M8/1DsMarkII Comparison Test in the Studio

[Hartmonstr]

I've had my M8 and 50mm f/1.4 Summilux ASPH for a few days, and decided to take it into the studio to see how it compares to a Canon 1Ds Mark II with comparable glass.

Let me preface this informal test by saying that although I've been a professional photographer for 34 years, this is my first foray into the rangefinder world. I earn my living photographing people, and although I don't forsee using the M8 regularly on portrait assignments, I felt that I could most accurately assess the strengths and weaknesses of both cameras under the controlled and familiar conditions of my studio.

Let me also say that although I would never use a lens this short for a portrait in the studio, I rather like the perspective of the Lux. For casual location portraits, it's perfect. The 67mm effective FOV is almost exactly in between the Canon equivalents I used for this test, the 50mmL f/1.2 and the 85mmL f/1.2 (v2), so the perspective for each is slightly different than that of the Summilux.

For the wide open images I used the modeling lights on my Paul Buff Ultra flash units with an ISO of 640. The main light is shot through a Larson 4x6 Soft Box. A custom white balance was created on each camera using an ExpoDisk (neutral version). Flash units were fired on the stopped down images (approx. 1/4 power) with ISO 100 on the Canon, ISO 160 on the M8. Another custom white balance setting was made with the flash for each camera with the Expo Disk.

I have taken to the the rangefinder focusing pretty well. In some ways it is easier in the studio to focus the L lenses because the image is bigger in the viewfinder, but hopefully that will be resolved when my 75mm APO 'Cron and the 1.25 magnifier arrive in the next week or two. I shot these hand-held and manually focused each lens (I don't rely on autofocus on these L lenses at full aperture). The shutter speed on the wide-open shots was 1/90.

All images were processed in CaptureOne Pro using my customized processing parameters; Sharpening Method - Standard Look, Amount 20, Threshold 3, Noise and Banding Supression Medium. Minor exposure adjustments were made for uniformity, but no color adjustments were made. The C1 Generic 1DsMkII camera profile was used for the Canon files and Edmund Ronald's very fine M8 profiles (Welcome) were used for the Leica images. (Hey dude, I want to send you some money, but you make it hard to do from your site - more instructions, please!)

Full Size, Highest Quality JPEGs were processed out of C1. No post-production work was done on the files except for some minor blemish retouching (it was the only way the model would agree to having them out on the 'Net). The full frame shots were resized from the originals with no additional sharpening. The 100% crops were likewise untouched.

Impressions:
The M8 requires a totally different way of shooting than I'm used to, but it works as advertised and returns a very nice file. There is a slight color differential between the output images of each camera, but it's nothing some additional profile tweaking couldn't adjust. I prefer the Canon profile only because I'm used to it; the Leica profiles are a bit more yellow than I'd like to see, but they are very close, and the differences shown here are more personal preference than error.

The Summilux wide open outperforms either Canon lens by a noticeable margin. All three produce incredibly creamy bokeh, but the eyelashes are consistently sharper on the M8 (I focused on her right eye for these tests - you really have to choose at this distance and aperture). And although it's not shown here, the Lux kills the Canons wide open in the corners; no surprise there.

I'm also surprised to see how well the M8 handles noise at ISO 640 compared to the Canon. I have a 5D that I tested against the 1Ds2 and, as advertised, it does extremely well with noise at high ISOs. But I've since had the 5D converted to a dedicated infrared camera, so a direct comparison is no longer possible.

Please don't let this thread be the start of another one of those boring Canon/Leica wars. Both are excellent tools capable of producing wonderful files beyond the capabilities and talents of most of the people who own them, including myself. (Of course, in the wrong hands, they can also become very dangerous.) Both exist to create images, but each goes about its business in a very different way. Both are worthy of being tops in their respective class.

My M8 experience to date has been heightened not only by its stellar performance, but also because I haven't had any of the gremlins show up that have plagued many of the users on this board and elsewhere. I bought in late enough to have gotten a second generation unit, plus the IR filter right away, and have yet to see any ghosting, lockups, battery challenges, magenta blacks, etc. Because this is not my sole production camera, should any of those issues ever show up, I won't be down for the count. (And I still get to write it off - take that, you amateurs! ;-) )

All in all, I'm very satisfied with this new acquisition, and am looking forward to the 28mm 'Cron and 75mm 'Cron to arrive soon. I'll probably do more testing (and posting, unless nobody cares), perhaps even outdoors if it ever warms up here in Wisconsin (21ºF right now, 9ºF wind chill, it's a heat wave!).

John

[DaveEP]

Thanks for posting these John. I was going to do my own comparison as soon as my 486 filters arrived - but I am still waiting.

I still use my 1Ds2 for studio shooting, but if the M8 can do well enough in the studio then the Canon may be consigned to telephoto (>200mm) stuff.

[wilfredo]

John,

I don't do studio work but I love the lighting in all these shots, IMHO it is excellent. Looking at these samples I see a difference, one I see consistently. It may be a matter of taste but the M8 is phenomenal when it comes to skin texture, it looks real, I don't know how else to describe it. I suspect this little range finder is going to find its way into many studios.
Thanks for posting these. I use both Canon and Leica gear, and since purchasing the M8 my bias has leaned over to the Leica digital side (before then it was all film when it came to Leica).

Cheers,
Wilfredo+
Benitez-Rivera Photography

[Peter D Lux 2]

John, thanks for posting. Interesting read + photo's.

Good luck with both camera's!

Peter

[hiphop]

Thanks for this testing. Yes we care and appreciate to see a good job being done by an experienced professional. Waiting for your next posts...

