My rolling take on the M.

[huckles]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi guys, it has been tested and tested and put into my work in the field. Wedding season is upon me and I'm glad to say, it's in the bag (the M9P never made it that far - don't read into that too much).

 

Leica M (type 240) | Van Dang Photographer

 

It will be a rolling update, but for the MOST part, I'm very happy to have this new addition to the family.

 

Thanks for checking it out!

 

V

[BerndReini]

It is refreshing to read a review that is so honest and devoid of hyperbole from an M9 and M owner. It reflects my experiences precisely, which led me to my personal decision not to buy the M because I fall in the category of people who don't need the new features. I also share your enthusiasm for the MM. The files from that camera are truly amazing.

[huckles]

Thanks. I don't do write up to generate hits or whatever to my site. Everyone is different but I always find it useful to see how others feel about new products particularly in the line of work I do.

[colonel]

nice pictures

I like personal accounts especially with good pictures that show off the camera.

 

I disagree with this 640 limit. Its very artificial.

With Lightroom 3.6 and above the M9 can take pretty good pictures at ISO 2500 in low light. I'll try and post an example later if I get time.

[huckles]

I agree. I meant 640 in camera... Then push in post.

[huckles]

And I'm speaking comparatively. With careful processing, pretty much any sensor can be made to look great at highish iso, including the m9. Where it is helpful for me in my line of work is to have a cleaner file to begin with. Hope that clears that up.

[colonel]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

And I'm speaking comparatively. With careful processing, pretty much any sensor can be made to look great at highish iso, including the m9. Where it is helpful for me in my line of work is to have a cleaner file to begin with. Hope that clears that up.

 

of course, as clean as possible

I am not saying the M240 isn't better, in fact my X-Vario is significantly better, although it needs to be as it is aperture "challenged" 50mm and above.

I think my point is that with f1.4 lenses, which I mostly use (I only use f2.8 for 90mm), the light range available with 2500 and f1.4 is 99.9% of my photography needs. ISO 6400 would deliver the other 0.01%

[Guest malland]

And I'm speaking comparatively. With careful processing, pretty much any sensor can be made to look great at highish iso, including the m9. Where it is helpful for me in my line of work is to have a cleaner file to begin with. Hope that clears that up.

For me the key thing is the color rendition of the M9, which, for high-ISO using the "Shoot at ISO 640 and push in LR5" technique shows the best colors for night photography that I have seen from any digital camera I've seen — but I haven't yet seen enough night shots from the M240 to have a judgment on that.

 

huckles, interesting writeup, but the center-justified text gets in the way of the reader too much: it may look good on the page but is more difficult to read than left-justified test; and I found myself skipping a lot because of that.

 

—Mitch/Paris

Tristes Tropiques [WIP]

[colonel]

I couldn't be bothered with looking through my photos so I just snapped a few ISO 2500 examples with the M9

I don't use the push processing much, I have not really investigated it to be honest.

This was in the evening waiting for a train, it was somewhat dark

 

Not good pictures and I haven't been bothered to process it much but you can see with LR4.4 that its pretty good even with flickr sharpening and size reduction, you get the idea

 

 

 

 

[huckles]

The M has about 1.5 stops difference to the M9. Your shots show that the M9 is capable at higher iso, which it is! However, against the M let alone the Nikons it gets beat anywhere above 640. Does that make it a worse camera or redundant. No way! It's still my favourite at base iso. . Rarely, in my normal shooting do I go anywhere near 3200 in any camera in any conditions. Only time I go past that is at weddings, there are completely different beasts.

 

What I would really love from the next M? Strip it down. Make it smaller, take away the movie feature, evf function. No logos. Just a pure image making machine. That would be awesome. No matter what sensor was in it. A digital MP...

[huckles]

of course, as clean as possible

I am not saying the M240 isn't better, in fact my X-Vario is significantly better, although it needs to be as it is aperture "challenged" 50mm and above.

I think my point is that with f1.4 lenses, which I mostly use (I only use f2.8 for 90mm), the light range available with 2500 and f1.4 is 99.9% of my photography needs. ISO 6400 would deliver the other 0.01%

 

I was interested to get my hands on the x Vario. Yes, it's aperture challenged... Love the way you put that! . It feels so good in the hands though. I could see why the 'mini m' words were bandied about... But certainly the critical specs were anything but. I'm sure with good light it is a sweet camera.

