M-240 "Seeking Light"

[AlanJW]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

 

Looking forward to this camera but as of yet not on any lists and would imagine my M9's (and new D600) will get me through until the waiting lists and early bugs get worked out. When I compare the image quality of the CCD M9 to the CMOS D600 it doesn't give me much hope (except nice to have the high iso's of the D600). But maybe Leica can pull it off. And maybe I can even pick up a used one at a great price in a year or two.

 

Charles, I haven't used D600 but the D800E w/o AA filter is pretty darn good for what it is. The lenses don't draw like Leica lenses but that isn't the fault of the sensor or the firmware. For some uses, DSLR is pretty useful. After a week in the Galapagos with only DSLRs and long-ish lenses, I was satisfied with what I got, and did not pine away for my M9. For everyday walking around, the M9 remains my first choice, but I do have an order in for a M240 as my eyes are no longer very good and help in focusing is becoming important. I'm not a Doctor, just a (retired) lawyer, so I haven't been given one as a beta tester. If I had, I suspect my test photos would be crap, as my test photos with new equipment are always just that, not looking for artistry. They are deleted from my computer with some rapidity, and I wouldn't want them widely disseminated, so I feel sympathy if not empathy for Dr. Rohde.

[IWC Doppel]

It's going to be interesting to see how the rendering of the CMOS vs CCD sensor is over time, ignoring the pixel peeking and technical advantages, looking at a few Nikon images on LR4 reminded me why I like my M9-P

 

I do hope (and to some extent expect) Leica can pull off the ISO improvement without compromising the 'look', but I am prepared to be dissapointed.

 

Maybe the MM old glass experiences will be repeated.

 

No matter as I am happy with my M9-P and will stay in the background as an interested observer. Fingers crossed though

[charlesphoto99]

Charles Peterson, you still shoot the coolest pictures on the forum... actually the coolest pictures, period. Love the photographs Graham Nash picked of yours for his rock book, "Taking Aim."

 

Taking Aim - Unforgettable Rock 'N" Roll Photographs The Seattle Opening with Graham Nash, Jim Marshall, Henry Diltz, Joel Nernstein, Neal Preston, Chris Walter and more.

 

Taking Aim: Unforgettable Rock 'n' Roll Photographs Selected by Graham Nash: Graham Nash: 9780811871013: Amazon.com: Books

 

 

Thanks Rick. Sorry we couldn't meet up in Seattle. With two very young children (one named Leica even) it gets hard to be as social as before. And can make one a bit snarky at times on the internets.

[zlatkob]

As a pathetic photog myself, i seem to recall that some famous photogs have been unable to detect the magenta issue of the M8 in 2006 so why not a doctor, a dentist or a lawyer (are you hearing Leica?) in 2012?

 

Which famous photographers beta tested the M8? I recall pre-production copies went out to reviewers, but I don't recall the famous photographers.

 

If these 25 units are genuinely being beta tested, then they should be going out to outstanding photographers — people near the level of, say, Ansel Adams (if he were alive). This is mission-critical. Testing by non-experts is pretty much a prescription for mediocre testing and missed faults — which then has adverse consequences later. Those photographers should be doing real-world testing to push the camera to its limits. They should be photojournalists, commercial photographers, landscape masters, etc. Color should be tested by experts in color. Black & white should be tested by experts in black & white. Durability should be tested by heavy-duty use in harsh environments. Some of those cameras should be coming back broken because they were pushed too hard. Everything that breaks provides a valuable lesson. Ideally, faults like the magenta issue, cracked baseplates and cracked sensor glass would all be uncovered at this stage.

 

I think that a beta tester has as a primary goal to take HUNDREDS of pics, playing often with features like changing ISO, and other settings, just to verify that software is robust : this means not to try to take FINE pictures, but simply "use a lot the camera" : all the "inmost" tuning to get the best IQ I think is a matter of inside lab.

 

"Hundreds" is not enough. Hundreds is what a wedding photographer shoots in the first few hours of wedding, or what a sports photographer shoots in the first 30 minutes of a game.

[mjh]

If these 25 units are genuinely being beta tested, then they should be going out to outstanding photographers — people near the level of, say, Ansel Adams (if he were alive). This is mission-critical.

It isn’t. Being a great photographer would range among the least important qualifications for a beta tester.

[zlatkob]

It isn’t. Being a great photographer would range among the least important qualifications for a beta tester.

 

Sorry I wasn't being clear. I meant to write master photographers who are very highly skilled. Ansel Adams was both highly skilled and famous, so not a clear example. You may still disagree. However, the highly skilled tend to be very demanding of their tools and materials. This may be why Polaroid consulted with Adams on certain black & white products — who better than a master of black & white?

