taosantamonica Posted January 23, 2013 Share #121 Posted January 23, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) I've been trying a nex7 recently, and like the peaking. It appears better/easier with narrow depth of field, but for me, critical focus requires magnification. i'm not using my nex 7 as much now but it's what got me into buying m-mount lenses and then m rangefinders. i also like the magnification/peak focusing combination, especially when looking through the viewfinder and not just on a lcd. I use my 50/75 lux's and 90 2.8 on the nex with excellent results. It's probably the feature i most want to see how it's designed/works on the new m. Well, that and the image quality between the sensors. I'm more than satisfied enough with both my m9p and monochrom though that i probably will stay with those for the next couple of years. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 23, 2013 Posted January 23, 2013 Hi taosantamonica, Take a look here new 'official' M240 pics up!. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Peter H Posted January 23, 2013 Share #122 Posted January 23, 2013 The most interesting things these photos tell us so far are about ourselves, and what we want to see. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pragmatist Posted January 23, 2013 Share #123 Posted January 23, 2013 To clarify which photos are from which camera (based on the EXIF): I must say the M9 photos look rather good!!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramosa Posted January 23, 2013 Share #124 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. Indeed, this could actually be good news. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrid Posted January 23, 2013 Share #125 Posted January 23, 2013 Lot of camera design experts, photography experts and marketing experts in here today. What a well educated audience. Sarcasm aside, as clearly we all know we're an armchair expert at everything at some point. And deep down we all know that no, we couldn't shoot that penalty if it was up to us. And no, we don't own and run one of the most highly regarded photo optical companies in the industry. And no, Magnum never did come knocking at the door, with their jaws on the floor at the shear quality of our cat pictures. You don't need to be a member of Magnum or even a professional photographer to be qualified to criticize their work. Just because someone is in Magnum does it mean that every shot that comes out of their camera is manna from heaven. If anything there are many people out there who are of the opinion that a lot of the work coming out of Magnum in recent years is fairly mediocre. At this point their most admired work has for the most part been produced by members, who have departed for the big darkroom in the sky. And I can't say that the work from a lot of the new members is in the same league. If anything there seems to be a hostility within the company towards strongly composed and thought out work, which many of them consider quaint and old fashioned. The faction that promotes more of a sloppy snapshot aesthetic and whom HCB and other members railed against, when he was still alive, seems to have gained the upper hand, if for any reason, because they have outlived the opposition. If you want to see an agency with a line up of photographers that produces work of the highest quality in terms of telling a story, composition and technical execution, have a gander at VII Photo. Those guys and girls are running circles around Magnum. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wok64 Posted January 23, 2013 Share #126 Posted January 23, 2013 Now that we know we were mainly looking at M9 images reading this thread again is quite enjoyable. Apologies, couldn´t resist ... Wolfgang Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dwbell Posted January 23, 2013 Share #127 Posted January 23, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) You don't need to be a member of Magnum or even a professional photographer to be qualified to criticize their work. Just because someone is in Magnum does it mean that every shot that comes out of their camera is manna from heaven. If anything there are many people out there who are of the opinion that a lot of the work coming out of Magnum in recent years is fairly mediocre. At this point their most admired work has for the most part been produced by members, who have departed for the big darkroom in the sky. And I can't say that the work from a lot of the new members is in the same league. If anything there seems to be a hostility within the company towards strongly composed and thought out work, which many of them consider quaint and old fashioned. The faction that promotes more of a sloppy snapshot aesthetic and whom HCB and other members railed against, when he was still alive, seems to have gained the upper hand, if for any reason, because they have outlived the opposition. If you want to see an agency with a line up of photographers that produces work of the highest quality in terms of telling a story, composition and technical execution, have a gander at VII Photo. Those guys and girls are running circles around Magnum. Good post, thanks. Very interesting. I'm aware of VII and loosely follow their progression. If I had to pick a camp it would be the older, more rigid / classical magnum of the past. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted January 23, 2013 Share #128 Posted January 23, 2013 Now that we know we were mainly looking at M9 images reading this thread again is quite enjoyable. Apologies, couldn´t resist ... Wolfgang What are you talking about? We knew they were from the M9 way back in post #3 when Peter Branch so astutely pointed out the meta data made the pictures as from the M9. These pictures are still nothing to judge any camera by. How about this: Leica, post a full resolution file in raw format and do it only when we can see it developed in LR with a good profile. Until then, these little snap-shots are useless. Jono, could you please post for us a decent DNG from the M? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sblitz Posted January 23, 2013 Share #129 Posted January 23, 2013 let's see where we are here, leica posted shots headlined they are from the M, and we think they are flat, awful, etc., but found out many of the shots are actually from an M9, a camera we all like and think takes great shots, sooooooooooooooooooooo ....... it would seem to me the M shots in the bunch are really not judgable for quality of the M given the M9 photos in the bunch .....in other words, as Rick noted, let's get some DNG files released, like Leica did for the MM, and then all can tell whether this is the camera to take the step up. As I written elsewhere, I tried the M at Photo expo in NYC and felt it wasn't for me, rather spend the money on improving my photography than my gear.....or maybe a good scanner for shots from my M4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted January 23, 2013 Share #130 Posted January 23, 2013 All that this thread proves is that poor images are poor images, no matter what camera or lens is used. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 23, 2013 Share #131 Posted January 23, 2013 let's see where we are here, leica posted shots headlined they are from the M, and we think they are flat, awful, etc., but found out many of the shots are actually from an M9, a camera we all like and think takes great shots, sooooooooooooooooooooo ....... it would seem to me the M shots in the bunch are really not judgable for quality of the M given the M9 photos in the bunch .....in other words, as Rick noted, let's get some DNG files released, like Leica did for the MM, and then all can tell whether this is the camera to take the step up. As I written elsewhere, I tried the M at Photo expo in NYC and felt it wasn't for me, rather spend the money on improving my photography than my gear.....or maybe a good scanner for shots from my M4 Iirc, it was not Leica that released the DNGs, but Jono. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted January 23, 2013 Share #132 Posted January 23, 2013 By the way Jono, I love your dog series! There are a couple of just amazing shots in there like the one of your dog in the grass with the tree. Blue - Page 1 Anyone that wants to kill some time waiting for "official" photographs from the M would find some great photographs on Jono's site. Would someone please give Jono a M if you haven't already. I think he is such a fine photographer and I'm looking forward to his shots with the M. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted January 23, 2013 Share #133 Posted January 23, 2013 ...the woman on the right side of the frame (with child in hand), has very ruddy/magenta skin tone and this is somewhat disappointing... I don't see much magenta in this pic but the reddish skin tone is due to the Adobe RGB (98) profile IMO. You might wish to try another profile like that of your calibrated monitor instead and you should see more natural colors. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdriceman Posted January 24, 2013 Share #134 Posted January 24, 2013 Sorry if this has been discussed previously, I haven't read through this entire thread, but am I missing something? What could we hope to learn by looking at 1600x1080 72 ppi jpeg images (I am referring to the one 'M' image I found before I got tired of looking) that we have no idea how they have been processed? Isn't the IQ part of this thread sort of an irrelevant discussion? On the other hand, it is perplexing to me that Leica has allowed a sort of lack of control over the release of M images. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted January 24, 2013 Share #135 Posted January 24, 2013 We all take crappy images from time to time, but what USUALLY separates pros from non-pros is you do not see pros exhibiting their crappy images, be it lacking composition, color, PP or whatever. I am surprised the photographer let these be shown as representative of his work, unless he believes this is great work. Now let us all keep in mind these were shot some 4-5 months ago, so we might assume the firmware was version 0.0000001. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scopedude Posted January 24, 2013 Share #136 Posted January 24, 2013 All that this thread proves is that poor images are poor images, no matter what camera or lens is used. I agree. What an entrance for the most expensive full frame camera... maybe this is how the Leica marketing works? at least it created quite a discussion here, right? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bybrett Posted January 24, 2013 Share #137 Posted January 24, 2013 These images didn't make it to Photokina... looks to me like someone's trying to backfill a hole with some old rubble. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BerndReini Posted January 24, 2013 Share #138 Posted January 24, 2013 Fact is that everybody is freaking out. People who want to buy it are freaking out because they need to justify it and those that don't have to trash it because they don't want to buy it. I for my part am anxiously awaiting mine ... and nervously. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted January 24, 2013 Share #139 Posted January 24, 2013 Sorry if this has been discussed previously, I haven't read through this entire thread, but am I missing something? What could we hope to learn by looking at 1600x1080 72 ppi jpeg images [...] We can learn nothing by such diminished images. Sorry, but I am an Olde Pharte who grew up with the print. These impressionistic opinions based upon digital screen presentation are unacceptable. When a very expensive Leica's output is presented in a format in which a far less expensive 4/3rd can do better then you have to know that the format is seriously compromised. When bandwidth improves, and when we have far more capable monitors, then presentations of images might become equitable. At this moment that is impossible. . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
batmobile Posted January 24, 2013 Share #140 Posted January 24, 2013 At a guess, it would be because: The D800 is a far better landscape tool for professional landscapers. Arguably the 5D III is too. How many well published landscape photographers are using the M9? The high ISO of the M9 is way behind even the X100 and smashed by new cameras like the X-Pro1 / X100S, never mind the SLRs. The market for people wanting a camera that now offers only 'CCD signature' and 'M form factor' is insufficient to sustain the brand. They have to make the camera excel in its niche: street and documentary. With Fuji making huge leaps (with the lightning fast AF and far better MF in the X100S, imagine what the X-Pro 2 might be like) they are up a certain creek without a paddle with the crummy high ISO performance of the M9, poor battery life etc. The M240 may sacrifice the CCD look (which no publication, art collector or gallery owner could care less about) for gains that make it relevant to photographers who can choose other brands to make their images with, and for a LOT less money. Leica has done the smart thing. Sticking with CCD would have been utter suicide and they knew it. A Leica M with the IQ and 'look' of my 5D III would be very useful thanks Of course, I would prefer something more organic looking, but the relentless, machine-like performance of the Canon is much more useful. All conditions, whatever the light, it punches out near perfect images first time every time. Yes, I want some of that in an M and so do many other people. If I can't produce images with my signature on them, regardless of the camera, its time to give up... As an aside, the newer optics coming out of Canon and Nikon are absolutely spectacular and so absolute IQ is not the battle ground Leica should be choosing for the M and quite sensibly they have recognised this. Instead, a blend of features giving best overall utility appears to have been their goal. I mean, what would be the real world market for a $7000 M10 with 32 MP CCD when canon releases a 50MP camera, which has access to all the tilt and shift lenses for landscapers etc...and which pros can use in the same system as their 5DIII? None. A dumbed down "Me too" Leica- think I'll pass. Why do Leica think that they have to compete with Can/Nik - stick with what you know and forget this ridiculous video/live view CMOS pile of poo poo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.