MM, M240, MM246 comparison images

[BerndReini]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thanks for doing this. In the ISO 3,200 tests I much prefer the M246 and M9M over the M240. The M240 looks blotchy. I actually just bought the old MM. I set my ISO limit to 2,500 and I couldn't be happier with the results.

Edited May 16, 2015 by BerndReini

[Guest jvansmit]

Very interesting!

 

Looking at the noise on the top of the wooden lectern, and also the white cloth to the right, I much prefer the MM9.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[BerndReini]

Very interesting!

 

Looking at the noise on the top of the wooden lectern, and also the white cloth to the right, I much prefer the MM9.

I wouldn't draw any conclusions from this since we don't know about exposure and post-processing. I'm assuming EV was set to -1 again with the M246? Either way, it seems close enough. The two Monochrom cameras do stand on their own though against the converted color photo.

Edited May 17, 2015 by BerndReini

[Lenshacker]

I'm a bit surprised as well- the M246 ISO3200 shots look a little noisier than the M Monochrom. I'm used to the M Monochrom delivering great ISO5000 shots that compare well with my Nikon Df at ISO5000. But- I'm a stickler for using Slow cards and avoid Liveview in the Df. Remember- noise increases with sensor temperature, and Liveview is EVIL"...

[Likaleica]

Great effort and very kind of you to share.  Thank you.

[Jeff S]

While I appreciate the effort…always fun to look at pics…I draw no conclusions for myself.   As stated in the initial post, none of these pics have been subject to any rigorous PP, nor does the 'test' reveal how they would work in a given print workflow.  

 

If, for instance, I had used my M240 on the above pics, I could print it a hundred different ways, with very different results.  And I'd want to shoot lots and lots of pics of different subjects in widely varying conditions to even begin to form a conclusion.  The fact that others actually could make purchase decisions based on a couple of pics is incredible to me…but to each his/her own.  Forums are entertaining places.  

 

I do, however, appreciate the OP's efforts…and I think he stated the limitations upfront…and wisely avoided conclusions IMO.

 

Jeff

Edited May 17, 2015 by Jeff S

[BerndReini]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Jeff, while I do agree that I wouldn't make purchase decisions based on a few web pictures, I sometimes make non-purchase decisions based on a couple of web pictures. These days, anything that can keep my GAS in check and keep me on track with just making the best of what fantastic equipment I have is most welcome.

 

I know you did the same when you had your M8 and skipped a generation. It's hard enough to do that, and it feels extra special and justified when you actually do upgrade, as you can probably also attest.

[fotografr]

What a fascinating post! Three incredible cameras with so little between them....it would be extremely interesting to see these tests as prints.

 

So....I had been planning to place an order for the "new" MM, however, since reading (and digesting) the various reviews I had actually arrived

at the conclusion that my ( self perceived) need for the camera is not sufficiently great that it justifies the seriously selfish financial outlay. 

 

This excellent and informative post has provided visual confirmation of that reality.....so it's onwards and upwards with the M9 and old MM!

 

Thanks for the time and trouble you have expended on producing these examples! 

 

Wait a minute! I thought this forum was supposed to give us GAS, not relieve it.

 

Unfortunately, Thighslapper's processing skills are so good that I can barely see any difference in the images.

 

The most surprising part of this comparison to me is that i would have expected to see more distinct differences in dynamic range, given that the M240 is frequently criticized for being weak in that area.

Edited May 17, 2015 by fotografr

[250swb]

I think it's clear that while tonally none of the cameras fail, in terms of resolution the M240 is way behind in each set of tests, which is of course what MM owners have been banging on about all this time.

 

That leaves the choice between MM or M246, and there isn't much to choose. With the MM we had a massive ground breaking jump from the resolution and tone of the M9 and it also leapfrogged the M240 by a smaller but still significant margin. But all is now normalised in the development cycle offering much smaller improvements from model to model. So for camera features it's back to 'do I need them', or 'do I leapfrog this model and wait for the next in anticipation of a significant improvement'. The real test will be if the next model on from the M240 can scupper the MM in B&W conversion, and if it can't (it's a big job) then the MM will have an even longer life before GAS sets in.

 

Steve

[thighslapper]

Dee ........ there is more to come ....... and you may well change your mind ....... 

[otto.f]

Thank you very much thighslapper!  I must say this comparison comes to a quite different impression than jonoslacks review in the sense that the differences in the uncropped versions are negligible to me. I don't like cropping in essence and I would not go along with a one lens M-system with the Elmarit 24 (the lens Puts suggested in that case). I'm not a particular fan of high ISO's either because most of the time it ends up in photo's that suggest more light in a scene than there actually was, which makes it mostly less interesting. 

[thighslapper]

6400 iso ...... this is where the balance between sharpening and NR starts to bite in earnest ...... some will tolerate almost nothing .....

 

MM246 original image iso 6400

 

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited May 17, 2015 by thighslapper

[thighslapper]

MM original file 6400 iso

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[MarkP]

I have the M240 and Monochrom. The high-ISO difference between the Monochrom and M240 does not at all surprise me, irrespective of PP. In my experience the difference between these two cameras is also obvious at or close to base-ISO and I'm sure thighslapper would agree.   That doesn't mean we can't still get fantastic B&W from the M240 

 

Thanks for the wakeup slap (well to the thigh, not the face).  I wanted an M246 primarily for its M240 features (mounting R lenses, EVF for those more challenging situations, battery compatibility) and certainly had expected more improvement in IQ, dynamic and tonal range, and reduced high-ISO banding.  Now, based on a number of reviews, and these photos, I think I'll avoid the new camera rush and look at upgrading when common sense, greater availability, and perhaps slightly lower prices prevail, but of course by then the M360 will be out.  I still love using my clunky technologically arcane Monochrom.

 

 

Thighslapper, would you consider dumping these four Monochrom and M246 DNGs into the public domain (others may want those from the M240) - I'd love to play with and print them.

[thighslapper]

M240 original file 6400 iso

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[thighslapper]

MM246 6400 iso 100% crops

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 
Edited May 17, 2015 by thighslapper

[thighslapper]

MM 6400 iso 100% crops

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 
Edited May 17, 2015 by thighslapper

[thighslapper]

M240 6400 iso 100% crops

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

[thighslapper]

and a couple at 10000 for the MM and 12500 for MM246......

 

MM246 original file 12500 iso

 

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

 

Edited May 17, 2015 by thighslapper

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[thighslapper]

MM original file 10000 iso

 

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

 

Edited May 17, 2015 by thighslapper