jaapv Posted April 22, 2013 Share #101 Posted April 22, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) I didn't see one photo I couldn't capture with the m9. . I should hope so - the M9 is a fabulous camera in its own right. I am sure you could say the same about the M8. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted April 22, 2013 Posted April 22, 2013 Hi jaapv, Take a look here March LFI debunks CCD vs CMOS theory. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Xavier Forcioli Posted April 23, 2013 Share #102 Posted April 23, 2013 I should hope so - the M9 is a fabulous camera in its own right. I am sure you could say the same about the M8. Marketing is fighting hard to make us consider as obsolete older but still great technology! In a way this mechanism helps R&D departments to look forward Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Chen Posted May 3, 2013 Share #103 Posted May 3, 2013 Sure it might not always look like realistic colors, but in some pictures those bold colors work. At least the M10 has a bold and brave character. And I think we should learn to love those, as I am not sure they will get "fixed". I sure hope not. I'm not a bold and brave man to convert to the "bold and brave color" of M (out of camera file, without PP) which, for my own opinion, is not even comparable to D-Lux 4, 5, and 6. I anticipate some pictures out of FW 1.103 before my second thought....... Thomas Chen Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
david strachan Posted November 26, 2013 Share #104 Posted November 26, 2013 didn't see one photo i couldn't capture with the m9. ... Hi Steve You don't see macro images ? Flash and close up type photos? Long telephoto lenses images? Images closer than 1m? Images that might benefit from a zoom? Star trails? Infra red? Exactly framed photos? These are photos many people would like to capture. The M9 is good, but only a very selective style of image capture for this camera. cheers Dave S Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkP Posted November 26, 2013 Share #105 Posted November 26, 2013 I'm not a bold and brave man to convert to the "bold and brave color" of M (out of camera file, without PP) which, for my own opinion, is not even comparable to D-Lux 4, 5, and 6. I anticipate some pictures out of FW 1.103 before my second thought....... Thomas Chen Hi Thomas, now that the FW has been upgraded the M240 colour is better, but I really think that much of the complaints are due to these detailed and higher dynamic range files (like those of the Monochrom) appear flatter. However, I find them to be much more robust and versatile than those from the M9 for post-processing. We no longer hear complaints about the flat Monochrtom files now that users have a better handle on processing them and I think that the same will happen with the M240. Regards, Mark Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wilfredo Posted November 29, 2013 Share #106 Posted November 29, 2013 No flat Monochrom complaints from me. I'm often exited just looking at the LCD screen. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
junior Posted May 4, 2014 Share #107 Posted May 4, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) my 0.02 after having owned the M 240 along with the S2 (which have both been stolen 2 weeks ago...) i realized: just shooting a greycard does not do the job. raw files tend to have a magenta tint, skin tones look redish/pinkish. this counts for both cameras. compared to my Hasselblad/Phase One gear this was a huge disappointment. but: you have to be organized, do a manual WB every time the light changes. plus shoot the color checker along with that. later generate a LR profile based on the colorchecker dng. finally bring down the reds a hair. when you do that, the images are fine. and another but: now, without gear and about to go out and shop for replacement i wonder if i really should go back to Leica or stick to Phase. considering the pricerange we are talking about here, i am having a hard time accepting two cameras for roughly 35K $ which both deliver unuseable skin tones. especially cause my simple Canon 1DIII does a better job in reproducing skintones. otoh: shooting with my two Leicas was special, i loved the feel and even the final outcome, although it took a while to get there. and i do not love my Canon 1DIII. all the above only counts for skin tones. shooting a bunch of flowers is amazing, the colors vibrant and vivid. bummer, though, i do not shoot flowers, i shoot faces. reinhard Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 4, 2014 Share #108 Posted May 4, 2014 Skin tones are far better if you use an IR cut filter. And don’t just use a gray card, shoot a profile. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
billo101 Posted May 5, 2014 Share #109 Posted May 5, 2014 More more gamut bye CCD sensor Inviato da mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobey bilek Posted May 6, 2014 Share #110 Posted May 6, 2014 The Leica engineers are trying to distinguish their camera and they are doing it messing with colors. As above, use a camera profile and proper white balance not depending on the canned "sun" or whatever and profile the camera. It is a pain to WB often, but I used the Whi Bal card and set the the camera profiles for sun, tungsten, studio flash, A manual WB is the only way to get G/M tint correct unlike the nikon. All the adjustment in camera change only blue yellow. The camera profile removes the excessive red. I have a set of R lenses in Leitax mount I use on Nikon. While there is some difference, they do not have dramatic change over current Nikon. I conclude it is not the lenses that account for differences. And please do not use an old Kodak grey card for WB. They are not truly grey , but 18% for exposure control. We were supposed to expose for a certain densitometer reading of the card using the red channel. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ynp Posted May 6, 2014 Share #111 Posted May 6, 2014 my 0.02 after having owned the M 240 along with the S2 (which have both been stolen 2 weeks ago...) i realized: just shooting a greycard does not do the job. raw files tend to have a magenta tint, skin tones look redish/pinkish. this counts for both cameras. compared to my Hasselblad/Phase One gear this was a huge disappointment. but: you have to be organized, do a manual WB every time the light changes. plus shoot the color checker along with that. later generate a LR profile based on the colorchecker dng. finally bring down the reds a hair. when you do that, the images are fine. reinhard I agree. Shooting a profile with the S2 is the best way to get the skin tones right, IMO. I build a profile for copying work and get the right colors for reproductions (with my lights), but caucasian skin is a more difficult subject. Even the troublesome Sinar eMotion is better in neutralizing the excessive reds in PP. The IR filter helps, but the PhaseOne and Leaf files are much easier than Leica's to work with. I am still learning to use the potential of the S2. Like the lenses, hate the skin tones. Even a meagre Olympus file is better out of the can... Maybe some more experienced board members who use their S2 can recommend a workflow to get better results. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.