 

Likewise, if the M8 had been extensively tested by a master of color photography, would the IR issue have been identified (and addressed) earlier and not been such an embarrassment right after the product launch? An expert in color photography would likely discover the problem and say something like, "Based on my xx years of work in color photography, this isn't an accurate or acceptable color response and, unless corrected with extra filtration, wouldn't meet my needs for certain photography projects."

 

Years of dedication and experience are good for something, no? Surely a company that makes high-end musical instruments will have them tested by some highly skilled musicians? Surely a high-end fragrance company will work with testers who have a highly refined sense of smell?

[pico]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Leica's market has a very large part in which the individuals understand that they are prosperous snap shooters, and not masters of photography.

[zlatkob]

Leica's market has a very large part in which the individuals understand that they are prosperous snap shooters, and not masters of photography.

Agreed. But both prosperous snap shooters and masters of photography expect a refined product that's been well-tested by qualified people. Perhaps we disagree on who "qualified people" are.

 

Suppose you're an amateur pianist at a basic level of skill and you're looking to buy an expensive grand piano. Would you rather that the piano has been rigorously tested by some master pianists, or by other amateur pianists who are at a basic level?

 

Having masters of photography do the testing serves two goals. First, they'll detect faults, if any, that would prevent them and others like them from using the camera on the job. In Canon-land, we occasionally hear rumors of input from professional testers delaying the release of high-end lens; this is encouraging because we suspect that the delay means the lens will be further refined before it is released.

 

Second, once the product meets their approval, such approval serves a vital marketing purpose. Even prosperous snap shooters are encouraged that the first sample photos from the new M on Leica's web site are by a member of Magnum, and not by another prosperous snap shooter. The qualifications of the user speak to the qualities of the product.

[marknorton]

I agree that beta testers do not need to be great photographers but they certainly need to be competent and engaged photographers. Their contribution is less useful if they never come off auto exposure or auto white balance or do not explore challenging lighting conditions.

 

If all you take is dreary snap shots of the inside of a US supermarket (makes my Stratford upon Avon Waitrose look like a palace!), Leica are not going to learn much from your feeble efforts.

[Erik Gunst Lund]

....the D800E w/o AA filter is pretty darn good for what it is. ....

Just a small correction;

The D800E does have an AA filter it is just a very special one, it's a combination of two AA filters canceling out each other.

Not comparable to the filter packs of M8, M9 or M

[-ph-]

As much as I love my M9, I would say that amongst its beta-testers were too many great photographers and too few famous electronics experts . In any case, the wider variety of testers used, the better. So certainly there were enough "photographers" involved as well as people with other qualifications. As the delivery date is approaching, the testing now would be mostly ensuring that the firmware is ready, the basic development work is done by now. Random snapshots might be a very good way to do this. In any case, I find it strange how much negative posts were made in reaction of those images. Yes, its obvious that these images are not of exhibition quality. But considering that up to them I had not seen M pictures at all, it was nice to get a teaser. But when "sneak previews" like this create so much criticism, they might not appear again in the future...

In the meantime, I got the chance to see a couple of M shots in Lightroom and was more than thoroughly impressed:)

 

Peter

[AlanJW]

Just a small correction;

The D800E does have an AA filter it is just a very special one, it's a combination of two AA filters canceling out each other.

Not comparable to the filter packs of M8, M9 or M

 

I don't think it is technically two AA filters, but essentially this is right. For a good technical explanation and comparison see here: LumoLabs -- Nikon D800 AA filter vs. D800E -- Whitepaper

[charlesphoto99]

Leica may not want truly critical feedback from working pros/masters/whatever you want to call them. If they did (and were willing to take it into consideration) then probably both the M8 and M9 would have taken many more months, if not years more to get out the door. Obviously they went cheap on the electronics of the M9 (essentially recycling most of the M8). Sounds like (fingers crossed) they're not doing it this time.

 

But "critical" is the key term here. Just how critical are amateur enthusiasts vs working pros? Quite often you get a lot of "great shot Johnny!" over poorly exposed pics of hotel lobbies just because it was taken with the latest greatest APO Lux whatever. Not really putting the camera through it's paces from inception to final presentation. Of course there are many exceptions to this (Slack of course being one) but too often the red dot can do no wrong and I think to a degree that perception has contributed to some hubris among the corporate think at Leica HQ.

