Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/01/25

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

Subject: [Leica] M8, Macro 90 and nature photography
From: phamard at numericable.fr (Philippe Amard)
Date: Thu Jan 25 12:39:50 2007
References: <518616.34612.qm@web32515.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <6F63CAAE-C768-47D7-B9B3-76C6150729D3@mac.com>

The M8 handles noise issue very smartly - congratulations on your 
purchase George!
And thanks for the very infroamtive pictures
Phileicangemix


Lottermoser George wrote:

> Thus far I've found the auto white balance to perform poorly under  
> indoor lighting conditions. However, the manual white balance  
> performs almost too well. By that I mean that it seems to neutralize  
> to point of perfection, at times losing the illusion of warmth  
> (easily recovered in processing). I carry a 4x4 inch piece of  
> flexible translucent material (which I use for softening light in the  
> studio), place it in front of the lens, and perform the manual white  
> point task once in a room upon entering a new condition. Takes me  
> back to my old video days.
>
> If you need 2500 ISO - you may be disappointed. 1250 is quite  
> useable. And 640 works quite well, 320 performs as good as or better  
> than film. If folks want to compare M8 noise with Canon (or other  
> chip) noise I think they should also consider rendering of fine  
> detail at related speeds. For me this is an ongoing balancing act  
> with the results in print as the only real judge.
>
> Bottom line: if, as you say, you're happy with what you're using, why  
> change?
>
> In my case. I found myself no longer happy with the work flow of film  
> processing and scanning; while at the same time wishing for the M  
> form factor. The M8 brings the form factor in line with my work flow  
> beautifully - so far.
>
> Have a look at:
> <http://www.imagist.com/m8/iso640_manual_wb.jpg>
> for sample of manual white balance
> <http://www.imagist.com/m8/iso640_auto_wb.jpg>
> for sample of auto white balance
> <http://www.imagist.com/m8/iso640_noise.jpg>
> for sample of noise at 640
> <http://www.imagist.com/m8/iso1250_noise0_noise.jpg>
> for sample of noise at 1250
>
> Samples hand held, 1/15 sec, f:4, with 35 lux asph.
>
> For me - the M8 replaces the M6's and their mostly Black and White  
> film chores. When the 1250 color noise is eliminated by processing as  
> a black and white image - the 1250 looks as good as or better, in  
> print, than films at that ISO.
>
> Regards,
> George Lottermoser
> george@imagist.com
>
>
>
> On Jan 25, 2007, at 12:55 PM, Tom Pastorello wrote:
>
>> I understand that under tungsten
>> light I would see poor WB compensation, bad noise
>> above ISO 640 (apparently, high ISO noise is worse in
>> tungsten light than outdoor light) and IR sensitivity
>> color casts.  (IR filters would not be a solution for
>> me since I need speed under available light and a
>> filter factor of 20-40 won't do.)
>>    Do I overstate the limitations of the M8 under
>> tungsten light?  I'm otherwise happy with the M6, film
>> and digital processing of the film.  Thank you for any
>> information, insights, advice ...
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>

In reply to: Message from etruscello at yahoo.com (Tom Pastorello) ([Leica] M8, Macro 90 and nature photography)
Message from imagist3 at mac.com (Lottermoser George) ([Leica] M8, Macro 90 and nature photography)