new 'official' M240 pics up!

[Rick]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

That depends on the C1 version. C1pro has very subtle colour controls that are better than LR in my experience. One can make the adjustments your mention targeted at each colour group separately, so tweaking the red, for instance, won't affect the yellow.

 

Similarly LAB colour correction is much more precise. As you see by your method changing the hue in one colour affects the whole balance. That is because RGB colours are automatically linked to luminance. In LAB you are only tweaking the colours without shifting the luminance by using the curves tool in the A and B channel.

 

It looks like I'll have to download the C1 pro version to see what you are talking about.

 

The curves tool in LAB is entirely different in using the A and B channel. I rarely use that anymore because, LR is so good. Are you still using LAB? You are a far better than I if you really are regularly taking photos into LAB.

[Advertisement]

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

[IWC Doppel]

Let's put it this way - what I have been taking in over the last month regarding IQ has my resolve not to get one wavering....

I am still doubtful about the Swiss Army Knife aspect of the package, but....

 

Any views on the great CCD CMOS debate ?

[jaapv]

It looks like I'll have to download the C1 pro version to see what you are talking about.

 

The curves tool in LAB is entirely different in using the A and B channel. I rarely use that anymore because, LR is so good. Are you still using LAB? You are a far better than I if you really are regularly taking photos into LAB.

Yes I still do use LAB, for instance to get colour differentiation in highly structured images. I want to get my money's worth out of the headaches Dan Margulis' books gave me :p

[jaapv]

Any views on the great CCD CMOS debate ?

No - I never had strong views there, still don't, except an outsider's observation that the output of the technologies appears to be converging.

[Guest malland]

Doesn't look exactly like a cliffhanger to me whether Leica will be able to do as well as Ricoh in their use of the CMOS sensor. I'm referring to the Ricoh GXR M-Module which, in my view, has better color accuracy than either the M8 or the M9 and that is wonderfully transparent to the lenses used. My own cliffhanger is whether I will eventually get an M240, considering what a stunning and fun to shoot camera my recently acquired M-Monochrom is.

 

—Mitch/Chiang Mai

Lanka Footsteps [series shot with M-Monochrom]

[chris_tribble]

Paul - a point of view.

 

Assuming that the IQ of the M-240 is at least at the level of the M9 (but preferably better), my own perspective is that I want an M:

 

- which is more robust than the current iteration

- which is faster in operation

- which gives me the flexibility to shoot video simple high quality for clients when it's needed

- that lets me focus M lenses at 90 and above with greater accuracy

- that lets me use the beautiful R 80-200 f4 for the odd occasions when I need longer glass without having to hump a DSLR + lens when on travel assignments

- which lets me use my Nikon 28PC lens when I'm shooting buildings

- and which has a screen which isn't an embarrassment when showing clients previews of images on location.

 

The good news is that if these things don't matter, you can hold on to your M9 or get an M-E. Again - what's not to like!

[voxish]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

i actually ran into jean gaumy in kyrgyzstan, at a festival by issyk kul lake in october. he was definitely using the M at that point.

 

(i was so surprised to have encountered the M in the wild i didn't even think about its owner, and five minutes later when i realized who the photographer was, i was far too embarrassed to bother him again…especially as he did not exactly seem charmed by a foolish american girl fawning over his camera. that being said, he and his companion were quite the gentlemen when they stood behind me to block the snow as i changed the film in my M3.)

[BerndReini]

no pro photographer is going to waste time trying to shoot with the electronic viewfinder - sorry but it's not viable.

 

You are very wrong about this one. Have you ever shot portraits wide open with the 75lux? they are beautiful when you actually manage to frame them right and get them in focus, which is where the limitations of the rangefinder become painfully obvious.

[Peter H]

You are very wrong about this one. Have you ever shot portraits wide open with the 75lux? they are beautiful when you actually manage to frame them right and get them in focus, which is where the limitations of the rangefinder become painfully obvious.

 

Paul is a professional photographer who consistently makes and publishes some wonderful photos, so his opinion is worth taking seriously here.

