a week with the M240 and pretty disillusioned‎

[mwilliamsphotography]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Rick, I'm curious as to why your experiences and tastes trump anyone else's?

 

Personally, if a camera takes 7 months to get close to optimal IQ, and according to you, you are still learning ... what sort of attribute is that? Sounds like a lot of work to me. Personally, I don't have months to get anything up to its' potential, and frankly I can't afford a $7,000 commitment that takes so long to get there ... after two weeks I consider it a slacker that can't earn its' keep. It took me one week to compare my Hasselblad H4D/40 against a S2P before jettisoning the Hasselblad and committing to the Leica. After years of S2P use, that decision still holds as true as the day I made it.

 

Granted, one has to play awhile to get a feel for any files from any camera, but your assumption that others can't make a reasonable determination in less time is at best flawed. This also assumes that anyone that doesn't agree with you is less skilled than you ... where they may well be far more skilled than you ... at least more skilled in determining if a camera can work for the applications they may favor or specialize in.

 

While I do not subscribe to denying a purchase based on someone else's experiences, or the way others may have presented files from a camera, they can and do offer up a caution to heed. Conversely, enthusiastic endorsements such as yours should also be heeded and weighed in the balance.

 

I like the prospects that this camera presents on paper, however, to date I do not like the look and feel of the files. Nothing to do with CCD or CMOS, or everything to do with it, which isn't really a theory that can be factually proved, just anecdotally referenced ... I just don't like M240 files I've seen so far the way I did the M9P I had, or the S2P I still use.

 

I'm profoundly sorry I can't quantify that subjective aesthetic opinion with empirical data ... and can only say that every time I let the rhetoric of logic over-ride my subjective eyes, I've regretted it. Every single time.

 

So, I'll wait, and watch, and see what the future brings ... it isn't like my world will crumble and my photography will suffer because I am devoid of a M240.

 

- Marc

[Advertisement]

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

[lct]

Yes of course, we may prefer such or such camera for its jpeg or ooc raw capabilities as well. The first thing i noticed when using my 5D1 was the quality of its results out of the box with good lenses and i'm still happy to use it this way with R lenses when i have not the time to develop raws. Not a reason to come on a Nikon forum to bash Nikon cams or to explain ad nauseam to which point i could prefer Canon or Leica colours though...

[Guest malland]

Mitch - I know you say it is a matter of taste, but I've been listening to you say this now for a long time. Would you please be specific on what you mean. At this point in time I have not read anything from you except voluminous numbers of posts from you stating you like the M9. What do you specifically like about it. Please be more specific than you just like the color better. That doesn't carry any weight. Otherwise it just tends to sound like you are rationalizing what you own...

Rick, fortunately the charger for my computer blew up and I haven't been able to respond until now. I say "fortunately" because Marc says it below somewhat better than I have been saying it:

...I like the prospects that this camera presents on paper, however, to date I do not like the look and feel of the files. Nothing to do with CCD or CMOS, or everything to do with it, which isn't really a theory that can be factually proved, just anecdotally referenced ... I just don't like M240 files I've seen so far the way I did the M9P...I'm profoundly sorry I can't quantify that subjective aesthetic opinion with empirical data ... and can only say that every time I let the rhetoric of logic over-ride my subjective eyes, I've regretted it. Every single time...

It's not that useful to describe looks or color rendition in words. In one of these threads — I don't recall which one — I provided a link to am M-digital thread on the Fred Miranda Alternative Gear & Lenses forum that has M9 pictures (including some from Edward) as well as M240 pictures. Most people will prefer one set or the other within the last few pages of that thread. That's taste and the differences between the pictures are, in my view, obvious.

 

—Mitch/Chiang Mai

Tristes Tropiques [WIP]

[tom0511]

Most people say one has to learn how to process and handle the M files.

 

So is anybody here fine with lifting the secret in which particular way you post process the M-files?

 

I am also one of those who like the new M for several reasons but miss somewhat the look I always got from my M9 images.

Thanks for any particular suggestions. (I normally use LR5)

Tom

[Rick]

Rick, I'm curious as to why your experiences and tastes trump anyone else's?

