Leica Leica Q - noise at high ISO

MikeN

Rookie
I've owned a Q since May this year and am loving it. The more I use it the more I understand and see the capabilities of this simple but complex camera.
However I have one issue I can't get through and would appreciate your help.
I experience a lot of noise with images when shooting in dark conditions at high ISO's. When post processing in LR I can lose some of the noise but it's still a flat photo.
My shooting in these conditions I set the ISO to 6400 or 12800 and shutter speed set to Auto I tend to leave the aperture at f4.
What should I be doing - auto ISO, shutter and aperture; lens wide open; shutter speed set to 125 and aperture on auto.
HELP please.
 
Hi Mike.
I've literally just acquired a "Q" (as a trade for my M240 - which I really liked but was overkill for the amount of digital shooting I do). I'm going to test the boundaries a bit and low light response is an area in which I'm also interested.
The best digi camera I've ever had for low light is the Fuji X-Pro1 which produced files at 6,400ISO that put most DSLRs to shame compared with their output at 400ISO. I'm not expecting the same with the Q and, if I'm honest, I don't need it. However, my starting point will be to run a series of tests at different "set" ISOs to identify the tipping point at which I don't think the results suit my tastes / expectations.
Ultimately, our response to noise is highly subjective. I'll see if I can post some of the tests I do - as scientifically as possible....
 
ive used literally dozens of digital cameras, and researched dozens more. regardless of manufacturer claims, clean images at 6400 is a rarity. the sony a7s and rx1, the nikon df, probably the nikon and canon ff flagship offerings. outside that, i dont know if youre going to get 'low noise' at high iso in dark situations at 6400 let alone above that.

so heres what i do: i do what i can to lower the needed iso. try shooting at f2 or 2.8 instead of f4--that gets you 1-2 stops of iso. since the Q is 28mm, there may be no need to shoot at 1/125 second ss. imo, youve a lot of leeway there. in fact at 1/60 where you gain a stop of iso, you still have a lot of leeway. combining these can get you up to 4 stops of iso.

finally, unfortunately for some, digital shooting sometimes requires spending more time learning how to make the best of our PP tools. try some of the LR tutorials on noise reduction and/or just try playing around with the tools until you find somd combination that suits you, then make a profile of it so you have a good starting point for future editing.
 
Can you post some sample shots? I shoot the Nikon Df and M Monochrom at high-ISO, have been happy with the results. But- that is very subjective, would be good to see the shots you are unhappy with.
 
as i posted above, the Df is exceptional in this regard. i neglected to mention the M Monochrome, which was my omission, because it is also exceptional in this regard. by definition, exceptional is not the norm. the vast vast vast majority of cameras--including the cameras i choose to use as well as OPs camera--simply cannot produce low noise images at 6400 in low light situations OOC. thats just the long and short of it. your cameras can, 90% of other cameras cant. so one has to find other ways, as i listed out above, to compensate for this fact.
 
I just wanted to see an example.

M Monochrom at ISO 5000:

16520126332_e8e17514ff_o.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
Monochrom4_F15_ISO5000 by fiftyonepointsix, on Flickr

Leica M8 with the same exposure settings, M8RAW2DNG, pushed in Lightroom.

16335237507_580a22188f_o.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
M8_4_F15_ISO5000 by fiftyonepointsix, on Flickr

Which meets my threshold for decent High-ISO...
 
Here's a grainy shot from a recent party.
untitled-10.jpg

1/60, f4.0, ISO 10,000
 
ive used literally dozens of digital cameras, and researched dozens more. regardless of manufacturer claims, clean images at 6400 is a rarity. the sony a7s and rx1, the nikon df, probably the nikon and canon ff flagship offerings. outside that, i dont know if youre going to get 'low noise' at high iso in dark situations at 6400 let alone above that.

so heres what i do: i do what i can to lower the needed iso. try shooting at f2 or 2.8 instead of f4--that gets you 1-2 stops of iso. since the Q is 28mm, there may be no need to shoot at 1/125 second ss. imo, youve a lot of leeway there. in fact at 1/60 where you gain a stop of iso, you still have a lot of leeway. combining these can get you up to 4 stops of iso.

finally, unfortunately for some, digital shooting sometimes requires spending more time learning how to make the best of our PP tools. try some of the LR tutorials on noise reduction and/or just try playing around with the tools until you find somd combination that suits you, then make a profile of it so you have a good starting point for future editing.
Many thanks for this - I shall try this approach.
 