 

Like many, probably most professional journalistic photographers, his emphasis is not usually the razor-thin dof-type portrait you have in mind, and in that respect I think he's correct.

 

But of course Leicas aren't just for pro journalists.

[Guest WPalank]

The new M will initially sell well but my predictions are that after initial sales to people who want the added features in their M the sales will dry up. Hope I'm wrong but I don't think so.

 

.

 

Paul, I am not a Leica fantasist and I am not afraid to say when they are wrong. But I'm saying this more like two friends sitting at the bar having a drink. "Are you a betting man?"

 

I think it will go over like no other Leica device. In fact, I predict, those who aren't on a list right now may have over a year to wait if it suddenly tickles the fancy.

[thighslapper]

I don't want to be able to shoot an M at 10,000 ISO it's totally irrelevant - I want the image to look like life and be gritty and have feeling ie. like good old TRI-X I don't and never did want everything to look as though it's been shot on ADOX recording film.

 

..... with an MM you can have the 10,000 and the Leica look .... albeit in stupendous monochrome. It's a 'forget the ISO' camera ..... everything looks great - whatever the setting ......

 

Paradoxically I think the MM is more of a photographic leap than the M will be ..... and I think more of a stayer than the M which is relying on a 'feature list' as it's main selling point.

[The Gent.]

The only ones complaining about a Leica's lack of features seems to be non Leica photographers. These photographers wouldn't buy a Leica anyway' unless Leica know otherwise.

[wlaidlaw]

I agree with Paul on one thing, the behaviour of the M with flash needs some serious looking at. For anything other than close ups or medium sized room use, the GNC/pre-flash exposure on the M9/SF58-D is pretty useless. I was trying to take photos of a pride of lions that we came across at night while driving a Land Rover through the bush in South Africa. They had obviously killed recently, had bulging stomachs, were quite docile and soporific. I was trying to take photos of the dominant male with M9/90 Elmarit-M and SF58-D. In GNC, the exposures were all over the place, sometimes wildly over, some wildly under. I was furiously changing to Auto mode and setting the flash aperture to f4, when it walked off. Out of about 20 shots, I had only one usable one and even that is rather flat looking - see below.

 

Now Leica have the opportunity to dump GNC/pre-flash, when the camera is in live view mode and give us true TTL flash. Having used true TTL with big 45CL4 and 76MZ4 hammerhead Metz flashes on my Contax SLR's, I know just how accurate TTL flash can be. The GNC could not be used anyway in live view mode, as the shutter is open and therefore unavailable to reflect light from the pre-flash onto the CdS cell. The SF58-D can also be updated with new firmware, as it has a USB port for just this purpose.

 

Wilson

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[BerndReini]

I am a cinematographer, and at 39 I am always in danger of being one of the old outdated guys, so I try to stay current with what is going on. A few years ago, camera operators were complaining about electronic viewfinders, which were replacing the old optical ones on motion picture cameras (during the transition from film to digital).

 

Electronic viewfinders have come a long way, and of course the good ones for digital cinema cameras cost $5,000 and above.

 

But I feel very confident in saying that electronic viewfinders will replace optical viewfinders in still cameras within the next couple of years, since stills and video reportage are already merging and live view is becoming more and more important.

 

Therefore I say, that professionals that "don't bother with an electronic viewfinder" will sooner or later fall behind the curve of technology. I know two very successful fashion and portrait photographers that use live-view and focus peaking for critical work, and there are many photojournalists that use Zacuto finders and other hoods to work with their LCD screen as electronic viewfinders.

 

I wasn't saying that Paul isn't a professional, but his generalization is simply not correct, and the hybrid of an optical and electronic viewfinder is what many professionals will embrace.

 

And Wilson, I had the same experience with the SF58 and returned it after a week. I was expecting good results in TTL mode with this beast and found out quickly that my much smaller Olympus flash gives me much more accurate exposure in Auto mode.

