Jump to content

Prosophos: final verdict on the M240


Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

 

 

This was posted by photomeme.

 

I don't think we have heard yet on this issue from the LUF member Prosophos.

Belong those two user names to the same person with real name Peter?

Hard to believe, drawing inferences from Peter's past impeccable conduct.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This was posted by photomeme.

 

I don't think we have heard yet on this issue from the LUF member Prosophos.

Belong those two user names to the same person with real name Peter?

Hard to believe, drawing inferences from Peter's past impeccable conduct.

 

Not sure what you mean by "hard to believe." All the guy did was post an opinion on his personal blog. It's actually OK to have an opinion! No one makes the rules on when can actually form an opinion, or how much information one needs to form such an opinion. It's funny to me how people will get so upset that someone has a thought that might contradict theirs.

 

My experience from reading Peter's blog (Prosophos) is that he is a guy who is passionate about photography, his nice family, and taking fantastic pictures. He's done a lot for the Leica community....much more than I have and will have time to in the future. I have enjoyed looking at his photography in the past and hopes he continues his work for a long time!

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure what you mean by "hard to believe." All the guy did was post an opinion on his personal blog. It's actually OK to have an opinion! No one makes the rules on when can actually form an opinion, or how much information one needs to form such an opinion. It's funny to me how people will get so upset that someone has a thought that might contradict theirs.

 

My experience from reading Peter's blog (Prosophos) is that he is a guy who is passionate about photography, his nice family, and taking fantastic pictures. He's done a lot for the Leica community....much more than I have and will have time to in the future. I have enjoyed looking at his photography in the past and hopes he continues his work for a long time!

 

 

I agree. You express it so well! Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Still laughing here John at the ridiculous Live View and the even more bizarre Video on the new M - now that "me too" rubbish really cracks me up.

 

Owned every M since the M2 - now this is the first that I won't be buying.

 

Actually Paul, this is the first M that I will be buying, and precisely because of the Live View (though I don't need the video)! I've at last got a minimally satisfactory solution for using my R lenses. I've explained elsewhere why none of the alternatives hitherto available would meet my own particular needs. If you don't need it, you can always ignore it, as I will with video.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Still laughing here John at the ridiculous Live View and the even more bizarre Video on the new M - now that "me too" rubbish really cracks me up.

 

Owned every M since the M2 - now this is the first that I won't be buying.

 

I am a bit surprised by that because the trend is for news photographers to shoot video as well as stills - if they want to make money.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just visited Peter's site and from what I can see there's nothing really offensive there...he makes some statements that there's a different look, but also says that the debates don't really matter in the end as evidenced by the great old film shot from 1965 that he posts within it....the idea being that composition and 'feel' are more important, since the old picture isn't 'technically perfect'...if that photo was shot with a digital camera (like the new M..) and had been posted in today's absolutely ridiculous environment of micro-debates and criticisms, it would have started yet another storm.

 

I'm still thinking about the new M, but I'm also still really enjoying my M9, and my MP. Not to re-hash the film vs digital debate, but all of the endless go-around concerning the new M (and also the MM when it came out) does make me long for film....not because I think film looks better than digital or vice-versa, but just because HP5 or whatever film you choose looks the same no matter what the camera. And as a result, I'm saved these eternal threads of people getting angry, taking things out of context (ridiculously so...let's be honest people), and debating subtleties beneath subtleties of the consumer electronics world vs. the photography world (and they are different...). I'm sure the new M will have its great side and unique signature, and some will like it and some won't. Though in the end, I think in a blind test at times people might just want to 'think' they see something totally different.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I just visited Peter's site and from what I can see there's nothing really offensive there...he makes some statements that there's a different look, but also says that the debates don't really matter in the end as evidenced by the great old film shot from 1965 that he posts within it....the idea being that composition and 'feel' are more important, since the old picture isn't 'technically perfect'...if that photo was shot with a digital camera (like the new M..) and had been posted in today's absolutely ridiculous environment of micro-debates and criticisms, it would have started yet another storm.

 

I'm still thinking about the new M, but I'm also still really enjoying my M9, and my MP. Not to re-hash the film vs digital debate, but all of the endless go-around concerning the new M (and also the MM when it came out) does make me long for film....not because I think film looks better than digital or vice-versa, but just because HP5 or whatever film you choose looks the same no matter what the camera. And as a result, I'm saved these eternal threads of people getting angry, taking things out of context (ridiculously so...let's be honest people), and debating subtleties beneath subtleties of the consumer electronics world vs. the photography world (and they are different...). I'm sure the new M will have its great side and unique signature, and some will like it and some won't. Though in the end, I think in a blind test at times people might just want to 'think' they see something totally different.

