Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2011/07/22
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]That's what I'd expect Bob thanks! I may have come upon some wrong info on the internet... Having the verisimilitude of someone who had a clue what they were talking about. Mark William Rabiner > From: Bob Adler <rgacpa at yahoo.com> > Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> > Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2011 20:25:51 -0700 (PDT) > To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> > Subject: Re: [Leica] Lusting for an M9 > > In my experience medium format (MF) is exactly the same. Push the > histogram as > far to the right as you can without ANY clipping. > The one difference I see in MF is the the incredible amount of shadow > information you can pull over from the left. It's like magic; they out to > come > out with a MF histogram that has like dotted lines to the left to show you > how > far over you really do have data... > Bob > Bob Adler > Palo Alto, CA > http://www.rgaphoto.com > > > > > ________________________________ > From: Mark Rabiner <mark at rabinergroup.com> > To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> > Sent: Fri, July 22, 2011 6:20:36 PM > Subject: Re: [Leica] Lusting for an M9 > > Let me just say that I also treat digital shooting like its slide film > exposing for the highlights or in other terms placing them carefully and > letting the shadows pretty much fall where they may as they can invariably > be brought up later. > I only like to say this at this point because to me basic point like this > is > not a clear consensus yet out there. If I mention this on the list I'll > get > plenty of argument. But I've been shooting like this for years and I feel > very secure in it. > > But I've never shot medium format digital. > And I've heard though that in medium format digital work its somehow > basically different. And that its more important to place shadows and the > highlights can be delta with later. How or why that could be different I > cant guess as you treat small format film exposure the same as you'd treat > large format filim. > As you're experienced in medium format work, Paul perhaps you'll know if > that dichotomy really exists. Now I'm looking up dichotomy .... Yep! Right > word! > > > Mark William Rabiner > > > >> From: Paul Roark <roark.paul at gmail.com> >> Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> >> Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2011 17:26:37 -0700 >> To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> >> Subject: Re: [Leica] Lusting for an M9 >> >> Michiel Fokkema <michiel.fokkema at gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Do you think the M9 high iso perfomance is any good? >> >> >> I find it ironic that Leica uses CCD technology, which excels at its >> native ISO, but is not as good at high ISO as CMOS technology. For a >> landscape shooter like me, CCD is ideal. But for street/available >> light shooters or wherever extremely high speed is needed, CMOS might >> be a better solution. >> >> CCD must do its amplification after the signal is transferred off the >> sensor, and that transfer is where lot of noise seems to be acquired. >> So, I wondered how much difference there would be between a neutral >> gray that was amplified in camera compared to one that is amplified in >> Photoshop. To explore this, I set the M9 exposure manually for >> neutral gray at 2500 ISO and took a shot of an frosted/opal glass over >> the lens (totally smooth, out of focus image). I then moved the ISO >> back to 160 and took a shot at the same exposure settings. The 160 >> ISO image was near black when initially opened (ACR 3.x, with black >> slider all the way to the left). But when curves were used to take >> the 160 ISO gray up to the same level as the 2500 ISO gray, the noise >> levels in the images were essentially the same. See >> http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/CCD-iso-v-curves.jpg >> >> While the in-camera amplifier does ultimately help the image quality >> with even darker values, the message from the experiment is, I think, >> rather important for those of us who shoot M9s. I don't bracket much >> any more. Rather, I set the exposure for the highlights like I used >> to do with slide film. I manually "expose right", checking the >> histogram often, and just let the low values fall where they may. >> Amplification in PS is, over the ranges of values I've recently run >> into, good enough that HDR is not needed and would not accomplish all >> that much anyway. This is very different than the style than is >> needed for CMOS, and I prefer it to HDR and bracketing. >> >> Paul >> www.PaulRoark.com >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information