Leica M brochure; not good enough

[M'Ate]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Just spent an hour looking at the boxing photographs taken with the M9 that illustrate the latest M brochure.

 

IMO, these are poor by any standard. Composition and content are fine and interesting, but the highlight rendering is unacceptable by any standards I'm aware of. There are great big holes in the images showing paper base white through. Highlight content drift into the page margins without interruption.

 

Appreciate that dynamic range can be a challenge with any digital camera in sunny climes, but this looks to me as though the M9 is particularly bad. Maybe it's just because the printer hasn't laid down a 2% white.

 

Based on this brochure (M9 parts only), I'd hire the photographer, but wouldn't buy the camera. I do think they are dreadful.

 

Sorry about that guys, but thought it was worth a mention as members in our Film Section struggle to capture the full detail from their neg scans; as if highlight detail continued to be of any importance in today's digital world.

[Advertisement]

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

[yanidel]

In the times of internet and thousands of website/flickr samples, who still buys a camera based on a brochure ?

[Nikkor AIS]

Is that an excuss or a reason?

 

 

Gregory

[michael_b_elmer]

Just spent an hour looking at the boxing photographs taken with the M9 that illustrate the latest M brochure.

 

IMO' date=' these are poor by any standard. Composition and content are fine and interesting, but the highlight rendering is unacceptable by any standards I'm aware of. There are great big holes in the images showing paper base white through. Highlight content drift into the page margins without interruption.

 

Appreciate that dynamic range can be a challenge with any digital camera in sunny climes, but this looks to me as though the M9 is particularly bad. Maybe it's just because the printer hasn't laid down a 2% white.

 

Based on this brochure (M9 parts only), I'd hire the photographer, but wouldn't buy the camera. I do think they are dreadful.

 

Sorry about that guys, but thought it was worth a mention as members in our Film Section struggle to capture the full detail from their neg scans; as if highlight detail continued to be of any importance in today's digital world. [/quote']

 

And so what?

[erl]

A serious and genuine interest in buying the M9, or any bit of gear for that matter, ought be based on a need, a hands on knowledge, a capable budget and a mistrust of salespersons and particularly brochures. Apologies to any salespersons on the Forum, but I trust you understand my drift in the context of the thread.

 

Think for a moment how many variables are represented in any brochure you peruse. By definition they are a distortion of fact and therefore not to be relied on for a truthful portrayal. The poor standard you refer could be due to any number of factors beside the camera.

 

As for hiring the photographer, as you say you would, based on the presented display, could also be a mistake. There is no guarantee the composition is the photographers work, but may be the designers cut, ....... and so on.

 

As the owner of an M9 I have had nearly one years work from mine and I find it the equal of, or superior to, a long line of cameras i have and do own. That of course does not for a moment mean it would suit you. I recommend you give one a fair try and then report your findings.

[M'Ate]

And so what?

 

Sorry to disturb you, Goofy.

[M'Ate]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

As the owner of an M9 I have had nearly one years work from mine and I find it the equal of, or superior to, a long line of cameras i have and do own. That of course does not for a moment mean it would suit you. I recommend you give one a fair try and then report your findings.

 

Erl, I'm also the owner of an M9 and regularly produce fine images with it. My thread here is about the brochure and inclusion of technically poor images.

 

Personally, I believe that a manufacturer's brochure should represent the product as best as possible. I don't think it does in this case. Obviously, others have different standards and some like Yanidel above seem to care little about how Leica represents itself in it's sales literature. I do, but may well be on my own in this.

[AlanJW]

I don't care much about the brochure. I don't read brochures with a critical eye re the photos. I read for the specs, accessories, and to have a look if possible at the controls/menus. In no way would a brochure for a camera be terribly important in a purchase decision on a $7000 camera.

 

I'd rather Leica spent its resources (time and money) on the product I will be (or am) using as opposed to a brochure to be read. For example, I think I'd like them to finish the next firmware before they reissue a brochure with "better" photos. Just my opinion.

[pico]

The reproduction is unfortunate. I'm surprised that Leica put up with it.

 

2% white would not have made it better. Notice that there are no true black tones. I messed with my monitor to try to make it better. No luck.