 

Agreed. I feel like we're at the point now where upgrading cameras is a bit like upgrading film. Some film shooters are always after the latest and greatest, tightly grained film, while others stick to the same film their whole careers, if possible. I don't really see IQ as a reason to upgrade my M9. In fact, I'm hoping the M9 prices drop some more, and then I'll buy a second body.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose Mr P is welcome to his opinions......

 

.... but perhaps he would like to suggest how Leica would get the current feature set, enhanced ISO capability and 24mp from a CCD sensor ...... :rolleyes:

 

I think that is kind of the point that many are trying to make. Are those new features worth the trade off?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest WPalank
Not sure what you mean by "hard to believe." All the guy did was post an opinion on his personal blog. It's actually OK to have an opinion! No one makes the rules on when can actually form an opinion, or how much information one needs to form such an opinion. It's funny to me how people will get so upset that someone has a thought that might contradict theirs.

 

My experience from reading Peter's blog (Prosophos) is that he is a guy who is passionate about photography, his nice family, and taking fantastic pictures. He's done a lot for the Leica community....much more than I have and will have time to in the future. I have enjoyed looking at his photography in the past and hopes he continues his work for a long time!

 

You did read the title of his post, FINAL VERDICT ? It's probably me, but I read it to say, "Hey guys, no need to read anymore reviews or even think about getting this camera, my final verdict is out and it's this......"

Did he ever shoot with the camera or post images?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

You did read the title of his post, FINAL VERDICT ? It's probably me, but I read it to say, "Hey guys, no need to read anymore reviews or even think about getting this camera, my final verdict is out and it's this......"

Did he ever shoot with the camera or post images?

 

Here's my only point. We can debate whether one should base an opinion on such limited information, that's fine. I think it's silly to say that this individual has acted in a way that wasn't appropriate as some have. He's welcome to have an opinion with whatever limited information he has. I agree that it's a bit early to tell myself.

 

If I drive a 2012 Mercedes and the new improved 2013 Mercedes is released, is it OK if I make a blog post and say "it's not for me, the 2012 is better in my eyes, and I like it better!" ? It's not some sort of requirement that I go to the dealer and test drive it, bounce in the seats, test it 0-60mph, etc. We make those kinds of judgments and decisions in our life every day. If I had to try something out before I said "no" every time I was approached by a member of the opposite sex I'd not be married now!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think what people are reacting to are that these comments are presented as fact, not opinion. In fact it has not been "confirmed" that the M produces CMOS-like images (whatever that arbitrary standard might be) ... Especially if CMOS-like images are "smoother, more marshmallow-y, more… plastic ". :

 

"My long-standing suspicions here, here, and in several other posts (too many to cite at this point) have been confirmed: the new M produces CMOS-like images.

 

Not a profound statement, I’ll admit. But true.

 

What do I mean by CMOS-like?

 

I mean smoother, more marshmallow-y, more… plastic vs. the crisper/more microcontrast-y CCD rendering from the M9/M-E/MM/M8. This is not necessarily a bad thing, but it is different. As expected."

 

I've seen and downloaded Jono's DNG's and read Sean Reid's review and I have a different "opinion". Of course, that is open to debate. We'll see if my opinion changes once I get an M and can better compare it to my M9.

 

As the old saying goes: " you are entitled to your own opinion, but you're not entitled to your own set of facts".

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Very limited utility without Image Stabilization.

 

Nonsense. In fact most filmmakers shooting on DSLRs would use primes or lenses with IS switched off. You can't smooth pan or tilt with IS because it produces a 'lag'.

 

Look at any set of cine primes and you won't find stabilisation. That's what a tripod or stedicam is for.

 

I think people are seeing the M video mode as something to use for shooting family movies. It's not suitable for this. Neither are DSLRs. Don't confused the auto everything world of a compact camera that shoots video like a Cybershot with the M.

 

Video on the M as with DLRs have to be thought out shots. Set up, exposed focussed then 'taken'. Same as when making real films.

 

It's not a point and shoot for stills or video.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm

Nothing wrong with Peter's blog that I can see (beyond the fact that I disagree, but then I disagree with lots of things/people/dogs).

 

The problem perhaps is that Photomeme has posted lots of posts, most misreading Sean Reid's results, and others slagging off the M. As far as I can see, every single post he has made over the last few weeks is negative remarks against the M. It almost feels like a personal vendetta.