Can you post some sample shots? I shoot the Nikon Df and M Monochrom at high-ISO, have been happy with the results. But- that is very subjective, would be good to see the shots you are unhappy with.
Brian - what are your settings when shooting with your Monochrom in low light?
 
mike, if you compare your lovely Q with cameras specifically designed to be beasts in low light, you will be unnecessarily disappointed.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I put these up for MikeN to compare.

Prices on the Df and M Monochrom are way down...

AND my first Digital camera was better than either the Df or m Monochrom, it could see in complete darkness. That was way back in 1982. Longwave Infrared. Liquid Nitrogen was required. The lenses were very, very expensive, even by Leica standards.

I have shot the Df and M Monochrom side-by-side in low-light; too close for me to call. That CCD amazes me.
 
i guess im just not sure how this helps OP/OT, since the specific question he posed was 'what should i be doing' to get better results from [his]Q at high iso in low light. im not sure the solution is 'buy another camera' or 'look how nice my cameras shoot in those conditions'. it seems to me the more helpful possible solutions are to help modify the way he shoots the Q in those conditions, the way he PPs those results, and perhaps to help somewhat modify his expectations.

certainly the Df and Monochrome are great cameras, as is the Q. and the truth is they each do some things well, other things not well and involve trade-offs the valueing of which are wholly subjective. personally, ive tired of chasing the ghost of what my equipment doesnt do--as ive found this self-fulfillingly unsatisfying. so i lean to wanting to help others appreciate and make the most of what they have.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If you want the best camera for shooting Low-Light, and that is the prime concern: then a different camera will do better. The best cameras that i have for low-light were used for examples. I also used the supposedly worst camera for low-light, the Leica M8 for an example. for the latter- some creative processing was used and ISO 5000 was shown.

For the Df and M Monochrom: I get best results using 4x SD cards; full-battery; uncompressed NEF for the Df.

For the Q: I would suggest using slower memory cards as an experiment, shooting uncompressed DNG, experimenting with post-processors. That Magenta shift looks like it could be done away with.

BUT- if you want to shoot in the lowest light possible, other cameras will do better.

This is the Leica M8 at ISO2500 eqv, ISO160 shot 4 stops under, then pushed in LR.

by fiftyonepointsix, on Flickr

The original conversion gave a magenta shift, corrected. So sometimes the post-processing can be improved.
 
Last edited:
If you want the best camera for shooting Low-Light, and that is the prime concern: then a different camera will do better. The best cameras that i have for low-light were used for examples. I also used the supposedly worst camera for low-light, the Leica M8 for an example. for the latter- some creative processing was used and ISO 5000 was shown.

For the Df and M Monochrom: I get best results using 4x SD cards; full-battery; uncompressed NEF for the Df.

For the Q: I would suggest using slower memory cards as an experiment, shooting uncompressed DNG, experimenting with post-processors. That Magenta shift looks like it could be done away with.

BUT- if you want to shoot in the lowest light possible, other cameras will do better.

This is the Leica M8 at ISO2500 eqv, ISO160 shot 4 stops under, then pushed in LR.

14470625147_3bddd2c99f_o.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
skate4_ISO2500 by fiftyonepointsix, on Flickr

The original conversion gave a magenta shift, corrected. So sometimes the post-processing can be improved.
Thanks for this - other cameras out of the question but I'll be trialling the helpful suggestions.
Why would a slower memory card help??
 
sure another camera would do better in low light. but thats not the point here, and wasnt the point of the OT. the point was how OP could do better with his own equipment. instead, the majority of the thread is now a referndum on another persons camera choices and an analysis of his pictures.

people come here for advice, to learn, to improve their skill set, to get the most of their hobby. being told willy nilly they just need different equipment is not a service to those aspriations. in this case, given what he told us about how he uses his tools, there is zero need for OP to get a new camera. zero. all that is necessary is some modifications of how he uses the excellent piece of equipment he has. he can pick up 4 stops of iso just with different exposure settings, and thats before we get to PP! he certainly doesnt even remotely need a new camera.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top