Survey: Your opinion about the new LEICA M MONOCHROM

[paga]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Serious question to all you serious B&W shooters: would you really be willing to give up the grayscale tonal control offered by color channels? I could not imagine doing so.

 

Also, I wonder if Leica considered the option for in-camera digital colored filters. Seems possible and would be handy.

 

John

 

Not worried by that at all... If anything it will force the shooter to avoid gimmics and tricks to try recover failed photos with tonal mixing magic twists, which often end up giving a very unatural look to the resulting B&W. If one wants to play with grayscale tones, one can plan ahead and use filters.

 

[efftee]

It's hard to imagine why a sane person would spend over USD9K on a camera that makes only B&W images. For all the technical justification and engineering feat associated with removing the bayer filter, it was still impossible to grasp. That is, until you walk into a Leica store and they show you some comparative prints taken with the M9 and Monochrome.

 

One word: Jaw-dropping. It almost makes the M9's images look terrible! (Mind you, I am talking only about details here -- resolution, sharpness, etc)

 

If you have a proclivity to making B&W images, do yourself a favor, go and check out the Monochrome first hand. Never mind what you read online -- the debates in forums, reviews, etc -- go see the physical evidence in person. It will give you a new perspective.

 

While I'm at it, I should add that the new 50 APO Cron is insanely sharp, and appears to make an amazing pair with the Monochrome. I probably would never be able to make the sort of pictures I witnessed, but I might just sell my M9 + 50 Lux to get that Monochrome + 50 Cron and an X2 for color images at the likely risk of being a stupid Lecia fanboy.

[lct]

Or the risk of getting similar or better results with the M10 which would allow us to use our digital colored filters instead of the painful optical ones IMHO.

[OwinThomas]

Sorry Leica this one isn't for me, I'd prefer the colour and convert to B&W if I need it.

 

Having read the reviews and seen some of the photographs produced, i'm tending towards a complete 180 degree turn around on this one.

 

If I had the extra cash then this would be a possible purchase for me. Only after the main M (9, 10, 11 or 12) was purchased, of course. I would still want the option of b&w or colour.

[brill64]

there is no doubt that the m-monochrom is innovative but i'm afraid that combined with the incredible 50 summicron apo, the monochrom production is list priced way beyond the practical reach of the majority of potential, real life users making this a sophisticated, luxury product sought by collectors & bought in bulk by (some) dealers for resale at a 30%+ profit on the black market to people who will pay ANYTHING. leica ought to address this issue before asking for an opinion.

[MarkP]

I've recently been getting one-on-one Photoshop lessons from one our top professional art and publication scan and digital pre-print operators (who has extensive experience with film and digital photography) to to learn how to get the best out of my files digital files and printing (without overworking them). Having seen the work of Bill Allsop, Larry and others, I have learned that results can be achieved through Photoshop that unfortunately just can't be done in LR & SFXPro, etc. - and I don't mean special effects.

 

We are only doing B&W work, and as an exercise we reprocessed some of Jono's images today (to be posted later)

 

Amazing! They look like MF: extraordinary detail and micro-contrast, wonderful smooth tonal range (especially in the 'grandfather and grandchild', and even in tonally flat images such as the 'cormorant fisherman'), and the files beautifully handle the subtle introduction of noise (read grain) compared with the M9 files. The MM files are indeed very 'filmic' (please excuse the neologism).

 

The lack of external filtration or colour channels did at all not compromise the ability to produce outstanding photographs. The M9 files look downright average in comparison to these.

 

The monochrome files do not in any way compromise output in the hands of someone who knows how to process properly...I'm on a very steep learning curve.

 

Having already put myself on a list for an MM whilst I decided what to do he advised I just go ahead and buy it - which I will!

[Wang Man]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The only reason I kept my M4 since 18 years old and my 2 M6s (Silver & Black) since 45 years old is to shoot B&W film, I have a whole bunch of color filters to get the effect I want.

 

The Leica M9M is a poor effort by Leica to put something out as a "New" product. The Leica M9 which was later slightly improved by the Leica M9P is a similar ploy, nothing really new.

 

The marketing guys at Leica must be laughing all the way to the bank, the M9 which is almost 4 years old, has been their work horse, just tweek it a bit, and call it a new product. I guess that is why the M9 did not the sapphire screen to start with, so the birth of the M9P was possible.

 

I have to say that both the M9 and later the M9P are fine cameras, but a B&W M9 is really the last squeeze Leica can get out this model.

[MarkP]

The only reason I kept my M4 since 18 years old and my 2 M6s (Silver & Black) since 45 years old is to shoot B&W film, I have a whole bunch of color filters to get the effect I want.

 

The Leica M9M is a poor effort by Leica to put something out as a "New" product. The Leica M9 which was later slightly improved by the Leica M9P is a similar ploy, nothing really new.

 

The marketing guys at Leica must be laughing all the way to the bank, the M9 which is almost 4 years old, has been their work horse, just tweek it a bit, and call it a new product. I guess that is why the M9 did not the sapphire screen to start with, so the birth of the M9P was possible.

