When shooting with the M8 I find it easier to expose for highlights and then fish out the shadow details during post processing. This is not a steadfast rule and will depend on one’s taste and how they like to process files. By exposing for the highlights, this leaves some headroom in the file and I have fewer gamut issues.

The M8’s reds do seem more cranberry red than fire engine red. With some adjustments to red saturation via Photoshop, the reds can be biased more towards a primary red. The higher ISO shots tend towards a magenta bias. On skin tones I de-saturate the red channel by 15 to 25%. Whether this is the M8’s native coloring or a by-product of Phase One’s C1 M8 ICC profiles, I do not know.

April 13, 2009 Update

For the most part I do not use any exposure compensation (EC) adjustment. In most cases the M8 meters in a pleasing way, but some lenses seem to meter hotter than others (such as the 75mm ‘Lux and 90mm APO). If trying keep all the highlights from clipping, some EC adjustment may be needed. For some reason highlights tend to go beyond the gamut and clip. I probably could mitigate the clipping by creating custom color profiles in C1 Pro; unfortunately I do not have the pro version and have not decided if it is worth spending $299 to upgrade.

DYNAMIC RANGE

Based upon processing the images and editing them in Photoshop, the M8’s effective dynamic range is very good. It reminds me of the Phase One P25 files. The P25 has more dynamic range and the files feel smoother, but the M8 has a similar character. Thus far dynamic range has not been causing any grievances. In fact, sometimes I think the dynamic range stored in the 8-bit DNG is greater than that found in the Canon 1Ds Mark III. Outdoors the M8’s LCD is misleading. Often a shadow is pure black or a highlight totally clipped when checking the histogram. At home on the 30” calibrated monitor, there usually is more information than expected.

On the whole, the M8’s dynamic range has been pleasing and similar to the Canon 1Ds Mark II’s dynamic range. At ISO 160 the M8 files might even be cleaner in the shadows than the 1Ds Mark II). Whereas the Canon 1Ds Mark III files are cleaner than the M8; however, the 1Ds Mark III dynamic range can be lacking at times. I think Canon depends too heavily on Highlight Tone Priority (HTP) to offset for the 1Ds Mark III’s lack of dynamic range.

The M8 needs a full-sized histogram option when review images on the LCD.  I do not mind the LCD image being slightly inaccurate in terms of color or shadows looking darker than they really are, but I do want an accurate histogram.

April 13, 2009 Update

A curious trait of the M8 DNGs how the highlights and shadows terminate. Many times it is as if the last bit of data was simply truncated and the gradients look as if they stop abruptly before clipping. Instead of smoothly transitioning into white, there is a hard edge where the color channel stopped too soon. I suspect this is a side effect of the M8 8-bit DNG raw file format. Had Leica maintained a 16-bit DNG file, I believe the highlight roll-off and shadow depth in the M8 DNGs would be similar to that of a Phase One file from the P30 or P30+. I have exchanged emails with Stefan Daniel (M System Product Manager) and suggested Leica add an option for 8-bit DNG and 16-bit DNG. Since the prototype M8 could do this, then I believe Leica could implement a 16-bit DNG option without too much effort.

HIGH ISO PERFORMANCE

This section added April 13, 2009

The M8’s files are very good at ISO 160 and on the whole the noise level is acceptable up to ISO 640. C1 does a very good job removing chrominance noise. ISO 1250 can be hit or miss. If the image has many dark, black shadows, then noise can be too much (for my taste). If the image does not have dark(er) regions with deep shadows, then ISO 1250 can be workable. In the 135 Blog entries from April 1, April 2, April 3 and April 5 there are some ISO 320 to ISO 1250 images. The images shown in those entries are good examples of what the upper ISO’s can look like after some cleaning in Photoshop. I do not have any optional 3rd party plug-ins for noise removal. Those files were cleaned using various filter techniques - nothing fancy. Also, the image at the top of this page is straight from C1 with no additional Photoshop fixing; the file is ISO 640 (EXIF is attached).

SHARPNESS

This section added April 13, 2009

If there is one area where the M8 truly shines above the competition, it is sharpness. Having owned the Canon 1Ds Mark I, II and III; Phase One P25; Nikon D700; Mamiya ZD; Canon 5D Mark I and II; and countless other dSLRs - the M8 is as good as digital back like the Phase One P25 when it comes to per-pixel sharpness. The detail coming from its 10 MP file can be amazing. The M8’s files teach us how much detail is lost due to anti-aliasing filters. In the 135 Blog I uploaded full-size images from the Canon 5D Mark II, the Mamiya ZD and Leica M8. It is not a scientific comparison, but it does illustrate that the M8 can stand its ground - click here for the blog entry.

The picture to the right is a JPEG file straight from Phase One C1. Linked to it is the full-size JPEG. There is nothing special about this file and it should not be considered as a monument to photographic excellence! It is a simple picture with a consider amount of detail and a moderate amount of dynamic range. With the M8 I do not apply any additional sharpening in Photoshop. The images are crisp and added sharpening usually does not suit the file.

With the Canon 1Ds Mark III images I often applied multiple passes of USM and some even a high pass filter layer for added detail in textures. The amount of Photoshop effort needed to make a 1Ds Mark III look sharp was disappointing. I think the 1Ds Mark III could be a spectacular camera is Canon reduced the AA filter’s strength.

The Leica M8’s sharpness and how it compares to the Canon 5D and others has been the source of many debates on the photography forums. When it comes to sharpness, I have no complaints. The M8’s detail excels beyond what 10 MP suggests.