Probably old but I need to ask, Leica M vs Leica MM

[wilfredo]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It's interesting to read all the different perspectives offered here and the rationalizations connected to these. In the end, everything is an individual choice, and the choices we make should be solely our own and not based on opinion.

 

I mentioned earlier that I refused to let go of my M8 and then the MM came along. For me it is the right camera for the bulk of my shooting. It is simply a gift to behold my images when everything lines up just right.

 

There is no right or wrong choice and I'm the first to admit that a B&W camera is not a camera for everyone, in fact it is a camera for a minority of shooters. There is a difference between the ordinary and the sublime. I said this before and some of you got upset with me, but to me eye the difference is there. No B&W files can stand up to the MM files although they may be excellent approximations. I'm loving B&W photography more than ever. But that's me, this won't apply to everyone!

 

Good luck to those trying to decide which way to go? I say move away from this forum, and find a quiet place where you can clear your mind and silence the 10, 000 idiots that reside there (and sometimes on this forum - including yours truly). Then your choice will become clear. Whatever choice you make, own it, it's yours!

[mwilliamsphotography]

Having owned a succession of Leica M film cameras from the M4 through the M7 and MP3, I can barely recall running more than a handful of color film through them in all those decades (often wishing I hadn't).

 

The M Monochrome has been the first Leica digital M camera to continue that linage. I feel it is the first direct descendant of the film Ms ... and one that expands on B&W film use with its' high ISO ability, truly making the MM a denizen of the dark. Combined with many of the superb fast aperture M lenses, it can go where no other M dare go, including the M240.

 

IMO, it is essential to become proficient in the use of Nik Silver Efex Pro2 ... but I also think it is extremely important to use it as a plug-in to Photoshop where you can do multiple layer Nik conversions for certain types of B&W work ... with that occasional technique, I've found no need to use filters with the MM. The options in Nik Silver Efex are exponentially vast ... it just takes a little experimentation the same as it did in the darkroom.

 

There are so many highly competent color digital cameras these days, and only one M Monochrome.

 

However, I fully understand the rangefinder argument for those who prefer color M work ... be it the M9 or M240. A rangefinder is a rangefinder, is a rangefinder.

 

Finally, the MM is the first digital M that I feel is a longer term keeper, like the film Ms were. It already does everything I want or need from a rangefinder, and I'm skeptical that the image qualities of the M240 CMOS sensor will translate with the same acuity of the CCD MM. As far as I am concerned, it'd be great if the next M Monochrome were the same sort of CCD sensor, but employed some of the attributes of the M240 ... like the more accurate VF, higher res LCD, and weatherproofing. BTW. it'd be great if it were a tad smaller.

 

- Marc

[Guest malland]

... Silver Efex Pro2 ... but I also think it is extremely important to use it as a plug-in to Photoshop where you can do multiple layer Nik conversions for certain types of B&W work ... with that occasional technique, I've found no need to use filters with the MM...

 

...and I'm skeptical that the image qualities of the M240 CMOS sensor will translate with the same acuity of the CCD MM. As far as I am concerned, it'd be great if the next M Monochrome were the same sort of CCD sensor, but employed some of the attributes of the M240 ... like the more accurate VF, higher res LCD, and weatherproofing. BTW. it'd be great if it were a tad smaller...

I agree with the last statement on the desirability of keeping the CCD sensor in a future Monochrom version.

 

On using multiple layer SEFEX conversions in Photoshop to simulate filters, I haven't thought or tried that. It would be most useful if you could post a couple of examples of this, and an indication of when you use that.

 

—Mitch/Bangkok

Looking for Baudelaire [WIP]

[geoffreyg]

Long time Leica shooter (M2 for 20 yrs), got onto the M8 bandwagon, and have come to realize that it just doesn't work for me. Not enough ISO, resolution, although the BW is pretty. It was neat at first, but now is kind of hard to enjoy, as it hasn't found a place in the stable.