[Akemi-M]

I agree with M'Ate, the picture quality in the brochure is poor. I also agree that most people do not base their purchasing decisions solely on the brochure, but rather multiple points of data from various sources. However, the brochure is a marketing tool that is intended to communicate and promote the product. It should align well with the pricing, positioning, and placement of the product, and it should help the buyer with post-decision dissonance (e.g., yes, I made the right choice). In the case of the M9 brochure, I think it fails as an effective tool to either attract potential customers, or inspire feelings of satisfaction from buyers. But, to be fair, perhaps that is how the marketing department at Leica intended it to be.

 

IMHO the brochure images could have been better, by including a breadth of subjects (travel, street, landscape, etc.).

[yanidel]

I don't know how many of you actually had the physical brochure in their hands ?

 

I do, and I find the pictures good representatives of what the M9 can do in terms of rendering, field and depth of field and even sharpness with M lenses mounted. Yet, this remains A4 size prints so only raw files can give you an idea of the full potential of the M9.

 

Obviously, the style chosen means most pictures are a bit over-exposed, but I congratulate Leica for trying something different, more modern and in line with the digital times where post processing is also a big part of the final output. I personally like these pictures a lot, but here we get to tastes and colors I guess.

[michael_b_elmer]

Sorry to disturb you' date=' Goofy.[/quote']

 

Were it a disturbance only - starting a thread on this learned forum containing nothing but sour observations on the quality of some pictures you saw in some brochure not adding any constructive observations at all can only be qualified as waste of our time.

 

Come back if and when you have something constructive to bring to our attention.

[Fotomiguel]

Before my m9, I bought my M8 may be four years ago. Fist time I saw the M9 brochure I realized what had changed and how nice would be the M9. The artistic way to judge photography actually is really difficult but for a photographer who has a M camera in his hand, the brochure shows clearly the capabilities of the camera.

The way the camera admit highlights keeping details in the shadows is one of the most important features of the M9. If you try to work with so strong light you will realize. The brochure shows as well how nice the different leica lenses work through the M9 (full format). Some of them wide open with strong lights again.

Personally I like the pictures and they show clearly the ability of the photographer with a M camera. A couple of them are not my liking but the rest are very good.

[zlatkob]

The boxing brochure is interesting and certainly a valid topic of discussion. It has been discussed several times on the forum. Here's what I wrote last September:

 

"The brochure photos are beautiful! However, lovely as they are, I'm just not sure that their stylized fashion aesthetic goes with the subject matter of the photo essay, or with the concept of the camera.

 

"The brochure talks about uncompromising, unsurpassed image quality -- a technical message --- but shows strongly post-processed images. The contrasty images are great, but their stylized rendering feels somewhat disconnected from that technical message.

 

"Similarly, the brochure's text about discreteness, unobtrusiveness, documenting fleeting moments, preserving memories, etc., seems disconnected from what appears to be a styled and directed brochure shoot."

 

In other words, the photos don't support the text; the text does not match the photos. One or the other is off-message, creating a bit of dissonance.

[250swb]

Just spent an hour looking at the boxing photographs .

 

An hour! I'd complain to the head of the nursing home and ask to be moved more often.

 

Steve

[microview]

Much as I loathe boxing, I think Yanidel is right. And also Zlatkob... If nothing else the printed brochure gave a listing of current products, lens specs etc – pre-35 Summilux (ii) of course.

 

Incidentally, if you re-download the M9 instruction book you will find the confusingly transposed pics of the viewfinder framings in the earlier version have been corrected!

[bybrett]

I agree the treatment of the images throughout the brochure is not what I would have expected for a new camera/sensor launch. But now in hindsight it doesn't appear to have had a detrimental effect on M9...

[stealthman_1]

Can you name another camera brochure you remember the subject matter and photos from? I sure can't.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[zlatkob]

Oh yes, I still remember a 1980's brochure for the M4-P with work by Salgado. In particular, I remember a photo of miners in a coal mine. A brochure on the M and R systems also included oil workers and a child's portrait by Salgado (using the R6.2). A recent brochure on the M8 and M7 included work by Alex Webb, Bruce Gilden and Jeff Mermelstein, among others. Canon brochures have included work by Denis Reggie, Vincent Laforet, Arthur Morris and Joe Buissink, among others. A camera brochure can be memorable without stylized post-processing of the photos.

[erl]

It seems to me that much as everyone prefers different features on their cameras, the same applies to the brochures.