M Color

[dwbell]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

that puts Leica, for the first time, in the same ballpark as a 5D.

 

I agree. Released August 2005, so around 8 years behind.....

[jaapv]

This is an opinion disguised as a fact. It cannot find much support for it on the respected review sites. Iirc, the general opinion was : in the same league as Canon and Nikon, if a pecking order has to be established inbetween the two with Nikon at the top.

[dwbell]

I think he meant 5DII (or III), it was a jokey way of pointing that out.

No need to suit up just yet, fun watching you do so though.

 

But as you mention it, since when is the majority of things on here not opinion disguised as fact?

 

M cameras are;

 

The quietest camera?

The slowest hand holdable?

The best in low light?

A companion for Life?

An investment in your future?

Perfectly ok at ISO2500 if you "expose correctly" (that's changed now the M240 is out, now we accept it was rubbish)

"Pure" camera's, free of extraneous gimmicks and add ons.

 

and on it goes....

[Thomas Chen]

A ever, thoughtful and constructive. I agree that we need the firmware improvement..... I doubt anyone will bother to check )

 

Chris,

 

Would you please tell me which group of pictures in your Flikr are taken by M240. Thanks a lot.

 

Thomas Chen

[Guest borge]

I think he meant 5DII (or III), it was a jokey way of pointing that out.

No need to suit up just yet, fun watching you do so though.

 

But as you mention it, since when is the majority of things on here not opinion disguised as fact?

 

M cameras are;

 

The quietest camera?

 

A bit OT but: Are they really?

A friends 5D Mark III (with the silent shutter option enabled) is far quieter than my M Monochrom. Haven't had the chance to compare it to a M240 shutter yet though, but from the videos it seems that even the M240 sound is more distinct (sharp and noticeable) compared to a 5D3 shutter in silent-mode.

 

 

You can see a comparison here:

 

The 6D with silent shutter mode enabled is even far, far more quiet than the M6.

[chris_tribble]

Chris,

 

Would you please tell me which group of pictures in your Flikr are taken by M240. Thanks a lot.

 

Thomas Chen

 

Thomas - basically anything posted after mid March 2013. I have to say I've not been posting much to Flickr of late...

[dwbell]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

A bit OT but: Are they really?

A friends 5D Mark III (with the silent shutter option enabled) is far quieter than my M Monochrom. Haven't had the chance to compare it to a M240 shutter yet though, but from the videos it seems that even the M240 sound is more distinct (sharp and noticeable) compared to a 5D3 shutter in silent-mode.

 

 

You can see a comparison here:

 

The 6D with silent shutter mode enabled is even far, far more quiet than the M6.

 

That was my point. All of those things are "opinion disguised as fact" and often spewed on this forum. My opinion is that none of them are true.

 

"Mirror Slap" is another one, totally ignoring IS and modern damping systems in DSLRs. You'll still find reference to it here. Opinon disguised as fact is rampant.

[pop]

Opinon disguised as fact is rampant.

 

Indeed. May I quote you when and if?

[dwbell]

Absolutely.

[jonoslack]

I am an avid student of many Leica M shooters, and have followed their work in all its subtile iterations, often for years. IMO, some who have enthusiastically taken up the M240 have made a demarkation that they deem as good, or more often, for the better ... yet based on what my eye tells me when I look at their work with this camera so far, I am not so sure that the aesthetic shift isn't for the worse. There is just something off about it all, and I am no scientist to say why in an analytical way.

 

Hi There Marc

An interesting comment, and a valuable one. But perhaps the time for that kind of judgement is a little later - when both the photographers you are looking at, and you as well, get a handle on the changed aesthetic.

 

Personally I've been trying different ways of using the camera, different lenses etc. This is beginning to settle down into a more familiar mode of shooting, and I'm gradually gravitating back to my old favorite lenses (75 'cron, 50 'lux, 28 'cron and WATE). The EVF has replaced the frankenfinder, and sometimes for close ups - but isn't used for a great deal other than that. Live view on the screen not at all.

 

All the best

[k-hawinkler]

Coming back to M color, the topic of this thread.