 

Wasn't too excited on the M9 (is this more of the same), liked the sensor on the M240 a lot (and the shutter), but not all the features and extra weight. So this weekend, rented a MM for fun, just to see and make sure it wasn't worth considering as a companion to the RX1.

 

Well... the MM is just lovely. Wow. Extra resolution, so there are pixels to work with. Elastic files, like MFDB. High ISO, so you can shoot inside, dawn, dusk, tracking light. Surely one must miss the color scenes, but its just so very special - its like the best of film. You can take it into extreme situations and get the shot.

 

I don't want another camera, really. But this is hard to send back. You get out and shoot and if there is light, you find things. Its got the quality of the MF when you have the light, and when you don't, you have the flexibility of TriX, or even pushed film (meaning you can get that special shot when light is poor). The files can be worked, and the "poetic range" is vast. Very special.

 

I'm sure an M240 does most of the same, but somehow, the extension of the MM into refinement (more grey pixels), resolution and ISO is just right. Don't know if I'll get one (probably) but if not, it will be a camera that will be missed, for sure.

[Jeff S]

...but employed some of the attributes of the M240 ... like the more accurate VF, higher res LCD, and weatherproofing.

 

And the characteristic that for me makes the M(240) much more like my old film Ms, and that is the wonderful shutter release and shutter sound.

 

Plus, the M platform provides longer battery life (worth the extra weight IMO...in fact, adds stability), improved processor, 2m frame lines (superior IMO), illuminated frame lines (that likely add to the improved VF experience, possibly by reducing glare and increasing contrast), and generally better build quality.

 

In fact I'll wait to test the (potential) MM based on the new M platform; until then, b/w from the M is fantastic...better than from my M8.2, and that was better than from my M9 testing. And the M is just a more user friendly camera due to the improvements cited.

 

Frankly, though, most b/w print improvements I've experienced have come more from changes to my downstream workflow (software, printer, papers, profiles, inks (seven shades of grey), lighting improvements, etc) than from any camera change. Just like the darkroom days.

 

Jeff

[250swb]

The often listed refinements of the M240 make it read like the good the old days, quiet shutter, build quality, ease of focusing for old eye's. While the MM maintains the stripped down ethos of the M9, but taking technology to where it hasn't been before, showing what can be done rather than re-addressing what's already been done.

 

Build quality is fine if the camera is going to last any longer than any other Leica digital camera. Weather proofing is fine if it is actually weather proof, but there are concerns about light leaks around the bayonet flange (on all Leica digital M's) during long exposures, and if light can get in so can water, the lenses aren't weather sealed so what's the point of the body etc. It's great if the viewfinder is fantastic, but heck, people managed this long with the old decrepit system and got things into focus. It's a lovely idea to have a very quiet shutter, but it kind of supposes nobody can see you sneaking up on them with a camera raised to your eye. As for the other 'refinements' like Live View, well, they are a couple of years behind other camera manufacturers so it's almost like they are thrown in for free with the technology being so old, but it all adds to the nostalgic aura of the M240.

 

On the other hand, and as a dedicated B&W photographer, I'd rather have a noisy clunky old design that has grafted into its heart a warp engine and not a two stroke diesel. Something to astonish, to move expectations forward in a leap, not a shuffle.

 

So between the two it seems you either like your comfy slippers or your expedition boots, something wonderfully tactile and user friendly, or the things that take you places you've not been before. Yes, I know footwear is a strange analogy, but from the posts I read by M240 owners I can't help but think the only thing missing is the pipe and slippers and a comfy armchair.

 

Steve

[BrendanD]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Laughing +++

I agree though. The compelling reason for the Monochrom is the B&W sensor, its high ISO performance, film grain-like noise texture and smooth tonal rendition. It just doesn't 'look' at all like a digital B&W 'conversion' (and I've pinned those down as best I can using PP over years).

If I want all the advantages of a digital camera, I will take my OMD EM5. Better high ISO, more malleable files, mirrorless with EVF, light, small, all the advantages of a DSLR with none of the size.

