S2 vs M Monochrom

[esquire53]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I see a lot of comments about the M-M and the potential M10 to come and would the M10 be better than M-M...

 

How about the comparison of the S2 and the M Monochrom?

Did someone who had his hands on a M-M also the opportunity to compare it to the S2 converted to B&W?

 

Best regards

[StephenPatterson]

I see a lot of comments about the M-M and the potential M10 to come and would the M10 be better than M-M...

 

How about the comparison of the S2 and the M Monochrom?

Did someone who had his hands on a M-M also the opportunity to compare it to the S2 converted to B&W?

 

Best regards

 

What is better? The S2 has 37.5mp, the MM has 18mp, as does the M9. Is better about how big you can print?

[Messsucherkamera]

If you need or want to make wall size prints, it would seem that the S2 would be the better choice. How often does a person who is not creating huge prints for a gallery or advertising display purposes needle print to wall size?

 

For my purposes, prints that are 24" on the long side are big enough. Most of the time, 12"x18" are big enough. No doubt the Monochrome M is capabable of delivering quality prints at that size. My M4-P, 28 Summicron and Tri-X combination does.

[stephan_w]

From what I have seen so far, the resolution of the MM is about the same as the S2, this is also what Leica suggests when they say that the resolution power of the MM ist about 100% higher than the standard M9.

 

BUT the high ISO capacity of the MM is far better than the S2, which is more or less limited to ISO 640 for getting a decent quality.

 

There is also a discussion going on about the exposure latitude of the MM, which may be a hindicap in some situation, that will be handled bettter by the S2.

 

Also, focus is critical at those resolutions, so at the end the S2 might be a better choice when it comes to overall performance.

[esquire53]

well, all comments welcome but not really getting the fact that the MM according to Leica is 100% better, so the 18MP will be 36 MP?

So if a film 24x36 compared to 4.5x6 or others, how does this works out.

there are thoughts for M10 vs. MM, with the idea that the M10 will have 36MP or what ever, so I think it's fair enough to ask for what's out there and look at the best from both worlds and instead of waiting for MM and M10, go straight for S2.

 

cheers

[Jamie Roberts]

For me, an S2 would be better because I can do my own colour conversion to monochrome.

 

Those monochrome conversions, to my eyes, are extremely beautiful, detailed and hold up to film.

[rosuna]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

From what I have seen so far, the resolution of the MM is about the same as the S2, this is also what Leica suggests when they say that the resolution power of the MM ist about 100% higher than the standard M9.

 

BUT the high ISO capacity of the MM is far better than the S2, which is more or less limited to ISO 640 for getting a decent quality.

 

There is also a discussion going on about the exposure latitude of the MM, which may be a hindicap in some situation, that will be handled bettter by the S2.

 

Also, focus is critical at those resolutions, so at the end the S2 might be a better choice when it comes to overall performance.

 

Noise and dynamic range are narrowly connected.

[stephan_w]

go straight for S2.

 

those cameras are to different, especiall in size and weight, in ISO performance and lens choices.

 

From the resolution alone, you are maybe right, but from the ISO performance, the S2 ends where the MM begins. So probably better to get both

[kidigital]

A larger MF sensor like the S2 uses allows for a little more dimensionality to its final images. It's not just about how much bigger you want to print. I'm biased because I use an S2, but I think that S2 black and white images have a medium format aesthetic that is gorgeous.