Buy the M-Monochrom, or Wait for the M10?

[SpiritShooter]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I think that it is extremely easy to get caught up in the MM hype and and become fickle. I know that I have in the past with Madison Avenue hype.

 

I have had a chance to work with both an MM file and a M9 file both of the same scene. I processed them similarly in C1 and LR4 trying to make them look identical for final output and then printed at 24"x36" on my Epson 9900 using Imageprint 9.

 

The results are indistinguishable.

 

So, if you are into pixel chimping, by all means spend the money to keep yourself sane. But if your goal is to make expressive images, have flexibility and want to save some money then the M9 or future M10 will give you what you need.

 

Just my thoughts, YMMV.

[pico]

I think that it is extremely easy to get caught up in the MM hype and and become fickle. I know that I have in the past with Madison Avenue hype.

 

I have had a chance to work with both an MM file and a M9 file both of the same scene. I processed them similarly in C1 and LR4 trying to make them look identical for final output and then printed at 24"x36" on my Epson 9900 using Imageprint 9.

 

The results are indistinguishable.

 

So, if you are into pixel chimping, by all means spend the money to keep yourself sane. But if your goal is to make expressive images, have flexibility and want to save some money then the M9 or future M10 will give you what you need.

 

Just my thoughts, YMMV.

 

Given our healthy skepticism, in order to accept your impression we would need to see it ourselves. Is it possible that the MM image was degraded in order to look like the 9 image? The two cameras produce very different outcomes, even with filtration.

.

[Guest malland]

Lars, interesting views.

 

My thoughts are that I don't want an EVF camera, that the M9 is not what I am looking for in colour — the GXR-M Module, for example has substantially better colour accuracy (and presents better "transparency" to the lens used) — but that the M-Monochrom can produce the variety of B&W looks that I am interested in, including at higher ISOs. Hence, if the scenario that you outline is right, the logic is for me to get the M-Monochrom now.

 

On the other hand, if the New EVF camera, lets call it the Leica-ES (for Elektronischer Sucher) is really outstanding I could get that eventually in addition to the M-Momoshrom, but I would have to cross the bridge of using two cameras. Or at that point, I could get the M10 instead, assuming it comes out substantially later, as you suggest, and then decide whether to keep the M-Monochrom.

 

—MItch/Pak Nam Pran

Barrier

[Jamie Roberts]

Whatever Leica introduces at Photokina in terms of an EVF it will take some "convincing" time in my own hands or an impossibly low price on Leica's part for me to just "buy" it--both conceptually or in actual fact.

 

So I'm holding out for an M10. I think it will be the M for the ages, or at least for me as I age

 

And my M9 is still the fabulous performer it always was, and in truth I love it more every day I shoot it. The fact that Nikon and Canon are now "catching up" to it in terms of image quality, colour and usefulness in their last gen cameras (again, IMO, shooting both side by side) doesn't make it any less capable.

 

But my dilemma is rather that it's getting old and very well-used.

 

After working with MM DNGs and looking at images, I'm not really interested in the MM (though all the hype has caused me to go out and shoot more monochromatic personal stuff myself, both on film and on digital). I'm satisfied that I can essentially reproduce anything I need to in BW with an M3, M6, M9 and 5d3 And a large format film camera. "Essential" or not, it's all I need on that front.

 

I am not interested in putting filters back over my lenses either... FWIW.

 

So what to do? Ideally, Leica introduces the M10 and it has the stuff I want (see M9 end of the line thread) and it's actually available very early in 2013, and the Euro crisis means I can actually afford to use it as a working pro (meaning the price settles somewhere south of $7K US). Then II keep my M9 and sell my 5d3 and 85 1.2L

 

Ideally.

[Guest malland]

...I have had a chance to work with both an MM file and a M9 file both of the same scene. I processed them similarly in C1 and LR4 trying to make them look identical for final output and then printed at 24"x36" on my Epson 9900 using Imageprint 9.

 

The results are indistinguishable.

 

So, if you are into pixel chimping, by all means spend the money to keep yourself sane. But if your goal is to make expressive images, have flexibility and want to save some money then the M9 or future M10 will give you what you need...

I think that it is possible to make some prints from the M9 in B&W that are very close indeed to files printed from the M-Monochrom, but it depends the type of look that you are going for. However, my impression from what I have seen from some M-Monocherom files that I have worked on is that I can push M-Monochrom filed into substantially higher contrast and get a longer tonal range at the same time than I could get from the M9, for the admittedly short time that I had it. And at higher ISOs, there is no contestL the M-Monochrom is more flexible.

