Anyone with M9 (or variant) still shooting MF or LF

[2wk]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I shoot a MM, but I have a Mamiya 7ii on hand for when I need some good quality color. I scan with a Epson V750. The MM files resemble my 120 B/W scans.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[skinnfell]

I used to have a rollei with the schneider 90 macro. To this day I still believe that lens is the best I have ever tried, at all distances. But it is an absolute beast.

 

I didnt have access to a large format scanner, but I have made some scans on a Epson V700. I would say that at comparable enlargements, the Leica Monochrom is up there as a very close call vs the rollei. Of course I didnt own them at the same time so its hard to compare side-by side. Also scanning usually yields larger files, but with less acutity (pixel per pixel detail). But monochrom files usually enlarge easily up to 200%, and with a bit of careful sharpening and noise adding - to 400%.

 

The M9 does not come near the monochrom in terms of pixel detail, but it provides some very nice files indeed. 1 metre prints or smaller are usually not a problem with M9, and the M should perform at least as good.

 

So for me as a mostly black and white shooter it makes no sense at all to haul around a huge Mf rig with tripod etc, when I can get very similar quality with a monochrom and 50 summicron - hand held...

 

There is always the S2 series, but at that price I am uncertain if I want to take it out of the house at all...

[erlingmm]

........

 

So for me as a mostly black and white shooter it makes no sense at all to haul around a huge Mf rig with tripod etc, when I can get very similar quality with a monochrom and 50 summicron - hand held...

 

There is always the S2 series, but at that price I am uncertain if I want to take it out of the house at all...

 

I have the MM and the S2 (that I got used at a decent price), perfect combination. I have travelled extensively with the S2 (Barcelona, NYC, Vegas, SF...), no problems, fully insured (at used price value)

[BerndReini]

I ask because I wonder if the process of capturing an "analog" image digitally changes the quality of the capture - that is the "film look." Otherwise put, would an image digitized and printed lose the qualities unique to film that keeps some of you still shooting in that medium.

 

I scan my color negatives with an Epson V750 and they do have a nice open film-like look when I scan them. The trick is however not to mess with the curves too much. Just clip the blacks and the whites wherever you see fit, then adjust the mid tones, but be careful with any other adjustments since the film already has a "built-in" curve. As soon as you alter the film response digitally by too much, the file will look "digital."

 

Stay away from too much contrast and clarity/ unsharp masking.

[algrove]

Good thread. So many posts bring back old memories of now 45 years.

 

I still have an M9P,sold the others. Have a Monochrom and a few M 240's now.

 

Hassy-I repurchased about a year and a half ago now an old SWC (loved that old Zeiss 38) and was lucky to snare a P45+ for use with it. Got the 503CW too, but almost always seem to gravitate toward the SWC for my landscape work.

 

I got back into Hasselblad due to a friend in the SW USA, Alain Briot, who uses the SWC +503 setup and is very accomplished. He started out photography with an old CL and a 40 Cron in Paris at l'Ecole des Beaux Arts.

[sblutter]

I was a 4x5 guy for years both personal and pro

 

the pro career ended a long time ago, couldn't earn my family's needs

 

M9, with a long learning curve AND my shooting needs, has produced 3 well received exhibitions with clean (no pixel) prints up to 84" long side

 

Find the thread about shooting noiseless @ 640 ISO - huge

 

M's are 'handheld' (tho I use a tripod whenever poss) - Cartier-Bresson, not Edward Weston

 

I feel you guys - but when I moved to an apartment from the old house - it became more about getting more final images printed than known processes.

 

Tons of fun to be had learning new stuff like software on a powerful computer with a giant HD monitor - and the amazing Epson 3880 for 17x22" work prints

 

Sweet!

[xray]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm still shooting limited film in MF and LF. I shoot digital color and film B&W. Most of my LF shooting is now collodion wet plate / ambrotypes but will shoot some film once in a while. I don't think there's going to be any shortage of B&W film any time soon. Color transparencies might be a problem soon. Fuji is the only supplier an they could cut it off at any time. Also labs are getting scarce. I ran E3, E4 and E6 for decades in my studio and get no joy doing it now.

 

I'm retiring from commercial work next year and plan to expand my film shooting in B&W but probably will sell my Hasselblad CFV39 and a few long lenses, Technikardan 23 and some lenses and buy a Monochrome. Weight is becoming a consideration as I get older. I guess I'm shuffling My system.

[gjames9142]

Briefly, I have shot all formats -- MF up to 8x10 and mostly monochrome-- for years. Upon getting the M9, and then a Monochrom, I only use the darkroom rarely to print upon demand from older negatives. There are several reasons why, but the main one is time. Getting back from a shooting trip, and then taking a couple of weeks to develop and then being able to deal with at most ten negatives a day proofing/printing suddenly becomes a huge constraint in terms of time. In terms of quality there are a few trade-offs. There is nothing better than a good contact print. But the colour prints from the M9 work beautifully at 36 inches -- digital colour liberates you from the chemical dyes of each manufacturer, and there is a huge choice of excellent paper. The Monochrom around 40 inches is spectacular. I posted a while back saying that the quality looks like LF, and a rather rude poster asked me if I was senile, but last winter, there was a Monochrom print of mine on a table in the viewing room of a museum, and a collector walked by -- he is the richest man in Canada and buys at a level that it hard to convey -- and stopped in tracks and said "my God that's sharp." Some of the great photographers I know are seriously tempted by the Monochrom, although there are some for whom it is too late to start all over again. I think anyone starting now who restricts herself to film is missing out. The new technology is mature and for me quite miraculous.

[Printmaker]

Right now it's easy - I shoot 4x5 with a scanback in my studio and M9 in the field (though I still have a Nikon hanging around that I use when I know I might get splashed by a wave or two). Since most of my work is in the studio, 4x5 means work while Leica means fun.

 

In the past, I used 8x10 and put the chromes on my drum scanners. With a 1/2 stop bracket per shot, it was an expensive way to operate. Shooting less critical work on 4x5 and running my own E6 line helped but when scanbacks were invented, I was first in line. And the dynamic range I was getting with my first PhaseOne back made my work so much easier. Later, the IQ coming from my BetterLight back made the PhaseOne look like it came from the stone age.

 

I kept a Linhof Technika for personal work but as the years went on, I used it less and less. When I bought my M8, the Linhof really began to gather dust. I sold it right after I bought my M9.

 

As for MF, I've owned several systems over the years but I've never really warmed up to the format. Sure, the 500c was a nice tool and its TriX negs were beautiful to print from, but as a working tool... well if you are going to put a camera on a tripod, it should be the biggest camera you have. In the studio the 8x10 won. In the field the Linhof won.

 

To use another analogy, I drive a truck and a sportscar. Both have their uses. The family sedan has little appeal for me.

 

Of course your milage may vary.

[Jeff S]

... well if you are going to put a camera on a tripod, it should be the biggest camera you have...

 

I would add that it should be the biggest camera you have...with you.

 

Not being an Ansel-type, I wouldn't hike for miles in remote areas lugging LF gear, but I'd rather have a digital M and a light tripod than be limited to handheld, or without any camera. In my film days, this generally called for MF, but MF digital is too expensive IMO for the sometimes slight difference in IQ compared to a digital M at 'reasonable' print sizes.

 

Jeff

[emmet3]

I would say my M9-P has replaced my 35mm and medium format systems. But my 5x7, no way. I do however develop both B&W and C-41 in my basement so I have no worries. If I sent my film out I wouldn't shoot large format at this point. I just recently gave up RA-4 printing and started scanning and ink jet printing, it's just so much easier and you can do so much more!