 

Personally, if a camera takes 7 months to get close to optimal IQ, and according to you, you are still learning ... what sort of attribute is that? Sounds like a lot of work to me. Personally, I don't have months to get anything up to its' potential, and frankly I can't afford a $7,000 commitment that takes so long to get there ... after two weeks I consider it a slacker that can't earn its' keep. It took me one week to compare my Hasselblad H4D/40 against a S2P before jettisoning the Hasselblad and committing to the Leica. After years of S2P use, that decision still holds as true as the day I made it.

 

Granted, one has to play awhile to get a feel for any files from any camera, but your assumption that others can't make a reasonable determination in less time is at best flawed. This also assumes that anyone that doesn't agree with you is less skilled than you ... where they may well be far more skilled than you ... at least more skilled in determining if a camera can work for the applications they may favor or specialize in.

 

While I do not subscribe to denying a purchase based on someone else's experiences, or the way others may have presented files from a camera, they can and do offer up a caution to heed. Conversely, enthusiastic endorsements such as yours should also be heeded and weighed in the balance.

 

I like the prospects that this camera presents on paper, however, to date I do not like the look and feel of the files. Nothing to do with CCD or CMOS, or everything to do with it, which isn't really a theory that can be factually proved, just anecdotally referenced ... I just don't like M240 files I've seen so far the way I did the M9P I had, or the S2P I still use.

 

I'm profoundly sorry I can't quantify that subjective aesthetic opinion with empirical data ... and can only say that every time I let the rhetoric of logic over-ride my subjective eyes, I've regretted it. Every single time.

 

So, I'll wait, and watch, and see what the future brings ... it isn't like my world will crumble and my photography will suffer because I am devoid of a M240.

 

- Marc

 

Ok, Marc I'm not going to address you as you are one of the folks that doesn't even own the camera, but you are an expert, of course.

 

Here is how silly this thread is: Imagine if the OP instead went on the Canon 5DIII Forum and announced that he bought a 5DIII and was pretty disillusioned. Then he announced he sold it and bought his old 5D because , he liked it better.

 

This is how silly this thread is. I simply pointed out the technical advantages of using the M after having it for quite a while. Not emotional or having to due with taste. Of what value would it be if I said it I preferred something else? And, yes, I am still learn how to use the camera and the PP because, apparently I am obviously so stupid and you are so smart.

[keithlaban.co.uk]

I've yet to rely on any camera for a look.

[AlanJW]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Too many posts here trying to score points and put down other people's preferences or suggest that they are stupid because they disagree. What's the point?

 

I think all those who prefer the "look" of M9 files and don't care about the other attributes of M240's should keep their M9s and enjoy them but should also stop suggesting that there is some superiority in the M9 that is lacking in the M240. Some of us (including me) prefer the "look" of M240 files and the ease of working with them, particularly the better dynamic range. For me, the M240 is superior. But that is a matter of how I see things, and I don't think that makes me stupid and I also don't think it makes someone who sees thimngs differently and prefers the M9 stupid or crazy.

 

Along the same lines, I absolutely love the BW conversions with SilverEfex2 from the M240. Are they "superior" to images from a MM? There are lots of technical reasons why the MM is "better" but I don't much care and I would never suggest that those who are in love with the MM are somehow "wrong". But what works for me, works for me, so it is not "wrong" for me.

[Paul J]

I suppose the problem lays with those who want to buy an M and continue using the system but don't like the look of the files. They feel locked out with a camera and system they've probably loved for a long time because they don't like the look of files. That is a perfectly acceptable and legitimate frustration in my book and that is what we are seeing here, I believe.

 

The fact remains the sensor is different. You like it and buy it, don't like it and move on, or don't care and adapt. Moving on is not so easy when you have such an affinity for a brand, system, legacy, yada yada. and it's easy to think that by complaining a whole heap on a forum board that you can change things.

 

At first, I was disappointed with the look of the M. It is more generic, more canikon in not only it's colour but mostly it's tonality. It's not the added DR either. However, It's very rare for me to show a photo without post processing, so ultimately it doesn't really bother me. I've wasted a stupid amount of my life in front of photoshop to know how to get the look I want from any camera quite quickly. I think, again, we just need a reminder that it's just up to the person to try things out and see if it can work for them and leave out the personal attacks.