 

Incidentally, looking over my processed files and prints, I find that I like the B&W that I could get from the M8 more than what I was able to do with the M9. I agree with you, though, on ImagePrint, which I use with my Epson 9880.

 

—Mitch/Pak Nam Pran

Scratching the Surface©

[Guest malland]

Whatever Leica introduces at Photokina in terms of an EVF it will take some "convincing" time in my own hands or an impossibly low price on Leica's part for me to just "buy" it--both conceptually or in actual fact.

Similar to what I think.

 

So I'm holding out for an M10. I think it will be the M for the ages, or at least for me as I age...

Could be, and that's why I'm agonizing over the M-Monochrom. If I had an M9 or an M8, I also would just wait. Against this, if I got the M-Monochrom and was completely happy with it, I could hold off on doing any colour some years.

 

I am not interested in putting filters back over my lenses either... FWIW.

Neither am I, and when I shot film I rarely did.

 

—Mitch/Pak Nam Pran

Pak Nam Pran

[marknorton]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am planning to upgrade my M9 to a M9-P, getting at last the silver chrome finish that I prefer. And then I will continue to use that camera for possibly as long as I live, whatever Leica produces. Though possibly in tandem with the EVF camera ...

 

The old man from the Kodachrome Age

 

FWIW, I am much happier using my M9-P than my M9, I cannot explain why.

[Jeff S]

FWIW, I am much happier using my M9-P than my M9, I cannot explain why.

 

Well the looks of the chrome M9-P are enough to give me irrational thoughts about adding one to supplement my M8.2s ...if the prices (new or used) come down sufficiently at some point. No logic there either.

 

More rationally, a weather sealed M (and lenses) that better allowed for use of moderate tele lenses would remove thoughts of a DSLR for complementary photo work. The MM fits a niche that I don't feel compelled to fill, especially since digital spoiled me in terms of color options. In the meantime, the M8.2 fits the bill well enough for now, especially so for b/w.

 

The OP of course has to decide for himself, but one option would be to consider picking up a used M8.2 or M9 (despite his first experience) and see what happens at Photokina. Doing so from a reputable Leica dealer would allow for easy transition to a new camera if and when one appears, likely without much loss or fuss. And even in the event of a small loss, the value of having an M in the meantime might well offset any amount.

 

Jeff

[Messsucherkamera]

I would suggest taking the middle way : Wait to see what the M10 has to offer (provided the M10 is launched @Photokina this fall) - then buy the M/ M if the M10 is a no show.

 

Better yet, buy an MP and go on a photo expedition using the $5000+ saved by not buying the M10.

[SpiritShooter]

Given our healthy skepticism, in order to accept your impression we would need to see it ourselves. Is it possible that the MM image was degraded in order to look like the 9 image? The two cameras produce very different outcomes, even with filtration.

.

 

No need to accept what my experience has shown, we all have our own truth.

 

But no, the MM image was not degraded, it was processed just as I normally do. The M9 image was processed adjusting for contrast, shadows, highlights etc to match the MM look as best as I could.

 

I think the operable fact is that when printed the pixel level comparisons that we are seeing as significant become less so due to obvious factors.

[pico]

No need to accept what my experience has shown, we all have our own truth.

 

But no, the MM image was not degraded, it was processed just as I normally do. The M9 image was processed adjusting for contrast, shadows, highlights etc to match the MM look as best as I could.

 

I think the operable fact is that when printed the pixel level comparisons that we are seeing as significant become less so due to obvious factors.

 

Show us.

[kdriceman]

I think that it is extremely easy to get caught up in the MM hype and and become fickle. I know that I have in the past with Madison Avenue hype.

 

I have had a chance to work with both an MM file and a M9 file both of the same scene. I processed them similarly in C1 and LR4 trying to make them look identical for final output and then printed at 24"x36" on my Epson 9900 using Imageprint 9.

 

The results are indistinguishable.

 

So, if you are into pixel chimping, by all means spend the money to keep yourself sane. But if your goal is to make expressive images, have flexibility and want to save some money then the M9 or future M10 will give you what you need.

 

Just my thoughts, YMMV.

 

Were both images were shot at ISO 6400?