[larry]

John,

Thanks for posting this very revealing comparison. My Canon DSLR is a 10D, and not surprisingly the M8 makes it look like a P&S in a head-to-head. So your test with a 1DsII is considerably more meaningful.

Larry

[farnz]

Thanks for posting this balanced review, John. I must admit that I'm surprised but heartened by the M8's performance.

Pete.

[rosuna]

Very interesting. Thanks.
I would like to see the performance of the 75 Cron, and even the 75 Lux (Can anyone lend you the 75 Lux?).

[mitchell]

John,

These are great shots and very interesting. I see what you mean about the yellow in the M8 shoots.

I have to say though that the M8 shots are my preferred, with the second being my favorite, a really nice shot. To me, the Canon skin has a plasticy almost dead look. It seems to be partly color, and partly a certain smoothness.

Yes I'd love to see further comparisons. Not only do they educate me about the cameras, but they also teach my eye.

Thanks,

Mitchell

[KJB]

Of note is that the M8 does not do particularly well with JPEGs compared to the Canon bodies though yours show very well.

[jeff_weir]

John,

Very good "real world" test.

Thanks for sharing

Jeff

[Hartmonstr]

"Of note is that the M8 does not do particularly well with JPEGs compared to the Canon bodies though yours show very well."

KJ -

A note of clarification; these images started their lives as RAW files in both cameras. I find that RAW files provide so much more information, processing latitude and flexibility that there is just no advantage to shooting in-camera JPEGs. CaptureOne makes it very easy to batch process the RAW files into JPEGs, and if you're off in any way shooting RAW - exposure, white balance, unwanted color casts - you can fix it. Shoot bad JPEGs and you're stuck with them. Plus, that RAW digital negative, like the film negative, allows you to come back to it at a later date and do something else with it.

It takes a lot more work and precision shooting to get a good in-camera JPEG, which is why so many users complain not getting good JPEGs from this camera or that. (I could never get a good JPEG from either of my 1DsMkII's, and I haven't even tried with the M8.) But I can effortlessly and consistently create excellent JPEGs from RAW files.

John

[mtomalty]

John

Either you 50 1.2L is not to spec or your focus is slightly off on the 1.2 frame.
Comparing the 100% views of the Canon 50 and 85,both @ 1.2,it's very clear
by the detail in the eye that either the 85 is vastly superior to the 50 or the focus needs
tweaking.

That having been said,the M50 samples really are excellent.
Would be interested in seeing a 50 Noct thrown in this mix as well.

Mark

[Hartmonstr]

"Either you 50 1.2L is not to spec or your focus is slightly off on the 1.2 frame."

Mark, this lens is fairly new and I haven't had a chance to put it through the paces (i.e., the infamous and brutal newspaper test). I agree that the 85 appears sharper in these examples than the 50. It could be the lens, but because I shot these hand-held, it's more likely that I moved slightly after focusing. As you know, the DOF on any of these lenses wide open and at the closest focus distance is literally a couple of millimeters, so user error is the probable culprit.

My next test will be done on a tripod and a fixed subject.

Thanks for the sharp eye, Mark.

John

[WPalank]

Originally Posted by Hartmonstr

I agree that the 85 appears sharper in these examples than the 50. It could be the lens...

John,
I belong to a Canon shooters Forum and I have to admit I have never shot with the 85. But every professional photographer on the forum that has picked up this lens RAVES about it. It could be the lens.
My 2 cents. Thanks for sharing.

[reddawn]

Originally Posted by Hartmonstr

"Either you 50 1.2L is not to spec or your focus is slightly off on the 1.2 frame."

Mark, this lens is fairly new and I haven't had a chance to put it through the paces (i.e., the infamous and brutal newspaper test). I agree that the 85 appears sharper in these examples than the 50. It could be the lens, but because I shot these hand-held, it's more likely that I moved slightly after focusing. As you know, the DOF on any of these lenses wide open and at the closest focus distance is literally a couple of millimeters, so user error is the probable culprit.

It probably is, cos the subject in the M8 shots are more centrally positioned (probably due to the location of the rangefinder patch ) compared to those with the Canon, where the subjects were placed slightly off center. A tripod test will be more conclusive, but still, thanks for doing the tests and showing us the differences!

[artur5]

Don't know if focusing is a bit off on the Canon picture, but it's not surprising that the Summilux does better. It's a f1.4 lens against a f1.2 and the Summilux ASPH is "la creme de la creme" on this focal range and aperture. It should have been more interesting to see a F1.4 vs F1.4 match or -if possible-a Noctilux vs Canon 50/1.2 -at f1.2-
Anyway, thanks a lot for posting the images. It's been very interesting all the same. Right now I can't afford the Lux ASPH, but I hope my CV Nokton will do fairly well ( when the M8 arrives )

[rosuna]

Originally Posted by Hartmonstr

It could be the lens, but because I shot these hand-held, it's more likely that I moved slightly after focusing.

Well, if you shot hand-held a new variable is introduced into the equation. It is very difficult to know what is explaining the observed differences in those pictures.

[fotografz]

I also have the same set of lenses. In my experience, I arrived at the same basic conclusion as John.

The Canon 50/1.2 isn't the sharpest knife in the drawer @ f/1.2 or f/1.4, In fact, I had to send the first one I got back for a replacement ... which was a little better. The 85/1.2 MKII is the better lens of the two Canons IMO. I got about the same results with the Canon 50/1.2 even on a tripod and using the center focus AF point, and focusing manually ... and I also tested the lens on a 5D as well as a 1DsMKII with the same results.

But neither Canon is a bad lenses by any measure, the 50/1.4 ASPH is just incrementally better. Good news considering the price differential between the two 50mm lenses.

[eronald]

Someone should do this comparison against the 5D.

Edmund