cirke Posted January 23, 2013 Share #101 Posted January 23, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) it may be accurate, but it's not enjoyable to use!I like it very much and I am very surprised because I have never tried it before the NEX-6, for me it's a really great feature (at least with long lenses) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 23, 2013 Posted January 23, 2013 Hi cirke, Take a look here new 'official' M240 pics up!. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
barjohn Posted January 23, 2013 Share #102 Posted January 23, 2013 I have used it on the RX1 and I really like it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cirke Posted January 23, 2013 Share #103 Posted January 23, 2013 it's nice not to feel alone Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
humba Posted January 23, 2013 Share #104 Posted January 23, 2013 I cannot believe you guys are discussing anything senseful regarding colors or image quality based on these source pictures. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dwbell Posted January 23, 2013 Share #105 Posted January 23, 2013 I guess that answers the question about whether there is a difference between CCD and CMOS as the experts here couldn't tell without looking at th EXIF data. This right here. "like" "+1" "thanks" "kudos" Magenta skin colours, P&S looking files and so on. Surprise! They were M9 shots, in all their CCD, super sharp, Leica look, high contrast etc glory. So, when it arrives, and I calibrate it to my style, and shoot with it for a couple of months together with my M9, and 5DII. I'll draw a conclusion. To do so now out of uncontrolled excitement and anticipation is not much help to me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
iedei Posted January 23, 2013 Author Share #106 Posted January 23, 2013 Magenta skin colours, P&S looking files and so on. Surprise! They were M9 shots, in all their CCD, super sharp, Leica look, high contrast etc glory. huh? you must have not read the whole thread. Leica's official statement about the photos is: "approximately 90% of the photos were taken with the new Leica M" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dwbell Posted January 23, 2013 Share #107 Posted January 23, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) huh? you must have not read the whole thread. Leica's official statement about the photos is: "approximately 90% of the photos were taken with the new Leica M" Well, I read that the exif data is correct. That the photographer "started" this journey with the M9 as the M240 wasn't ready. And that 3 (was it 4) of THIS particular set we're discussing are from the M240. Are you saying 90% of this set is shot with the M240 and the exif's are wrong? That's not how I understood the facts and statements. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UliWer Posted January 23, 2013 Share #108 Posted January 23, 2013 The quote in #107 is incomplete. The "Leica Internet Team" says: "Thanks for reaching out with your question what camera these images were taken with. Jean Gaumy went to Kyrgyzstan with a Leica M9 in his package, because the Leica M prototype wasn’t ready at that exact moment. However, he just started this series with a M9. In fact, approx. 90% of all photos were taken with a new Leica M. Purporting that all images are from a Leica M was really not our intention. Sorry!! The Kyrgyzstan series will be continued and there are more installments to come, so please stay tuned for more genuine Leica M photos." So it's not clear if the photos shown now were those from the beginning, when the photographer used the M9, and the "90%" photos with the "M" will be part of "more installments to come". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
iedei Posted January 23, 2013 Author Share #109 Posted January 23, 2013 Well, I read that the exif data is correct. That the photographer "started" this journey with the M9 as the M240 wasn't ready. And that 3 (was it 4) of THIS particular set we're discussing are from the M240. Are you saying 90% of this set is shot with the M240 and the exif's are wrong? That's not how I understood the facts and statements. i'm just telling you what Leica said..... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dwbell Posted January 23, 2013 Share #110 Posted January 23, 2013 The quote in #107 is incomplete. The "Leica Internet Team" says: "Thanks for reaching out with your question what camera these images were taken with. Jean Gaumy went to Kyrgyzstan with a Leica M9 in his package, because the Leica M prototype wasn’t ready at that exact moment. However, he just started this series with a M9. In fact, approx. 90% of all photos were taken with a new Leica M. Purporting that all images are from a Leica M was really not our intention. Sorry!! The Kyrgyzstan series will be continued and there are more installments to come, so please stay tuned for more genuine Leica M photos." So it's not clear if the photos shown now were those from the beginning, when the photographer used the M9, and the "90%" photos with the "M" will be part of "more installments to come". Indeed, my point exactly. It seems sensible, at this stage, to simply take the exif data as proof positive. Wouldn't you agree? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dwbell Posted January 23, 2013 Share #111 Posted January 23, 2013 i'm just telling you what Leica said..... You're telling me a small, out of context, parsed phrase of what Leica said. I'm illustrating that point of view, as is the post above. And please note, to avoid sounding combative in anyway. My point is that we simply cannot draw conclusions from these images, good or bad. I don't think you (not "you", but rather "one") can tell the difference and the mix up of M9 and M240 combined with the comments about the set seems to prove that point. So, equally, "WOW! Best Leica images ever taken! Beats Nikon D1200000XG1!" and "Bleh, plastic looking canon rubbish" in my opinion are basely, invalid comments. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