[xrogers]

Mitch, I've enjoyed seeing your photos over the years, and my conservative advice would be that you should wait for the M10.

 

Now forget practicality---I think your style and the MM may be a great match. It's clear you're thinking about this pretty hard. I bet the MM looks good enough that you'll decide you need try it for yourself, at least someday. If you're going to buy it sooner or later, just do it sooner and get on with it. The worst thing that happens is you don't like it and can sell it while it's still hard to get and has maximum value.

 

Good shooting,

 

Clyde

[Paulus]

The M10 will arrive in september already at a price of € 7500,- It will have a European sensor. The MM will arrive a few months earlier at € 6800,-

 

If Leica is confident on putting these two camera's on the market almost at the same time, they will believe that there is a market for it.

 

Maybe we can compare it with the MP /M7 market. One camera for the purists , one for the other user. Only difference is, that the MP could load colour.

 

The same with the MM and the M10. The MM will have a longer live span than just a few years , but hopefully the M10 too. At this moment it is still not certain what the M10 will look like. Maybe the MM will provide the last camera for those that like the " old " leica look. Just like the MP did....and they still are bought.

[SpiritShooter]

Show us.

 

Sure, they are pinned up here in my studio.

I am located near SouthBeach in Miami.

 

PM me if you are in the area.

[Jamie Roberts]

{snipped}

Better yet, buy an MP and go on a photo expedition using the $5000+ saved by not buying the M10.

 

Sure--then blow $5K on development and scanning over the course of about 200 rolls of film. Even without the "expedition" that's only a couple of rolls a week for 2 years.

 

After that, you're actually paying more than you would for an M10, which you would think would last 3 years at least

[250swb]

I would wait for the M10 if I were you Mitch.

 

90% of the images I make are B&W, but the only thing the MM has inspired me to do is buy another film camera. I can't see the point of what I fully expect to be a short lived niche camera, to be equalled in B&W output when the M10 is released. If a colour file from the M9 is close when converted to B&W with an MM file, and I agree there isn't much in it, the M10 will be better. There is something intriguing about the simple purity of the MM in only doing monochrome (but so can a film camera), but I would rather carry an extra lens than two bodies, one for colour and one for B&W.

 

Steve

[Guest malland]

...Now forget practicality---I think your style and the MM may be a great match. It's clear you're thinking about this pretty hard. I bet the MM looks good enough that you'll decide you need try it for yourself, at least someday. If you're going to buy it sooner or later, just do it sooner and get on with it. The worst thing that happens is you don't like it and can sell it while it's still hard to get and has maximum value...

Clyde, that is pretty much where my thinking is heading; but a lot will depend on chance: can I get to Paris for a couple of days the last week of July; wIll I know soon enough to place an order (down payment required); and will the M-Monochrom arrive by the time I am in Paris? If all that doesn't t work out I'll have to wait until after Photokina anyway.

 

—Mitch/Pak Nam Pran

Scratching the Surface©

[Jamie Roberts]

Mitch,

 

I still think you're ultimately better off with a M9-P.

 

You had bad luck with the M9, I understand. But if you have the lenses, then it's fine for low light. And it makes wonderful BWs, without other limitations.

 

And colour if the story is there

 

Worst comes to worst you can sell it and get an M10 next year. There will still be a huge market for M9s.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Guest malland]

...90% of the images I make are B&W, but the only thing the MM has inspired me to do is buy another film camera. I can't see the point of what I fully expect to be a short lived niche camera, to be equalled in B&W output when the M10 is released. If a colour file from the M9 is close when converted to B&W with an MM file, and I agree there isn't much in it, the M10 will be better. There is something intriguing about the simple purity of the MM in only doing monochrome (but so can a film camera), but I would rather carry an extra lens than two bodies, one for colour and one for B&W...

Steve, all that makes sense, including that conversion of an M9 color DNG can be close to the output of the M-Monochorm. However, what I am seeing in working with some of Jono Slack's files is that I can make the sort of extreme adjustments that I often want without the M-Monochrom files falling — this is why I've been so interested in Jacob Aue Sobol's work of this camera — more so than with any digital camera that I've used, including the M9. I suspect that this also will not be the case of the M10, although I do think the resolution will be there. If I am right, I don't think that the M-Monochrom will be a short lived camera.

 

—Mitch/Bangkok

Pak Nam Pran