 

There is nothing more certain than change, particularly with the developments that occur in photography. If you think you can stick to one system and get the same look all your life then you are going to be sadly disappointed. The same could be said for the last few decades when film stocks dropped off and people had developed their careers and/or style on a look of colour, tonality, softness based on those stocks and they ended up in dead end trouble. I would urge all photographers to develop their own looks, unique to them, in their post processing and then adapt that to any camera they ever use. It makes it a win/win.

[tom0511]

Besides the little higher weight I clearly prefer the handling of the new M.

I love the new shutter, the long battery life is a nice add on, I use ISO up to 3200 all the time and feel much more "free" regarding choosing my f-stop in lower light.

The IQ is very good…I still would like to learn how to generate the M9 look.

I even consider adding M9 again (I sold mine when I got the M) and use that for use in good light. But then I want to keep it smile…and 2 different cameras are not simple.

[mwilliamsphotography]

I suppose the problem lays with those who want to buy an M and continue using the system but don't like the look of the files. They feel locked out with a camera and system they've probably loved for a long time because they don't like the look of files. That is a perfectly acceptable and legitimate frustration in my book and that is what we are seeing here, I believe.

 

The fact remains the sensor is different. You like it and buy it, don't like it and move on, or don't care and adapt. Moving on is not so easy when you have such an affinity for a brand, system, legacy, yada yada. and it's easy to think that by complaining a whole heap on a forum board that you can change things.

 

At first, I was disappointed with the look of the M. It is more generic, more canikon in not only it's colour but mostly it's tonality. It's not the added DR either. However, It's very rare for me to show a photo without post processing, so ultimately it doesn't really bother me. I've wasted a stupid amount of my life in front of photoshop to know how to get the look I want from any camera quite quickly. I think, again, we just need a reminder that it's just up to the person to try things out and see if it can work for them and leave out the personal attacks.

 

There is nothing more certain than change, particularly with the developments that occur in photography. If you think you can stick to one system and get the same look all your life then you are going to be sadly disappointed. The same could be said for the last few decades when film stocks dropped off and people had developed their careers and/or style on a look of colour, tonality, softness based on those stocks and they ended up in dead end trouble. I would urge all photographers to develop their own looks, unique to them, in their post processing and then adapt that to any camera they ever use. It makes it a win/win.

 

I think this is well said Paul ... from both perspectives.

 

Personally, I'm not complaining about the M240, nor take issue with those who like the images.Tastes, either way, are subjective and non-debatable IMO.

 

I also rarely if ever show any image without PP work ... however, I assume most of the M240 images being shown from this camera HAVE been post processed ... and what I see has given me pause ... perhaps not an outright rejection, but more of a wait and see mode. Similarly, didn't buy the Leica S2 until it had been out for well over a year, and some firmware adjustments had been made. I initially tried the S for 1/2 day and shot hundreds of images in all sorts of conditions, and after a month of PP explorations with those files, found it not ready for prime time ... yet. I didn't need weeks of shooting files to determine that. The second week long S demo I did over a year later was positive.

 

The notion that one has to commit to any camera, especially one this expensive, and actually have one for a certain amount of time to evaluate it negates the whole purpose of forums where one can collect impressions from a wide range of users who do have the camera ... many of whom I respect from both perspectives. This includes those I've had personal conversations with who like the M240, but readily reveal that it is challenging, and even after diligent PP explorations with the files freely admit that it is different from M9 files no matter what you do.

 

I'd be very willing to try the M240 in the manner I was able to do with the S2P. Unfortunately, due to demand and short supply, the chance of that happening has been slim to none ... however, I have now arranged to get a demo to try for 2 or 3 days as soon as I finish my civic Jury Duty next week. I plan on a lot of shooting to collect files, and then spend what-ever time is required on the files. I do not need the camera in hand to post process a batch of RAW files.

 

Looking forward to a hands on ... and even if I still do not like what I see from it, doesn't mean it is off the list ... things do change over time as I learned from my S2P experiences.