[huckles]

For consistancy.. i did post up the M9-P review earlier this year if anyone is interested..

 

Leica M9P | Van Dang Photographer

 

[Guest malland]

I couldn't be bothered with looking through my photos so I just snapped a few ISO 2500 examples with the M9

I don't use the push processing much, I have not really investigated it to be honest.

This was in the evening waiting for a train, it was somewhat dark

 

Not good pictures and I haven't been bothered to process it much but you can see with LR4.4 that its pretty good...

Actually, it's highly worthwhile to use the "Shoot at ISO 640 and push in LR4/5" technique for the M9 — and there is a discussion here (see posts by Jim Kasson) also of using the equivalent for the M240, which seems to be "Shoot at ISO 1600 and push in LR4/5."

 

The are two major advantages of this technique, (1) better image quality in terms of less noise and greater dynamic range, and (2) setting the exposure in post means that you don't have to get the "correct" exposure in-camera, which, for night shots with disparate lighting, can be difficult, especially with wide-angle lenses. In your posted pictures above ("it was somewhat dark") it looks like the exposure was not difficult, so they're not really good examples of the second advantage: look at these real night shots pushed 2-4+ stops.

 

Finally, for people who want to do dodging and burning: the latest version of Lightroom (LR5) has an excellent new tool, the Radial Filter.

 

—Mitch/Paris

Tristes Tropiques [WIP]

[colonel]

Actually, it's highly worthwhile to use the "Shoot at ISO 640 and push in LR4/5" technique for the M9 — and there is a discussion here (see posts by Jim Kasson)

 

Just for my stupid mind, what is the actual technique.

Is it set the ISO to 640 and move the exposure compensation to -2 (or -3) stops ?

 

Therefore its all shadow recovery ?

[Guest malland]

Just for my stupid mind, what is the actual technique.

Is it set the ISO to 640 and move the exposure compensation to -2 (or -3) stops ?

 

Therefore its all shadow recovery ?

Nah, there are no stupid questions; only stupid answers. The steps in shooting and processing with this technique are listed here.

 

—Mitch/Paris

Tristes Tropiques [WIP]

[Mike Geng]

Nice write up and photos. Thanks for sharing.

[huckles]

Nice write up and photos. Thanks for sharing.

 

Thanks!

[IWC Doppel]

I couldn't agree more with the comments so far, great pictures a nice combination of not only subject but colour, high and low contrast and some well considered words and thoughts

 

Thanks very much. Interestingly the M240 review showed the M240 to look, nearer CCD to me than most, was this post processing adjustments ?

[huckles]

I couldn't agree more with the comments so far, great pictures a nice combination of not only subject but colour, high and low contrast and some well considered words and thoughts

 

Thanks very much. Interestingly the M240 review showed the M240 to look, nearer CCD to me than most, was this post processing adjustments ?

 

Is there a particular image that screams 'CCD' to you? I can tell you what I did, if anything, in post.

 

Cheers, and thanks for the lovely words. It's a pleasure to use out in the field..

V

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[pieterpronk]

I agree that these pictures look less M240 than most pictures I've seen. I find it hard to pinpoint which one in particular, but as a set they seem less "digital" than most other M240 pictures. (or less Canikon even though you mention its rendering being more like that than the M9)

 

Maybe it's that you allow more noise in your pictures, or at least that your goal with taking a picture doesn't seem to be to make the cleanest picture possible. For example the second picture of the girl looking up.

You seem to enjoy the romance of backlit pictures which are harder to keep "in control". I think the Noctilux helps in that regard as it's less controlled than most lenses.

Basically it seems to be a combination of the way you shoot your subjects, your gear (noctilux. older version?) and how you process. Maybe it is exactly because you also see a difference between CCD and CMOS rendering that you are able to make CMOS pictures that look quite CCD.

 

The Pra (da?) picture to me (for example) is a typical M240 picture, shiny and controlled. (digital? ) I doubt the M9 could come close to it.

 

Personally I like the colour pictures better than the B/W, but that's probably because I've been staring too much at MM pictures.

All in all a great review and some amazing pictures. Thanks!