IWC Doppel Posted July 10, 2015 Share #1 Posted July 10, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hi Well I have been using my MM (CCD) for all of a week, whilst I am very much on the learning curve with processing I am a little confused by the direct comparison between the DNG and jpg files I have always shot DNG and jpg fine with my M9-P (Now covered some 22k shots), setting the jpg to B&W. I simply started with my MM in the same way (At least I can see two versions of the B&W picture, one hopefully processed and I may like the look, tonality or whatever) BUT, why are the JPG's sharper than the DNG files ? I am not sure I have been able replicate the sharpness of jpg files as yet with Lightroom and DNG's, when I try I am adding a lot of sharpening, contrast and clarity which I never did with M9 files. I know many will respond with a glib - the DNG's are more raw or unprocessed but why are my M9-P DNG files as sharp or sharper than my MM before any adjustment ? Many Thanks PS - I tried an MM in Leica Mayfair a few weeks back before buying one and I can see the improved sharpness between jpg and RAW there as well PPS - Please dont move this to Post processing as this is about a new used needing to better understand the camera Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 10, 2015 Posted July 10, 2015 Hi IWC Doppel, Take a look here Monochrom jpg vs DNG. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jaapv Posted July 10, 2015 Share #2 Posted July 10, 2015 You are confusing contrast with sharpness. Not surprising as all "sharpness" in postprocessing is just contrast manipulation. In my experience it takes a bit of a learning curve to get the most out of Monochrom files. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IWC Doppel Posted July 10, 2015 Author Share #3 Posted July 10, 2015 Tks, I would love to understand how the M9 DNG files compare to MM DNG and what has and hasn't been done in camera. I only ever sharpen jpg's from the M9 and only, very, very occasionally sharpen DNG's from the M9. I am really not a fan of sharpening as it is indiscriminate with image depth, for me half the potential digital files can look very 2D Given there is no beyer and algorithm I had expected out of camera DNG's to be comparable or better to M9 files. Mine look a little soft tbh (I will try again but adding contrast helped not cured) Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fiftyonepointsix Posted July 10, 2015 Share #4 Posted July 10, 2015 I turn sharpening off as it accentuates noise, and turn noise-reduction off as it can kill details. Try the Clarity slider in Lightroom, and use the tones curve. Or at least play with stretching blacks and highlights to fill the histogram. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted July 10, 2015 Share #5 Posted July 10, 2015 BUT, why are the JPG's sharper than the DNG files ? ‘Sharpness’ doesn’t apply to raw files, only to a developed image, be it developed in-camera or by a raw converter. With the original M Monochrom Leica had opted for a rather strong sharpening, probably with the intention to showcase the resolution it is capable of. The new M Monochrom (Typ 246) applies much less sharpening to its JPEGs. But whether your DNG files are from the original or the new M Monochrom, you can apply any amount of sharpening in the raw converter. With the same settings the results are quite similar. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted July 10, 2015 Share #6 Posted July 10, 2015 ‘Sharpness’ doesn’t apply to raw files, only to a developed image, be it developed in-camera or by a raw converter. With the original M Monochrom Leica had opted for a rather strong sharpening, probably with the intention to showcase the resolution it is capable of. The new M Monochrom (Typ 246) applies much less sharpening to its JPEGs. But whether your DNG files are from the original or the new M Monochrom, you can apply any amount of sharpening in the raw converter. With the same settings the results are quite similar. (This is where the right lens choice comes in handy) Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fiftyonepointsix Posted July 10, 2015 Share #7 Posted July 10, 2015 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) There are some lenses that just do not work out on the MM Monochrom: my 9cm F4 uncoated Elmar is too low contrast, too much veiling flare. The Summar- about the same. The uncoated/coated Sonnars work out for me. Lenses with too much contrast- lose shadow detail and highlights. I find a medium contrast lens with a yellow or orange filter gives good results outdoors. This one- shot in a cavern today, of my daughter. 50/1.1 Nokton wide-open, with a hot-mirror filter on it, Skyline Caverns by fiftyonepointsix, on Flickr Straight export, no adjustments made. Sometimes it's just the lighting, but I like this shot. I suspect the in-camera JPEG has sharpening added and a Gamma curve of some type. I've owned the M Monochrom since Dec 2012, have never shot an in-camera Jpeg with it. Edited July 10, 2015 by fiftyonepointsix 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted July 11, 2015 Share #8 Posted July 11, 2015 I turn sharpening off as it accentuates noise, and turn noise-reduction off as it can kill details. Try the Clarity slider in Lightroom, and use the tones curve. Or at least play with stretching blacks and highlights to fill the histogram. On the original MM the clarity slider can produce quite nasty wide halos and should be used very carefully, if at all. It may well be that the MM2 reacts the same. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fiftyonepointsix Posted July 11, 2015 Share #9 Posted July 11, 2015 I've been using +10 on the clarity with some shots; but definitely see the Halos using a negative value and stronger positive value. Is there a reference on the math behind the Sliders that Lightroom and others are using? It would be interesting to know what each is actually doing to the image. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted July 11, 2015 Share #10 Posted July 11, 2015 (edited) BUT, why are the JPG's sharper than the DNG files ? That is usually the case for most cameras: JPG files are sharpened by the camera, unlike RAW files. If you cannot achieve the same (or better) look developing DNG with your software, then it is just because you are still at the beginning of the learning curve. But - just in case - which software are you using to view and process DNG ? Edited July 11, 2015 by CheshireCat Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alberti Posted July 28, 2015 Share #11 Posted July 28, 2015 If the JPG is sharper then the setting in menu sharpening is on 'standard' or higher; the imported RAW file has not had that sharpening applied yet. If you import in Capture One, the app applies stronger sharpening on the display than with Lightroom. I always like the LR that reduces the display rendering. So to me this is about appearances on screen only. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IWC Doppel Posted July 28, 2015 Author Share #12 Posted July 28, 2015 It's been interesting starting to get to know the monochrom and I find the difference most noticeable on long distance details with woider angle lenses, particularly my 18mm SEM. I can now successfully adapt DNG's to be comparable, as I get to know how the adjustments work with monochrom files. I do find it useful to record both DNG and JPG as there are some mid tones from the jpg files that balances contrast and tones very well. So it forces me to understand how I can improve elsewhere with the DNG and endevour to recreate the appealing tones, contrast and 'sharpness' of the jpg files. I also actually quite like the look from over exposed files on some occasions So far compared to the 9 I am finding: A great deal of subtlety in both the shadows and highlights Much easier than I expected to add weight and inky blacks to the image and when done, no need to crush too much shadow detail in the process An even greater appreciation of older glass. The Summaron f2.8 is wonderful on the MM, especially at higher ISO's Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.