iedei Posted January 23, 2013 Author Share #112 Posted January 23, 2013 You're telling me a small, out of context, parsed phrase of what Leica said. I'm illustrating that point of view, as is the post above. And please note, to avoid sounding combative in anyway. My point is that we simply cannot draw conclusions from these images, good or bad. I don't think you (not "you", but rather "one") can tell the difference and the mix up of M9 and M240 combined with the comments about the set seems to prove that point. So, equally, "WOW! Best Leica images ever taken! Beats Nikon D1200000XG1!" and "Bleh, plastic looking canon rubbish" in my opinion are basely, invalid comments. lol. ok. whatever makes you happy, mate.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dwbell Posted January 23, 2013 Share #113 Posted January 23, 2013 lol. ok. whatever makes you happy, mate.... You've lost me. I've tried to communicate fairly, politely and openly. I'm more than happy to leave it at that, yes. I still don't understand your point of view. But certainly there's no law that says I should. So again, pretty happy, yes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
theboch Posted January 23, 2013 Share #114 Posted January 23, 2013 I like it very much and I am very surprised because I have never tried it before the NEX-6, for me it's a really great feature (at least with long lenses) Exactly thats why I welcome this feature too. For longer lenses it will be helpful to get a sharper picture in some cases. Don't like it? Don't use it... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zlatkob Posted January 23, 2013 Share #115 Posted January 23, 2013 To clarify which photos are from which camera (based on the EXIF): 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! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/196672-new-official-m240-pics-up/?do=findComment&comment=2222730'>More sharing options...
dwbell Posted January 23, 2013 Share #116 Posted January 23, 2013 To clarify which photos are from which camera (based on the EXIF): Perfect, thanks. To me personally, aside from drawing overly positive conclusions or overlay negative ones. I think with this photographer, with his style of processing etc. the results can be said to be pleasingly similar. The thought I have is that if it's ostensibly "the same" as the M9 but better IQ, DR and speed - I'm happy. (edit - actually, saying "better IQ" is a red rag to a bull around here, so discount that. Go with "faster operation, reportedly increased DR and higher ISO capability" to be safe! ;-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted January 23, 2013 Share #117 Posted January 23, 2013 it may be accurate, but it's not enjoyable to use! I find it so, particularly with lenses of f2 and faster and a dream with the 60 Elmarit, but hey, what do I know...? Regards, Bill Sent from another Galaxy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
barjohn Posted January 23, 2013 Share #118 Posted January 23, 2013 Do you think that maybe now people will stop claiming that CCD is superior to CMOS? It appears to me to be the other way around. CMOS gives you extended ISO with cleaner images and live view and an appearance and color indistinguishable from CCD as well illustrated here in this thread and similar threads on GetDPI and DPR. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 23, 2013 Share #119 Posted January 23, 2013 The catchphrase is "better at base ISO" which was quite true only a few years ago. Recently the gap has closed quite considerably and people are looking to Leica for the final step, it seems Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pieterpronk Posted January 23, 2013 Share #120 Posted January 23, 2013 I would rather say that this proves that the M10 can blend in with the M9 at its worst, i.e. CMOS can look like bad CCD images. Like we didn't know that. Nobody claimed the M9 can't produce bad images. I.e. not even the M9 files seem to manage to show any of the nicer characteristics of the CCD sensor, i.e. color. To be honest if they would have put some X1 pictures in there too, I wouldn't have noticed either. Bland pictures prove that a camera can make bland digital looking pictures. Congratulations, Leica. What I need is some pictures that show something extra. Kinda like the MM has a certain look (one that I don't care too much for, but i appreciate that it has character), and like the M8/M9 has. Took a while before the MM showed its character, so it's far too early to tell. But it would have been nice to at least get one "nice" picture from the M10. BTW what kind of company is this? Sloppy first time releases on Facebook and then they mess it up by not even knowing themselves which pictures were taken by which camera? Nothing wrong with using social media and a blog to launch a new camera, but at least do it right. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.