Leica M or Leica MM

[bjdejong]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello,

 

I am curious if there already exists a comparison of the Leica M and Leica MM B&W results (higher iso ranges). I would love to understand better the trade-off between noise/dynamics at higher iso ranges and retaining the color channels for post-processing.

 

I would really appreciate if someone can provide me or point me to more information on this,

 

Cheers,

 

Barend Jan

[Advertisement]

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

[Avatar]

yeah, me too.

[otto.f]

The new M cannot ever be as sharp as the MM because it needs the Bayer filter before the sensor to produce color. See Steve Huff for instance

 

The Leica Monochrom Review Part 2: Low light, High ISO and Filters | STEVE HUFF PHOTOS

[Tonki-M]

i also am at the crossroad between the M and MM. while steve's site does show some of the potential of the MM, we havent seen anything dramatic (prints are another matter). what remains to be seen is how well the CMOS would fare. until i see and get to play with the M files from a production camera, i will still remain at this crossroad.

 

an afterthought: looking at this from a marketing stand point, the new M's b/w should not rival the MM in terms of anything from ability to resolve resolution, dynamic range, micro details, etc. since that would just doom its entire product line, b/c who would want to buy a b/w only camera if the b/w images it produce is close to its bayer brother.

[dwbell]

I just asked a question regarding a monochrome version of the "new" M in a separate thread. It seems there is the possibility of a new M Monochrom in the future, so another interesting comparison (even theoretical at this stage) would be the "new" MM vs the old MM.

[dwbell]

i also am at the crossroad between the M and MM. while steve's site does show some of the potential of the MM, we havent seen anything dramatic (prints are another matter). what remains to be seen is how well the CMOS would fare. until i see and get to play with the M files from a production camera, i will still remain at this crossroad.

 

an afterthought: looking at this from a marketing stand point, the new M's b/w should not rival the MM in terms of anything from ability to resolve resolution, dynamic range, micro details, etc. since that would just doom its entire product line, b/c who would want to buy a b/w only camera if the b/w images it produce is close to its bayer brother.

 

Many M9 and M9P owners already know that feeling of a doomed product line after the ME introduction. Arguably Leica don't mind sinking existing ships to sell more of the new ones. And nor should they from a purely financial point of view, CaNikon do it every 6 months it seems.

[marknorton]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

So far, we are taking it on trust that IQ will have benefitted from Leica being able to tailor the CMOS sensor design to the specific characteristics of M lenses where previously with Kodak, there may have been a take-it-or-leave-it attitude with only the microlenses up for modification.

 

My hope for the CMOS sensor is to be rid of the imaging artefacts which plagued the M9 and for less compromise. Whether this is pie-in-the-sky remains to be seen but I would much rather Leica get it right from the outset even if we have to wait rather than unwittingly become a beta tester again. They should test, test, test this camera and when they think they are done, test it some more.

[bjdejong]

Thank you for the replies sofar.

 

I learn that it is way too early to come to a conclusion on this luxury dilemma.

 

Cheers,

 

Barend Jan

[pico]

Jan, if you understand the profound difference of making B&W from post-processing color vs straight monochrome MM, then the answer should be apparent, and it is "If you cannot imagine the difference, the question is moot." If you don't care, then if you are rich, throw your money into the MM bucket and be happy or not.

[gjames9142]

Since Leica is still working on the M firmware, it is far too early to make comparisons between the M and the MM. I have some casual shots by Leica people, and they look okay, but it is very early still. (Though I wonder why they announce their cameras before they are ready.) Having said that, I was leant an M for ten days by Leica, and found it brilliant. I also like the M9 a lot for colour, and get very few artefacts -- except when I used the uber-sharp Zeiss 35 mm 2.8 Biogon, when there are all sorts of problems. Maybe I am lucky because I am using late, pre-asph lenses. I don't regard sharpness as the only quality of a lens.

[jonoslack]

I'd have said this was a pretty simple question. If you only ever shoot black and white, then the MM is a no-brainer; the whole concept of the monochrome camera is a winner, and why wouldn't you?

 

On the other hand, if you don't always shoot black and white, then the answer is that you either need two cameras, or you need a colour camera (whether that be the M or the MM).

 

I took a whole series of comparisons between the MM and the M9, and the differences were noticeable, but not earth shaking (I think some of these were at photokina). Unless Leica have really made a mistake with the M sensor (and why would they?) then I would assume that the difference will be a little less with the M . . . . but still, if you're only shooting black and white?!

 

. . . . and if you want colour?

[brill64]

i would imagine that introduction of the new 50 apo-summicron f2, with it's incredible sharpness & resolution, that this is a good indication about the kind of new leica sensors & lens line-ups to come in the future. probably also why you still can't get hold of one.

[thighslapper]

I'm not sure this is an either/or question....

 

Bit like asking if you should get a motorbike or a car....

 

I think with an MM alone I would feel a bit restricted.

 

Ideally both, or if cannot and you are undecided, get an M

[otto.f]

 

an afterthought: looking at this from a marketing stand point, the new M's b/w should not rival the MM in terms of anything from ability to resolve resolution, dynamic range, micro details, etc. since that would just doom its entire product line, b/c who would want to buy a b/w only camera if the b/w images it produce is close to its bayer brother.