[jaapv]

Wilson, I have never seen a wildlife flash shot of this kind that was worth the paper it was printed on. Flash is completely useless in this situation. Actually you did rather well and this is the best you can expect with any gear. Crank up the Iso and use the spotlight for decent results.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[algrove]

here's my thinking:

MP = 993 (the last hurrah)

M8 = 996 (controversial, not oil (air) cooled any longer, not film any longer)

M9 = 997 (the acceptable water cooled 911 and the acceptable digital?)

M = 991 (the next generation)

 

that almost works, doesn't it!?

You're too young. Where does my 1968 911S short wheel base Porsche fit into your scheme?

[BerndReini]

Some say that the 1989 Carrera 3.2 was the last real Carrera. Well, I owned one for three months before it was stolen right in front of my house. Now I own a 996. The most underrated 911, and definitely a real Carrera. It is the M4 of Porsches.

 

I still miss my 1989, but the 996 is faster, has heated seats, real AC, a good stereo system. and isn't as smelly. Oh and my friend used to say that my "car sounds like someone dumped a drawer full of silverware in the trunk."

 

With Leica you can have it all. Just get an MP and an M.

 

Btw. the analogy between Porsche works because they are both made in Germany and, maybe as a result of that, if you can afford one, you are the target audience for the other.

[Guest malland]

Wilson, I have never seen a wildlife flash shot of this kind that was worth the paper it was printed on. Flash is completely useless in this situation. Actually you did rather well and this is the best you can expect with any gear. Crank up the Iso and use the spotlight for decent results.

I agree and wouldn't in any case use flash on a lion or another animal in the wild, the same way that I wouldn't walk up to a person on a street at night and shoot off a flash in his or her face. Just as offensive in my book in both cases.

 

—Mitch/Chiang Mai

Lanka Footsteps [M-Monochrom series from Sri Lanka]

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[cirke]

I am a cinematographer, and at 39 I am always in danger of being one of the old outdated guys, so I try to stay current with what is going on. A few years ago, camera operators were complaining about electronic viewfinders, which were replacing the old optical ones on motion picture cameras (during the transition from film to digital).

 

Electronic viewfinders have come a long way, and of course the good ones for digital cinema cameras cost $5,000 and above.

 

But I feel very confident in saying that electronic viewfinders will replace optical viewfinders in still cameras within the next couple of years, since stills and video reportage are already merging and live view is becoming more and more important.

 

Therefore I say, that professionals that "don't bother with an electronic viewfinder" will sooner or later fall behind the curve of technology. I know two very successful fashion and portrait photographers that use live-view and focus peaking for critical work, and there are many photojournalists that use Zacuto finders and other hoods to work with their LCD screen as electronic viewfinders.

 

I wasn't saying that Paul isn't a professional, but his generalization is simply not correct, and the hybrid of an optical and electronic viewfinder is what many professionals will embrace.

 

And Wilson, I had the same experience with the SF58 and returned it after a week. I was expecting good results in TTL mode with this beast and found out quickly that my much smaller Olympus flash gives me much more accurate exposure in Auto mode.

 

It is exactly what I think about EVF

[slippyphoto]

I have to agree with Paul. Although I respect Bernd's views, of those point listed, only half matter to me personally, like the faster operation, the build quality and the screen improvement.

 

When I purchased my M9, it was competing side-by-side in image quality with a Phase One back, and Canon 35mm complete systems... It got used often, but sadly only on editorials and feature work when it's slower precise methodical indulgence would wow the crew over (many think this is superficial, but can actually be a valid tool on set).

 

My point here, that the M9 generation of body serves so well in this capacity, that I struggle to imagine replacing the all singing and dancing DSLR workhorse tools of commercial jobs with anything additional the the new M offers!!! These days I have a pair of D800E's that cleverly balance the quality of medium format with the speed and consistency of 35mm, HD video - the direction most seem to be heading in, is also well covered.

 

Don't get me wrong, I love the M system for so many reasons... I just struggle with the idea the the new M is ground-breaking. Sadly, it won't be.

--

 

 

http://www.simonlipman.co.uk