 

- Marc

[Paul J]

I think this is well said Paul ... from both perspectives.

 

Personally, I'm not complaining about the M240, nor take issue with those who like the images.Tastes, either way, are subjective and non-debatable IMO.

 

I also rarely if ever show any image without PP work ... however, I assume most of the M240 images being shown from this camera HAVE been post processed ... and what I see has given me pause ... perhaps not an outright rejection, but more of a wait and see mode. Similarly, didn't buy the Leica S2 until it had been out for well over a year, and some firmware adjustments had been made. I initially tried the S for 1/2 day and shot hundreds of images in all sorts of conditions, and after a month of PP explorations with those files, found it not ready for prime time ... yet. I didn't need weeks of shooting files to determine that. The second week long S demo I did over a year later was positive.

 

The notion that one has to commit to any camera, especially one this expensive, and actually have one for a certain amount of time to evaluate it negates the whole purpose of forums where one can collect impressions from a wide range of users who do have the camera ... many of whom I respect from both perspectives. This includes those I've had personal conversations with who like the M240, but readily reveal that it is challenging, and even after diligent PP explorations with the files freely admit that it is different from M9 files no matter what you do.

 

I'd be very willing to try the M240 in the manner I was able to do with the S2P. Unfortunately, due to demand and short supply, the chance of that happening has been slim to none ... however, I have now arranged to get a demo to try for 2 or 3 days as soon as I finish my civic Jury Duty next week. I plan on a lot of shooting to collect files, and then spend what-ever time is required on the files. I do not need the camera in hand to post process a batch of RAW files.

 

Looking forward to a hands on ... and even if I still do not like what I see from it, doesn't mean it is off the list ... things do change over time as I learned from my S2P experiences.

 

- Marc

 

I do understand your point of view there. I am not an early adopter by any stretch, I've just found it ends up in frustration, incompatibility, surprises, bugs etc etc. The APO 50 is another example. I really want the lens but will wait and see how things pan out with the fogging. I don't have the time or 'room for error', testing new things out like this. When I use it it needs to work and work well and I'm happy to sit back and see how things pan out once I've seen the potential in something like the APO50. For that reason I'm really thankful to the early adopters who deserve medals.

 

I feel the same about the M9>M upgrade for a number of reasons but am confident that i'll find my way PPing the new M, should I go that way. It's easy to get caught up in the hype of a product and upgrade when you really don't need to. I'm mostly happy with my combo of M9 and Hasselblad/Phase One. They complement each other nicely. I much prefer the M as a camera system though for so many reasons. Lastly, It's not a significant jump in IQ with the new M and is really the only reason I would have jumped in sooner. Better, yes, but not enough for a £6K purchase, IMO.

[Rick]

I have now arranged to get a demo to try for 2 or 3 days as soon as I finish my civic Jury Duty next week. I plan on a lot of shooting to collect files, and then spend what-ever time is required on the files. I do not need the camera in hand to post process a batch of RAW files.

 

Looking forward to a hands on ... and even if I still do not like what I see from it, doesn't mean it is off the list ... things do change over time as I learned from my S2P experiences.

 

- Marc

 

All right. That is exactly what you need to do to be able to get an idea what it can do. Two things: You may try shifting the Red Hue towards orange for some skin complexions (it tames red). And, under certain lighting conditions it sometimes can help to desaturate the Green Primary.

 

Rick

[mwilliamsphotography]

All right. That is exactly what you need to do to be able to get an idea what it can do. Two things: You may try shifting the Red Hue towards orange for some skin complexions (it tames red). And, under certain lighting conditions it sometimes can help to desaturate the Green Primary.

 

Rick

 

Yes, I have received similar recommendations from a user who I talk to frequently. One difference was their observation that the files are too strong on the yellow/green and that desaturating the orange a little also helps.

 

While it'll be nice if the new AWB has indeed been improved, I'll also be very interested in seeing how custom WB works as I do this frequently in the mixed lighting situations I frequently face.