 

Of course there's a conundrum that the masters have in using new gear. They don't tend to recycle through cameras every 3-6 months like many of the amateurs do now. Often they will stick with a single camera/lens combination for much of their careers. Getting them to test a new camera when time/money is on the line is tough, at least without getting paid for the testing and/or in a unique situation specifically for the purpose of such testing. Well heeled amateurs on the other hand pay for their own travels, personally have on hand all the exotic glass they might need, and therefore can do what Leica might otherwise have to pay/lend for. But the key is criticality - will they really be able tell Leica what is up or will they just gush over the opportunity of being a tester? Some will, some won't. I think that is why this set of photos got some of our hairs up, probably unnecessarily but all the same. And what Leica truly needs is honest feedback from the best of the best, amateur and pro.

[pico]

Agreed. But both prosperous snap shooters and masters of photography expect a refined product that's been well-tested by qualified people. Perhaps we disagree on who "qualified people" are.

 

Suppose you're an amateur pianist at a basic level of skill and you're looking to buy an expensive grand piano. Would you rather that the piano has been rigorously tested by some master pianists, or by other amateur pianists who are at a basic level?

 

I am sure we agree.

 

Why not include both amateurs and experts? When we developed software we included different kinds of people to test it. Very often experts avoided pitfalls because they knew what not to do, (often they did not know they knew). Many experts had years of experience which made them more tolerant of issues that potential customers would not tolerate. Inexpert users would occasionally ask for features that the experts would not consider.

 

It is all good.

[charlesphoto99]

Hi Alan,

 

Been shooting dslrs for a long time now (mostly D3 now D600) and slrs before that. I didn't go for the D800 due to the file size etc but thinking now maybe I should have. But I really needec something more portable than the D3 and the D600 fit the bill.They do need a lot more processing than the M9 but once done the results are pretty good, esp at high iso. Sometimes dslrs just work better for certain stuff, esp with lenses like the 14-24 and on the longer end. Also no way I could ever afford a 24 Summilux but the Nikon 24 1.4 I could.

 

Best,

 

CP

[charlesphoto99]

And oh, I'm not in the least bit interested in the M slr kludge. What I'd kinda like is the M body with a M9 sensor in it. I just think the M9 sensor look is so unique and wonderful. Tough act for Leica to follow.

[mjh]

Just a small correction; The D800E does have an AA filter it is just a very special one, it's a combination of two AA filters canceling out each other.

An AA filter is as an AA filter does; in this sense there is no antialiasing filter in the D800E. There are filter parts that arranged in one particular way would constitute an antialiasing filter, but the way they are put together in the D800E they do not.

[01af]

In the beta-testing phase, it is perfectly fine to shoot everything, just for the sake of shooting ... your feet, the interior of your photo bag, whatever. But you don't publish these on the Internet as an example of what the camera can do.

[Rick]

Charles, maybe, Leica is reading this thread and they could put you on the pro-tester list. I'll put my request in for you for a M + 24lux. You could shoot it around town at the rock clubs and test the low light capability. Imagine finally being able to easily shoot fast shutter speeds with a digital M. And, you would find out real fast if it was splash proof!

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[mjh]

Sorry I wasn't being clear. I meant to write master photographers who are very highly skilled. Ansel Adams was both highly skilled and famous, so not a clear example. You may still disagree. However, the highly skilled tend to be very demanding of their tools and materials. This may be why Polaroid consulted with Adams on certain black & white products — who better than a master of black & white?

I’m not adverse to having highly skilled and talented photographers participating in a beta test (and I trust that neither is Leica), but it is just as important having photographers with average or even poor skills testing the camera. It might even be that highly skilled photographers identify less bugs than the others – they will have developed a certain routine, a way of doing things that has proven to lead to good results. Still there may be a host of bugs lurking in areas these photographers wouldn’t even touch. So the crucial thing is to select a highly diverse set of beta testers, which I understand is what Leica did.

 

With a camera or indeed any sufficiently complex piece of technology you could have 100 people testing the product, but once you had ironed out all the bugs they had found you could give the thing to a monkey and it would take it 5 minutes to find a novel way of having the unit lock up or whatever. And you can be sure that when you ship the product, it will take mere weeks until one fairly intelligent customer will have stumbled upon the same issue as the monkey did. (I’m not actually advocating including monkeys in a beta test – small children would do as well btw –, but you get the idea.)

 

Likewise, if the M8 had been extensively tested by a master of color photography, would the IR issue have been identified (and addressed) earlier and not been such an embarrassment right after the product launch?

I am not so sure of that. The magenta cast in some of the images did not go unnoticed in early tests of the M8, but the full import of this phenomenon did. It isn’t that unusual for the colour to be slightly off at that stage, but normally you can be sure to get it correct eventually (and prior to the launch). In the case of the M8 this conviction turned out to be terribly wrong, but in defence of Leica it has to be said that back then they were lacking the experience they have now. And it certainly didn’t help that much of the development work for the M8 was done at Jenoptik so communication between Leica and Jenoptik created its own issues.