 

I have to say that both the M9 and later the M9P are fine cameras, but a B&W M9 is really the last squeeze Leica can get out this model.

 

I don't disagree with your comments about milking the current model, but I don't want to shoot film any more.....

[mugget]

... list priced way beyond the practical reach of the majority of potential, real life users making this a sophisticated, luxury product ...

 

Funny, you just described the Leica brand as a whole.

May not have been true 10, 20 or 30 years ago - but that's Leica now. Luxury products.

[SJP]

If new then perhaps yes, although there are panaleica's within the reach of many (not all I fully realise that).

 

If second hand (there are no second hand Leica's - only pre-used ones:D) then a Leica is available to all, especially R stuff is very competitive in terms of price at present.

 

As Leica stuff rarely looses value in fact they are not expensive at all. Certainly not luxury in the sense that the money evaporates, unlike perfume & what have you.

[pop]

... Leica now. Luxury products.

 

As a matter of fact, photography is pretty high on Maslow's pyramid of needs. Hence, all photographic paraphernalia are by themselves luxury products.

 

In the fifties of the last century I could scarcely afford my simple box camera and the film rolls; hence, I had to economize on shots. Pure luxury.

[downstairs]

Some people here are peeved at the price on an MM. I'm dismayed but not peeved. Leave the Breguet crowd out of this, if anything, they help making it worthwhile to produce such a camera.

It's just another body, a tool, and not particularly sophisticated, more like a hand drill than a power drill.

My (now) obsolete and highly sophisticated digital Hasselblad body cost me more or less what a taxi-driver pays for his car. After five years I can re-sell the HB for 25%, he can resell his taxi for 3%.

I doubt obsolescence and wear and tear can knock the MM's value down to less than 50% in the next five years. The reason being that the MM is not a feature-laden jack-of-all-trades - it is basically a one-purpose tool and an accessory to the lenses.

I've ordered mine; I'm going to have a hard time paying for it, but it will probably cost me less than a box of 8x10 TMax each month for the next five years (I shoot B&W mostly).

[gtj]

The only valid and true opinions about the Leica M Monochrome will become evident when we see and evaluate the pictures that it produces. That will take some time. I am not ready to go and buy one as yet. My only opinion, at this time, is that this camera is a pricey piece of German technology and I am not sure what Leica was thinking. I am sure that business considerations are at the top of their thinking. There are enough people out there who think that the way to show they are excellent drivers and photographers is to be seen driving a Ferrari and holding an M9 with a lens of maximum aperture. These are the people Leica seems to cater too. And if there are enough buyers, it will assure Leica to be able to stay in business for some time. Admire and envy those clients, but do not ask them to a " show and tell" session. They may not be able to convince you, you may be disappointed. GJ.

[thebarnman]

Isn't the MM body only about $1000 more than the body of a M9 when it first came out? If so, the vast quality improvement is more than worth it.

[Jamie Roberts]

Isn't the MM body only about $1000 more than the body of a M9 when it first came out? If so, the vast quality improvement is more than worth it.

 

I'm not sure it's as 'vast' as all that, in truth. And the system limitations might not make it worth a premium.

[iforum]

At least leica nailed the one dimensional flat look with this camera's output:D

[AlanG]

Years ago, everything I shot for architecture and interiors was on both color transparency and b/w film. (Maybe color neg. too) I made nice b/w prints for ads that ran in the newspaper and elsewhere. Then over time clients dropped the need for b/w film and simply went with color for everything. Especially once we started scanning film. The reason was that all retouching and other work was done in color and then was converted to b/w if they needed it that way. I have no idea if they adjusted color channels when converting. I have not had a single client mention shooting in b/w for at least 15 years now. But I'm not saying my market applies to everyone.

 

So I am not sure if there is much of a market for this among commercial photographers. It seems to me that it must be targeted to deep pocket Leica enthusiasts who are less likely to be using this commercially, and perhaps some other users that I can't think of off the top of my head... but can only guess Leica has thought about.

 

I can't imagine it cost that much to come up with the MM so it probably was not much of a risk. (We'd like some sensors with clear glass instead of the Bayer filter please. No problem, we've done that before. Change the firmware a bit.) The publicity alone was probably worth it.

[lct]

I wonder what percentage of MM users will use optical colored filters actually. I suspect a very little one but i may be wrong. Anyway, would this mean that photogs not using those filters are more interested by sharpness and cleanliness at high isos than by tonality? Just curious.

[downstairs]

The general consensus here, and on other forums, seem to suggest that black and white is best done by converting from colour. Nobody is worried by the pretense involved. It's a fake - like fake woodcuts and fake oil painting. To me it seems a bit like tweaking a synthesiser to get a Steinway piano sound.

If the M9 is a theater organ, then the MM is an electric piano - by reduction somewhat closer to the truth. Optical filters are back, like pedals on a Yamaha.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[iforum]

Excuse me downstairs while I shoe my BMW