[wilfredo]

Long time Leica shooter (M2 for 20 yrs), got onto the M8 bandwagon, and have come to realize that it just doesn't work for me. Not enough ISO, resolution, although the BW is pretty. It was neat at first, but now is kind of hard to enjoy, as it hasn't found a place in the stable.

 

Wasn't too excited on the M9 (is this more of the same), liked the sensor on the M240 a lot (and the shutter), but not all the features and extra weight. So this weekend, rented a MM for fun, just to see and make sure it wasn't worth considering as a companion to the RX1.

 

Well... the MM is just lovely. Wow. Extra resolution, so there are pixels to work with. Elastic files, like MFDB. High ISO, so you can shoot inside, dawn, dusk, tracking light. Surely one must miss the color scenes, but its just so very special - its like the best of film. You can take it into extreme situations and get the shot.

 

I don't want another camera, really. But this is hard to send back. You get out and shoot and if there is light, you find things. Its got the quality of the MF when you have the light, and when you don't, you have the flexibility of TriX, or even pushed film (meaning you can get that special shot when light is poor). The files can be worked, and the "poetic range" is vast. Very special.

 

I'm sure an M240 does most of the same, but somehow, the extension of the MM into refinement (more grey pixels), resolution and ISO is just right. Don't know if I'll get one (probably) but if not, it will be a camera that will be missed, for sure.

 

I resonate with your line: "the "poetic range" is vast. Very special." Indeed! Sounds like the poetry of this camera is whispering in your ear... ;-)

[geoffreyg]

I resonate with your line: "the "poetic range" is vast. Very special." Indeed! Sounds like the poetry of this camera is whispering in your ear... ;-)

 

Would it be just a whisper. More like a dull roar. Going over to local dealer and hope to shoot M240, MM (on its way back to Lens Rental) and RX1, and see what ISO 2500/5000, and BW looks like on all three.

[Jeff S]

from the posts I read by M240 owners I can't help but think the only thing missing is the pipe and slippers and a comfy armchair.

 

It's unfortunate that you make it seem like MM owners are into real photography and M owners are just into superficial comfort. While perhaps not your intent, your post seems quite condescending.

 

I've been a b/w photographer and printer for over 40 years, having built 4 darkrooms and used gear from 35mm to 8x10. Having switched to digital only 5 years ago with an M8.2, my goal has always been the final print...self-matted, framed and displayed. Toward that end, as I commented above, the camera has been only one part of a much broader and all-important workflow.

 

I passed on the M9 after testing since it didn't really address any specific needs or preferences. While I stuck with the M8.2, I hoped for some improvements, which I listed on the forum long before the M announcement. These just happened to be ones that were incorporated into the M....quiet shutter, weather sealing, etc. The improved RF was a bonus, and maybe the best change of all.

 

I don't print to monster size, don't shoot extensively at high ISO (ASA 400 was good enough for decades), and I gave up medium and large format some time ago. IQ is still important, however, and the new M delivers...for my needs. It just happens to deliver in a way that makes the user experience better, not perfect. More importantly, though, it can be incorporated into an overall workflow that, for me, produces wonderful prints when I do my job right.

 

Just because I like the M refinements doesn't mean that my photography is about the tools. It's still about the pic and the print, and if getting there is more pleasant, then that's a bonus.

 

If I want to explore unknown places, I'll buy a plane ticket to find better pics. And I won't pack any slippers.

 

Jeff

[jaapv]

Couldn’t agree more with the airplane ticket;)

[Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS]

 

The one thing you should not do is to carry two cameras, one M Monochrom and another for colour just in case. Do not do that. .

Why???.............that's my plan:confused:

[marcg]

I must say that I would have some difficulty in switching my brain over each time. It would be easier for me to carry two cameras with different focal lengths on them - but one for mono and one for colour would present difficulties - for me at any rate. For opportunistic shots, at any rate.

