLR, the Canon look is not the be-all and end-all of >> aesthetics, and a camera optimized for resolution with a body of >> existing, wonderful optics deserves better than it's been getting in >> some quarters. >> >> If the M8 were being marketed as an all-around picture-taking tool >> for the masses, such comparisons might carry a bit more weight. But >> there are reasons to take a small, light, nimble camera with fast >> lenses that focus where *you* tell them to, over much bigger, >> heavier, (acoustically) noisier machines that don't do wide angles so >> well. >> >> Canons are fine machines. So is the M8, for different reasons. If >> people want to talk about the relative merits of various design >> choices with respect to various kinds of photography, fine. But this >> "Leica should die because the 5D has less noise at ISO 3200" is just >> plain dumb. >> >> --Peter >> >>> As far as I know Leica made no such claim. I think this was a wish >>> of some one hee ar on another list. >>> >>> Gene >>> >>> >>> -------------- Original message from "Robert Jagitsch" >>> <robert.jagitsch@gmail.com>: -------------- >>> >>> >>> > Lastly, I would like to see where the factory claimed that ISO 2500 >>> > performance would be equal to Canon 5D performance at ISO 3200. What >>> > did the factory claim, can someone point me to it? >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >