batmobile Posted February 11, 2014 Author Share #41 Posted February 11, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) I chose between a M240 and the MM based on file quality as much as anything and chose to pay more for the MM... but this is because I am a dyed in the wool B&W photographer. The file flexibility is something else and allows me more of what I am used to in the darkroom (ironically). Then there is the tonality, which is oh so smooth. For colour, I've chosen to jump in with Sony.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 11, 2014 Posted February 11, 2014 Hi batmobile, Take a look here M240 or Monochrom for B&W: A personal Perspective. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Jeff S Posted February 11, 2014 Share #42 Posted February 11, 2014 in the end, i dont think there's any surprise to find that the MM produces better mono than M240..considering MM is specialized for that purpose. And for those who don't understand fundamentals about use of filters, PP techniques, etc., the results could also be worse. My comments should not, however, be taken to mean that the M is 'as good' as the MM for b/w. It depends on the person, and in the right hands, an MM may in fact give better results. The point I tried to make was that one need not own the MM to still understand and be serious about b/w work, and to turn out some beautiful prints….heck, that can be done with lots of cameras. I expect to rent and try an MM myself one day, perhaps the next iteration, and I might find it to be a better tool for my needs. But in the meantime, any inability to make some great b/w prints is my fault. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dant Posted February 11, 2014 Share #43 Posted February 11, 2014 Dng Files From the M Monochrom http://www.the.me/leica-m-monochrom-raw-files-for-download/ You can try some PP with these MM files. I have not done anything as yet. Still trying to perfect my other files before taking the MM plunge. I'd like side by side compares of the same scene in M240 and MM for my own use. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Londonmember Posted February 11, 2014 Share #44 Posted February 11, 2014 And for those who don't understand fundamentals about use of filters, PP techniques, etc., the results could also be worse. I expect to rent and try an MM myself one day, perhaps the next iteration, and I might find it to be a better tool for my needs. But in the meantime, any inability to make some great b/w prints is my fault. Jeff Funny how lots of people have such strong opinions about cameras they haven't used. You should try it. You may be surprised.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dant Posted February 11, 2014 Share #45 Posted February 11, 2014 Funny how lots of people have such strong opinions about cameras they haven't used. You should try it. You may be surprised.... I love to try one, but the price and rarity precludes it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted February 11, 2014 Share #46 Posted February 11, 2014 I love black and white but colour is "my thing". I will get a monochrome at some point but it will be used along side the M9 at all times. The M9 is so bloody good at black and white that I really have no pressing urge at this point. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted February 11, 2014 Share #47 Posted February 11, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) PaulJ Rent one and you might just change your mind. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted February 11, 2014 Share #48 Posted February 11, 2014 Funny how lots of people have such strong opinions about cameras they haven't used. You should try it. You may be surprised.... Please don't put words in my mouth. My strong opinions are about photography, not about the tools (except as they apply to my own use). The sentence you quoted simply means that some people might get better results from the MM, and some might not. If you think that's just because of the camera, you don't understand the point. And if you think everyone will get better results just because they use the MM, I repeat. As for trying things, that's my mantra. To each his/her own. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Warwick Posted February 11, 2014 Share #49 Posted February 11, 2014 dant, Thanks for posting the link to the comparison between the M9 and MM. Those files confirm some of my casual tests -- when resampling to a large image size, there is a very different "look" achieved by the the M9 / M240 versus the Monochrom. I'm not talking about fine detail here -- there is lot of "detail" similarly recorded by the M9 / 240. To me, the main difference is that overall images from the colour sensors look a bit blurred, and no amount of sharpening will get rid of that slight blurriness to achieve an image with the same bite and immediacy that you get from the Monochrom. 50"x30" images off the Monochrom give me a feel not dissimilar to when I view drum-scanned medium-format Acros (i.e., images are completely real looking, with "bite" and tactile qualities) ......... whereas, in contrast, the M9 / 240's images have this slightly waxy (plastic-looking?) blurriness to them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest redge Posted February 12, 2014 Share #50 Posted February 12, 2014 Very interesting comments in this thread about the divide between people who "see" in colour and those who "see" in black and white. I guess Irving Penn and Richard Avedon missed that lecture. And, apparently, Robert Capa, whose colour work I went to see today at the ICP. Also very interesting comments on the differences between how the Monochrome and the M render black and white. Sounds like a debate about which is better, Tri-X or FP 4. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Londonmember Posted February 12, 2014 Share #51 Posted February 12, 2014 Please don't put words in my mouth. My strong opinions are about photography, not about the tools (except as they apply to my own use). The sentence you quoted simply means that some people might get better results from the MM, and some might not. If you think that's just because of the camera, you don't understand the point. And if you think everyone will get better results just because they use the MM, I repeat. As for trying things, that's my mantra. To each his/her own. Jeff No intention of putting words in your mouth, and if I have offended in any way I apologise. I agree with you the MM is just a tool. FOR ME it works, and I get B&W images with a look I want and that I cannot achieve otherwise (in spite of years of practice). So it is worth the £4000 my used MM cost me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
batmobile Posted February 12, 2014 Author Share #52 Posted February 12, 2014 Hey, everyone gets to make their own choices and form their own opinions Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted February 12, 2014 Share #53 Posted February 12, 2014 I hope this isn't directed at me, trying to explain working in b/w. I could write my own tome on the topic after 40 years in b/w, 4 darkrooms built, countless hours 'working' at the craft, 30 years collecting b/w vintage prints and photo/art books, working with gallery and museum curators worldwide, and still always a student of the field. Good grief, I was agreeing with something you said, that 'it goes beyond the camera'. I then elaborated my own thinking on 'it goes beyond the camera'. If you've changed your mind about that in the intervening hours then yes, it was directed at you, and if you haven't changed your mind don't try and put words into my mouth. Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tonki-M Posted February 12, 2014 Share #54 Posted February 12, 2014 Please don't put words in my mouth. My strong opinions are about photography, not about the tools (except as they apply to my own use). The sentence you quoted simply means that some people might get better results from the MM, and some might not. If you think that's just because of the camera, you don't understand the point. And if you think everyone will get better results just because they use the MM, I repeat. As for trying things, that's my mantra. To each his/her own. Jeff agreed wholeheartedly! But there's really no point in discussing 'gear' superiority when the user's skill is in the factor, is there? A professional will take better photos with a Canon 1100D than a beginner with a M240...what does that say about Canon and Leica camera? Nothing at all. btw, for those who have not tried the MM DNG files, it is very much superior to the M9's DNG IMHO, but not enough to warrant giving up color altogether! but it did exceeded my expectation by a mile! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted February 12, 2014 Share #55 Posted February 12, 2014 Good grief, I was agreeing with something you said, that 'it goes beyond the camera'. I then elaborated my own thinking on 'it goes beyond the camera'. If you've changed your mind about that in the intervening hours then yes, it was directed at you, and if you haven't changed your mind don't try and put words into my mouth. Oh…as Emily Litella would say, never mind. Still, after re-reading your comments, I think we disagree on the M vs MM for b/w, and the degree to which the tool necessarily affects one's mindset and results. But I think the internet is not generally the best place for nuanced discussion. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.