I seem to sense a consensus developing that AWB on the M would benefit from an improvement.

In general it appears too warm.

Is my impression from reading this forum correct?

 

How about other color aspects?

What's the situation there?

[k-hawinkler]

Hi Jono,

 

Great list (75 'cron, 50 'lux, 28 'cron and WATE).

I would add TE 135/4.

[algrove]

How many here actually shoot the 5D3, the M 240 and the Sony RX-1? How many here actually own a Leica? Oh that's another subject.

 

I dare say I love shooting with my M and MM and use them most of the time. But do not say that Leica has caught up with the new M model.

 

1.The ISO basically maxes out at 3200 versus 6400 on the RX1 and 5000 (conservatively on the 5D3). For most occasions this will not matter, but when you need it you want to have it available not wishing you had it available.

 

2.Diopters adjustment still comes up short for us older M users, whereas the 5D3 has a -/+4 eye piece insert in addition to the -/+ 3 wheel built in to it giving a total -/+ 7 diopters.

 

3.To change the SD and/or CF card (yes it holds 2 cards) on the 5D3 there is a side door not requiring bottom plate removal. When the door is closed you get a short red flash indicating card inserted OK and the door is shut OK.

 

4.It has a sonic sensor cleaner that is activated BOTH when you turn it on and turn it off in case you changed lenses during the power on phase.

 

5.How about a real horizon and tilt "meter" in the RX-1 which works simply and stays on until you turn it off. Red you are out and green you are inline. Go try one at a dealer and you will see what I mean.

 

These are small refinements that often seem so small that we often overlook their benefits, but all add up to a very pleasureful experience. Lets not get into AF which I have never had problem with and its spot meter/AF function which greatly helps in all types of shooting.

 

The colors will get better we all know that so in the meantime use it or sell it and be done with it.

 

Solid discussion about correcting color via LR 4.4 greatly interests me and I cannot get enough examples.

 

I posted some of the first images I took with my M +R lenses early on and sure some are maybe too red or too whatever, but I live in Florida where colors are bright and saturated and people have red (often sunburned) skin or heavily tanned skin so to me the colors are fine most of the time and I even like to use the Vibrance slider on occasion.

 

I like my M so much I will get a second one so I am changing lenses much less in windy and/or in sandy environments. If I had been close to Stephen I might have bought his, but then again I am partial to all black Leicas and they are cheaper by a Summarit lens here versus HK.

[thighslapper]

Coming back to M color, the topic of this thread.

I seem to sense a consensus developing that AWB on the M would benefit from an improvement.

In general it appears too warm.

Is my impression from reading this forum correct?

 

How about other color aspects?

What's the situation there?

 

It's not quite that simple........

 

Under full sun AWB seems to do a reasonable job......

In shade and overcast conditions it is well adrift .... and the duller, the worse it appears.

 

Daylight, Cloudy and Shade are all set a few hundred K high as well.

 

The slightly worrying aspect of all this is that most AWB algorithms are theoretically camera independent ..... otherwise they wouldn't work well in Aperture/LR etc......

 

... but it depends where the WB correction takes place in the RAW data processing chain.... and it's anyones guess what other correction factors Leica apply to the raw data for camera calibration as well..... whatever, something is nor working right in the processing software.

 

As I've pointed out numerous times, if you take an AWB M9 image and an AWB M240 image taken in identical circumstances and put the M9 WB figures into the M240 image on LR you get images that look virtually identical.

 

By implication it suggests the AWB corrections applied by the M240 are just plain wrong, and some misguided soul has added.... or not added... the correct figures in some look-up table or other that brings the images back to the world view according to Leica...That would account for the fact that none of the other pre-sets are right either.....

 

And again..... as I've said before, I personally cannot find much fault in the M240 colour palette once the aberrant WB is corrected for.....

[lct]

My usually serious dealer didn't see such WB problem on the sample (47015xx) he's been testing for me. I'll check if he needs new spectacles when i receive the body next week.