 

This is not correct. The M cannot rival the MM technically because of the Bayer filter and commercially because production is/was only for half a year in 2012.

[Tonki-M]

This is not correct. The M cannot rival the MM technically because of the Bayer filter and commercially because production is/was only for half a year in 2012.

 

but we're saying the same thing

[jonoslack]

but we're saying the same thing

 

I don't think so - you're saying that marketing will make sure that the black and white of the M doesn't match that of the MM. Otto is saying that the reason that the black and white on the M won't match that on the MM is because of the lack of a Bayer filter.

 

Hmm - one thing I think you can be absolutely certain of is that Leica have done their very best to make sure that both cameras work as well as they possibly can. I really don't think marketing will impose constraint on the M to ensure sales of the MM.

 

But even if they wanted to, they couldn't control the black and white conversions in the M anyway (only the jpgs) - the only possible way to do it would be to handicap the dynamic range and colour of the M overall - and let's face it, they aren't going to do this!

 

all the best

[photomeme]

Many M9 and M9P owners already know that feeling of a doomed product line after the ME introduction. Arguably Leica don't mind sinking existing ships to sell more of the new ones. And nor should they from a purely financial point of view, CaNikon do it every 6 months it seems.

 

I'm an M-P owner, and felt quite the opposite. It was a huge blessing by Leica of the M9 CCD as a platform that holds its own, and will continue to do so over years. Unsurpassed image quality at base ISO.

 

The new product line is stabilizing the resale market price (after initial panic/ignorant selling), which I expect to be further butressed by some upcoming disclosures about IQ on the new M.

[Guest borge]

Question: Do you shoot Black and White only (or want to)?

If answer "YES" then purchase a MM.

If answer "NO" then purchase a M, M9 or M-E.

 

Quite easy.

 

The latitude of the files from the MM is extraordinary, and cannot be matched by the cameras with CFA's (color filter arrays). But they shoot color and black and white.

 

I love going around and shooting pictures hand-held with my MM + 50 Lux when it is as dark as it gets out without any problem what-so-ever. My guess is that the "M" won't be nearly as nice at 6400 ISO as the MM (due to color noise and the fact that CMOS sensors are noisier and generates nasty noise compared to CCD's mostly), and the M can't go up to 10000 ISO - which is actually useable on the MM.

 

If you still don't know what to do then get a camera with a CFA. The MM is mostly made for people that know that they want it. You don't want to regret purchasing a $8000 USD camera!

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[dante]

The OP raises a fair question (I too am considering an M or MM). and I don't understand some of the answers that I have seen here, especially with so little available information on the M.

 

1. One is this supposedly insurmountable resolution advantage of an MM sensor. Although it is true that against an M9, there is only about a 20% difference between what an MM theoretically resolves and what an M9 actually resolves (speaking volumes about Leica's processing). When the frame of reference becomes a 24mp sensor, it is going to be much, much closer.*

 

*If someone wants to trot out the "well, a Bayer only resolves 1/4 as much on all-red objects," then we can talk about b/w capture of objects that have different colors but the same luminance. That results in a very similar problem - only it happens with about a thousand times the frequency as shooting detailed objects in primary colors.

 

2. I don't know that the sensitivity of the MM is, for any practical purpose, is higher than an M. The numbers say 6,400 and 10,000, which is 2/3 of a stop. If those are based on a common standard of acceptable noise, then correcting the MM's color "neutrality" to that of the MM could easily erase any difference. There is no b/w contrast filter that exacts less than one stop. In fact, the ones that would tend to get past the MM's green-yellow sensitivity usually cop two or more. A Bayer camera does not have any loss; it has all of the RGB color data on one shot.

 

3. I'm not sure why claims keep cropping up to the effect that the MM has a greater dynamic range, latitude, etc. than an M. What specification or calculation supports this? All I see is reports about how much shadow detail you can drag out of what look like muddy files on screen - I think LCDs make all shadows look muddy.

 

4. CMOS noisier? What decade is this? You can argue some imperceptible difference at base ISO - or some slope of noise at higher ISOs. But ISO for ISO, CMOS is now (and has been for some years) a lot cleaner than CCDs. Does anyone really want to argue that the output from an M8 or M9 at ISO 1250+ involves less noise than, say, a Nikon D700 at an equal setting? In fact, I have a hard time finding any more noise in my Kodak 14n files (CMOS from 2003) than in my M8 files at base ISO.

 

If you are a black and white shooter, the MM is something that you really, really want to believe in. And if it were the M9 vs. MM, especially at the M9's original MAP, it would be a no-brainer. But with the M on the horizon, it's a lot harder decision. And the M has also brought in some big improvements like battery life and the Maestro processor.

 

Dante

Edited October 21, 2012 by dante

[mjh]

Many M9 and M9P owners already know that feeling of a doomed product line after the ME introduction.

Huh? Many people did believe that an M10 (now the new M) would render the M9 line of models obsolete. But no, the introduction of the M-E means this product line lives on. (Obviously the M-E is based on the M9 hardware platform, as is the M Monochrom.)