 

My main concentration is people photography and use for weddings, events, and more canid portions of portrait sessions. The skin tones are of paramount importance, and how this camera's over-all color rendering and tonal response compares to the S2P files will be of interest because I'd shoot both for these type assignments.

 

- Marc

[Jeff S]

I plan on a lot of shooting to collect files, and then spend what-ever time is required on the files. I do not need the camera in hand to post process a batch of RAW files.

 

Even better to process some along the way to determine if you need to tweak your custom balance approach on the front end, not just PP. I used an iterative approach until I nailed my workflow (and again after new FW released)....didn't take long. But, based on your comments and your obvious experience, I'm sure you'll do whatever you need to evaluate.

 

Jeff

[efreed2754]

While we are at it will provide my M experiences--at least for last weekend.

 

Flew to New England to shoot my niece's wedding as part of my gift. Everything took place on a cloudy afternoon in a very narrow restaurant with large windows behind the ceremony. Do not use a flash so yes very challenging to one who is already challenged and have not shot a wedding in 40+ years.

 

Did use a monopod and 90% with 50 Summilux Asph. Shot at 1,000 or 1,250. Results were better than could have hoped for. Always had grain above 640 with M9, virtually none here. Had to crop to eliminate some of the crowd and images were wonderful.

 

Of course the light kept changing as the sun went down creating a panorama of white balance issues. Interesting I also reduced the orange to get more natural skin tones. Not a big deal!

 

Anyways the point is between the better rangefinder and sensor got much better results than would have expected from M9 which I loved. Thank you Leica for the M. Oh, never used the EVF, but did use LV for a few 24 2.8 shots to set the scene.

[thighslapper]

I'll also be very interested in seeing how custom WB works as I do this frequently in the mixed lighting situations I frequently face.

- Marc

 

In the last few interior shoots (a historical interiors and portraiture teaching days) I used and expodisk extensively and the results were spot on with the M. Skin tones in particular were (to my eye) excellent (and needed no PP) , even under mixed lighting.

 

This is the first that came to hand ...... straight from LR with default profile ...... I am not a pro and don't do weddings .... so I no idea if this passes your critical standards ....

 

(the original DNG is a little pinker than this reduced jpg .....https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/8936627/L4005552.DNG)

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[jaapv]

I’d get a little bit of the yellow (reflection?) out on the shoulder and the far side of the face, but otherwise pretty good, especially that the AWB was not fooled by the background colour.

[Rick]

I’d get a little bit of the yellow (reflection?) out on the shoulder and the far side of the face, but otherwise pretty good, especially that the AWB was not fooled by the background colour.

 

I understand you are showing how good the new AWB firmware is and I agree it is very good.

 

If, you wanted to deal with the yellow light falling on her right side it can be done using primaries. These sort of primary changes can be utilized in all sorts of artificial lighting conditions. For example, on your picture, try desaturating the Green Primary to -30 and change the Green Primary Hue to +10. Add some general saturation. I don't have the raw so you will want to experiment a little. Watch the yellow on the right side of her face.

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[mwilliamsphotography]

I'm not sure there Rick ... you are scaring me : -) The skin now looks a wee bit lifeless. Could be just the web compression which doesn't do any image any favors.

 

The solution to ambient contamination is either strobes, or get the subject away from the reflective light.

 

It's kinda hard to evaluate these sub one meg jpegs on the web ... which goes to your point about hands on for real shooting ... although I have PPed some M240 RAW files.

 

Here's a bit of what I'm after ... not sure these will play well on the web ... the amount of compression from the originals is horrifying, but they printed perfectly in the albums, and for some very large display prints ... won't know until I upload them ... LOL!

 

Close enough ... just the fire engine one got a bit hotter than the original

 

- Marc

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[mwilliamsphotography]

BTW, I spent time with a pro photographer friend whom I greatly respect, and he's been doing some work with the M240 and finds the color to be problematic also ... however, he discovered something pretty dramatic which I won't reveal untilI try it myself when I get the M240 Demo camera ... now I can't wait to get my hands on one.

 

I know, very cryptic and suspicious ... but what he had to say blew my mind, and is so controversial sounding I have to try it first and then back it up with images.

 

Stay tuned.

 

-Marc