[k-hawinkler]

My usually serious dealer didn't see such WB problem on the sample (47015xx) he's been testing for me. I'll check if he needs new spectacles when i receive the body next week.

 

Interesting. Do you happen to know the firmware version of your M? Thanks.

[thighslapper]

My usually serious dealer didn't see such WB problem on the sample (47015xx) he's been testing for me. I'll check if he needs new spectacles when i receive the body next week.

 

Unless you have spent years looking at and processing m9 photos it is not that obvious .... And as I've said in good bright sunlight the camera manages pretty well......

 

...... And who ever met a car salesman who pointed out the dents and scratches on the body ...

[lct]

I'll see this next week folks. Stay tuned

[digitalfx]

How many here actually shoot the 5D3, the M 240 and the Sony RX-1? How many here actually own a Leica? Oh that's another subject.

 

snip

 

1.The ISO basically maxes out at 3200 versus 6400 on the RX1 and 5000 (conservatively on the 5D3). For most occasions this will not matter, but when you need it you want to have it available not wishing you had it available.

 

2.Diopters adjustment still comes up short for us older M users, whereas the 5D3 has a -/+4 eye piece insert in addition to the -/+ 3 wheel built in to it giving a total -/+ 7 diopters.

 

3.To change the SD and/or CF card (yes it holds 2 cards) on the 5D3 there is a side door not requiring bottom plate removal. When the door is closed you get a short red flash indicating card inserted OK and the door is shut OK.

 

4.It has a sonic sensor cleaner that is activated BOTH when you turn it on and turn it off in case you changed lenses during the power on phase.

 

5.How about a real horizon and tilt "meter" in the RX-1 which works simply and stays on until you turn it off. Red you are out and green you are inline. Go try one at a dealer and you will see what I mean.

 

snip

 

I shoot with The 5D2 and 5D3 + Leica M8, M9, M10

I agree with all your points below. Leica is way behind the curve on just basic functions that are standard on far cheaper cameras. I has disappointed to see that the 240 still had the lame bottom plate. Its such a PITA to use...it was a novelty on the M8, which clearly lost its appeal on the M9. When it showed up on the M10 I couldnt believe it was still here.

 

Its a shame we are expected to accept these oddities just because its still an M camera at heart. I think Leica needs to up the game now. The 240 is clearly a step in the right direction, but its also two steps back.

 

Back to the topic of color. The 240 is not that far off. The tweaks will happen from Leica im sure. There is too much saturation and the color temp is off in certain lighting conditions. But for the most part I have no problems quickly adjusting the color for now and get exceptional results in the matter of seconds using LR4.4.

I much prefer the look of the 240 over the M9, and honestly would not go back to the M9 if you paid me. The addition of Live View under certain circumstances and the fact that the buffer does not disable the camera after 9 shots are the two most valuable options for me.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[algrove]

I shoot with The 5D2 and 5D3 + Leica M8, M9, M10

I agree with all your points below. Leica is way behind the curve on just basic functions that are standard on far cheaper cameras. I has disappointed to see that the 240 still had the lame bottom plate. Its such a PITA to use...it was a novelty on the M8, which clearly lost its appeal on the M9. When it showed up on the M10 I couldnt believe it was still here.

 

Its a shame we are expected to accept these oddities just because its still an M camera at heart. I think Leica needs to up the game now. The 240 is clearly a step in the right direction, but its also two steps back.

 

Back to the topic of color. The 240 is not that far off. The tweaks will happen from Leica im sure. There is too much saturation and the color temp is off in certain lighting conditions. But for the most part I have no problems quickly adjusting the color for now and get exceptional results in the matter of seconds using LR4.4.

I much prefer the look of the 240 over the M9, and honestly would not go back to the M9 if you paid me. The addition of Live View under certain circumstances and the fact that the buffer does not disable the camera after 9 shots are the two most valuable options for me.

 

Agree that LV and buffer are terrific to have. I appreciate the quieter shutter too for my street/candid shooting not to mention R lens capability when ever we see the adapter. Maybe it is being redesigned to swivel like many R telephotos do for landscape to portrait and back.