[250swb]

It's unfortunate that you make it seem like MM owners are into real photography and M owners are just into superficial comfort. While perhaps not your intent, your post seems quite condescending.

 

 

I do nothing to make it seem that way, it's posts that say the M240 is worth buying just because of the quieter shutter and the improved framelines. I make no other case than asking how have people managed so far that with such noisy shutters and terrible framelines in previous Leica's?

 

When it comes down to that sort of triviality I for once don't feel any compulsion to be condescending. The rest of the M240 'improvements' can be decided based on a) many other full frame camera's can handle R lenses better than the M240, Live View is better handled by those camera's or any higher end P&S, and c) the image quality is still a matter of opinion as to whether it is an improvement over the M9 in anything other than the amount of pixels. So the differentiating factor, making the camera worth buying, over an M9 for instance, is the quieter shutter and the improved framelines, and they are comfort factors, not essentials. It isn't me who points this out and makes an issue of it, I just respond to the irony of it.

 

Steve

[jaapv]

Well, there have been many threads about shutter sound and framelines in the past.... Complaining bitterly is the answer I suppose.

 

 

II make no other case than asking how have people managed so far that with such noisy shutters and terrible framelines in previous Leica's?

 

Steve

[01af]

The one thing you should not do is to carry two cameras, one M Monochrom and another for colour just in case. Do not do that. Seriously.

Why? ... that's my plan

Aw, come on! This has been discussed soo many times before ...

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m9-forum/305649-probably-old-but-i-need-ask.html#post2542551

 

Of course there's always some who believe they can handle colour and B/W side by side ... but those who just think they can outnumber those who really can by several orders of magnitude.

[Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS]

Aw, come on! This has been discussed soo many times before ...

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m9-forum/305649-probably-old-but-i-need-ask.html#post2542551

 

Of course there's always some who believe they can handle colour and B/W side by side ... but those who just think they can outnumber those who really can by several orders of magnitude.

I can assure you that I will be carrying both colour and B&W and if it works out then great but if it doesn't so be it. But I will be giving it a shot.......its not like I am breaking the law:D, is it??

[Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS]

A bit too categorical I think, in that it may be true for some people but not for everybody. For myself, I prefer to shoot in binges: I shot the M-Monochrom for six months and then the M9 for six months, and now I'm back to the Monochrom; but I am sure that there are good photographers who don't have a problem switching between the two on the go when they need do, although they might prefer shooting one or the other separately.

 

—Mitch/Paris

Looking for Baudelaire [WIP]

+1

[Jeff S]

I do nothing to make it seem that way, it's posts that say the M240 is worth buying just because of the quieter shutter and the improved framelines. I make no other case than asking how have people managed so far that with such noisy shutters and terrible framelines in previous Leica's?

 

The improved RF is the best new aspect. Anything that allows me to either see or focus better is paramount in a camera. It's why I use an M. Weather sealing is also a practical improvement, despite your dismissal over lenses, etc. It's may not be perfect, but it's better.

 

And for me, the files are better than those I got from my M8.2. It doesn't get much more practical than that.

 

I couldn't care less about LV or video (except that LV helps with camera/lens calibration checks)...I use it for the RF experience.

 

As for your last statement about "how people managed..."....well, that's the condescending part. Few of us really need anything more to take good pics; often ergonomics, handling improvements, and other refinements mean as much or more than IQ. Lots of cameras today have plenty good enough IQ. It's because we like it, not because we need it or couldn't survive without it...please....it's just a camera.

 

Jeff

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[thighslapper]

I agree though. The compelling reason for the Monochrom is the B&W sensor, its high ISO performance, film grain-like noise texture and smooth tonal rendition.

 

.... The COMPELLING reason is that you have to think in Black and White when you take a photo .... not lots of random colour ones with the odd one that you convert.

 

You quickly learn to think purely in terms of light, shadow and tone .... so composition and framing tend to be different.

 

It's what goes on in your eye and brain when you use an MM that is the most important factor.... not the camera itself:p