 

Of course, this is entirely his prerogative (he may even be right about the M - he isn't right about his interpretation of Sean Reid's results however).

 

But he seems to have hoiked in this blog as support - which isn't really cool, and has probably caused a negative appreciation of a rather interesting point of view

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

The future as I imagine it: ;)

 

This debate is going to live on in a similar manor to something straight out of the high end tweeko-audiophile world. Tenured engineers will point out all of the reasons to disprove the CCD lovers claims. The CCDers will claim that there is just something appealing to CCD images that just doesn't exist in mushy, plasticy CMOS images and to certain extent, can't be measured.

 

CCD lovers like tube amplifier lovers will gather together and reassure each other that they are not nuts because, others can see these differences as well.

 

A whole new lexicon will come into being to describe these characteristics between CCD and CMOS, such as: mushy, unclear, plasticy, film-like (personal favorite), etc...

 

Leica will continue to sell ME model cameras as they continue stripping features from camera. At some point Leica will achieve a complete understanding of the personality characteristics of their ME demographic and will immediately double the price of the ME - sales will soar. :D

 

Edit: Just killing time waiting for the M...

Edited by RickLeica
  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

Nonsense. In fact most filmmakers shooting on DSLRs would use primes or lenses with IS switched off. You can't smooth pan or tilt with IS because it produces a 'lag'.

 

Look at any set of cine primes and you won't find stabilisation. That's what a tripod or stedicam is for.

 

I think people are seeing the M video mode as something to use for shooting family movies. It's not suitable for this. Neither are DSLRs. Don't confused the auto everything world of a compact camera that shoots video like a Cybershot with the M.

 

Video on the M as with DLRs have to be thought out shots. Set up, exposed focussed then 'taken'. Same as when making real films.

 

It's not a point and shoot for stills or video.

 

Photomeme was responding in regards to photojournalism, which is more run and gun, rather than feature movie or TV show making. Sure, you can break out rigs for serious film making, but that isn't as likely with on the fly photojournalism, where things like IS and AF may be helpful.

 

That's why the video feature is a little odd, to me, in terms of usefulness. Being a bit limited compared to other options, you're probably not going to pick the M for serious, feature movie making. I'd probably just use it for the occasional home movie of the family, or whatever.

Edited by douglasf13
Link to post
Share on other sites

The smoother look of CMOS may be evident when pixel peeping at 100%, but will make little practical difference. Also, all other things being equal, a 24mp file viewed at 100% will look less crisp than an 18mp file viewed at 100%, just as an 18mp file viewed at 100% will look less crisp than a 10mp file viewed at 100%.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow - all those steadycams and fluid video heads must be just for show. Imagine being able to shoot real films on a Leica M. I can't wait to see all these professional results from this amazing new camera !!

 

Err.. You're missing the point somewhat. I said that is what stedicam is for. Not in lens or in body IS. I assume you don't shoot moving pictures then or your reply may have been slightly more educated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Photomeme was responding in regards to photojournalism, which is more run and gun, rather than feature movie or TV show making. Sure, you can break out rigs for serious film making, but that isn't as likely with on the fly photojournalism, where things like IS and AF may be helpful.

 

That's why the video feature is a little odd, to me, in terms of usefulness. Being a bit limited compared to other options, you're probably not going to pick the M for serious, feature movie making. I'd probably just use it for the occasional home movie of the family, or whatever.

 

Sorry- disagree. I shoot video and stills and I am a broadcast professional who moved into stills 4 years ago.

If - and if the sensor on the M240 is robust and the codec is good for video then there is EVERY reason the camera could be a film making tool and not for family videos.

 

Ok- some will take issue there is no 'clean' hdmi output from the camera.

 

My point is that if you are shooting video on a DSLR then IS is almost an irrelevant feature. Regardless of run and gun. The settings still have to be made manually. There is no real time AF. There is real time AF on domestic small compact cameras and some MFT bodies but not in the main.

 

Its a myth that shooting video on a non dedicated video camera is easy. It's not. It requires a lot of thought and knowledge which is sometimes quite different to shooting stills.

 

The M video mode is not there for filming your kids birthday. You'll be disappointed if you try. Buy a 200 quid handycam.

 

I may take some time to write an intro to video shooting at some point but it would be nice to at least have my points acknowledged as coming from some experience rather than trying to argue the case against the camera and video constantly.

 

30% of my revenue from shoots comes from video. I shoot stills too. Video is another revenue stream.

  • Like 14
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...