• site home
  • blog home
  • galleries
  • contact
  • underwater
  • the bleeding edge

the last word

Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.

You are here: Home / The Bleeding Edge / Leica M240 banding testing

Leica M240 banding testing

September 5, 2013 JimK Leave a Comment

It has been reported elsewhere that the M240 suffers from banding in the shadows at high ISO settings. I decided to check it out. I made a series of exposures of a plain white screen. I defocused to make sure there was no actual image detail. I made the first exposure at ISO 3200, and adjusted the shutter speed so the mean value was about 8 stops below clipping, about where you’d find a seriously dark shadow in an ETTR image. I made exposures with the same shutter and f-stop settings, and the camera’s ISO set to 1600, 800, 400, and 200.I turned off noise reduction in ACR 8.1

  • I gave the ISO 200 image a four-stop push in ACR.
  • I gave the ISO 400 image a three-stop push in ACR.
  • I gave the ISO 800 image a two-stop push in ACR.
  • I gave the ISO 1600 image a one-stop push in ACR.
  • I gave the ISO 3200 image no push in ACR.

I stacked all the images into a single Photoshop file. I applied a curves adjustment layer to the top of the stack, with the black point at 0, the white point at 40, and a straight line in between.

I saw banding running in the long dimension on the ISO 1600 and ISO 3200 images. The lower-ISO images had much less banding, but they were also much darker. Remember that funny 4-stop jump in the noise floor between ISO 800 and ISO 1600 that we saw here? Turns out it affects the pictures about the way you’d expect.

Here are some representative 1:1 crops.

ISO 3200:

banding test low crop 3200

ISO 1600 with a 1-stop push:

banding test low crop 1600

ISO 800 with a 2-stop push:

banding test low crop 800

ISO 400 with a 3-stop push:

banding test low crop 400

ISO 200 with a 4-stop push:

banding test low crop 200

 

Something funny is going on in the ISO 200, 400, and 800 images. Banding is either gone or way down, but the values are too dark. This will need more research.

The Bleeding Edge, The Last Word

← Leica M240 push-post images, shadows Leica M240 banding, part 2 →

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

May 2025
S M T W T F S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031
« Apr    

Articles

  • About
    • Patents and papers about color
    • Who am I?
  • How to…
    • Backing up photographic images
    • How to change email providers
    • How to shoot slanted edge images for me
  • Lens screening testing
    • Equipment and Software
    • Examples
      • Bad and OK 200-600 at 600
      • Excellent 180-400 zoom
      • Fair 14-30mm zoom
      • Good 100-200 mm MF zoom
      • Good 100-400 zoom
      • Good 100mm lens on P1 P45+
      • Good 120mm MF lens
      • Good 18mm FF lens
      • Good 24-105 mm FF lens
      • Good 24-70 FF zoom
      • Good 35 mm FF lens
      • Good 35-70 MF lens
      • Good 60 mm lens on IQ3-100
      • Good 63 mm MF lens
      • Good 65 mm FF lens
      • Good 85 mm FF lens
      • Good and bad 25mm FF lenses
      • Good zoom at 24 mm
      • Marginal 18mm lens
      • Marginal 35mm FF lens
      • Mildly problematic 55 mm FF lens
      • OK 16-35mm zoom
      • OK 60mm lens on P1 P45+
      • OK Sony 600mm f/4
      • Pretty good 16-35 FF zoom
      • Pretty good 90mm FF lens
      • Problematic 400 mm FF lens
      • Tilted 20 mm f/1.8 FF lens
      • Tilted 30 mm MF lens
      • Tilted 50 mm FF lens
      • Two 15mm FF lenses
    • Found a problem – now what?
    • Goals for this test
    • Minimum target distances
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Printable Siemens Star targets
    • Target size on sensor
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Test instructions — postproduction
    • Test instructions — reading the images
    • Test instructions – capture
    • Theory of the test
    • What’s wrong with conventional lens screening?
  • Previsualization heresy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Recommended photographic web sites
  • Using in-camera histograms for ETTR
    • Acknowledgments
    • Why ETTR?
    • Normal in-camera histograms
    • Image processing for in-camera histograms
    • Making the in-camera histogram closely represent the raw histogram
    • Shortcuts to UniWB
    • Preparing for monitor-based UniWB
    • A one-step UniWB procedure
    • The math behind the one-step method
    • Iteration using Newton’s Method

Category List

Recent Comments

  • Mike MacDonald on Your photograph looks like a painting?
  • Mike MacDonald on Your photograph looks like a painting?
  • bob lozano on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • JimK on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • DC Wedding Photographer on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • Wedding Photographer in DC on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • JimK on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • Renjie Zhu on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • Ivo de Man on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF

Archives

Copyright © 2025 · Daily Dish Pro On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.