mwilliamsphotography Posted November 25, 2013 Author Share #61 Posted November 25, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) How's best to eat your own words .... it's really odd how you only see what you need to see. I did a client job in Colombia a week back and have gone back over some of the images and discovered the contrast you can see below. What's odd is that I prefer the skin tones from the Leica, and in this case the table cloth hadn't been a problem because it didn't matter! However - it's also clear that under certain horrible artificial light, IR contamination is a major issue for the M-240. Hmmm... Fortunately for me, it's a non-issue. However, I can see how it would be a major problem for Marc. Hmmm. Thank you Chris ... and thanks to all others ... the collective response of all persuasions is very helpful when evaluating pros and cons of any gear. Chris, I appreciate you posting these typical work-a-day type images ... I've done quite a few of those type jobs myself ... and you are right, content trumps any variations in color rendering as long as it isn't blatant. The differences you show between the Canon and Leica are exactly the sort of mixed gear situations I deal with all the time ... from Sony, Canon or Nikon DSLRs, Leica S2, Hasselblad H, or a M9 (and now M240) ... none of which are the same in initial color response. Each camera/sensor/lens system combination has its' own set of conditional aspects to work through. My initial controlled IR test of the M240, was not to say it is unworkable ... far from it. It helps identify what aspect needs to be addressed and what to evaluate to see if it can be made workable for my applications. Right now, that is the $7,000 question. Unfortunately, I may not have the Demo camera long enough to do that. We'll see how generous my dealer is willing to be. I can say that as a classic rangefinder, the camera itself is not in question. Superb. Most every irritating aspect of the M9 has been addressed. Generous higher res LCD that provides more valuable feedback. Wonderful, whisper quiet shutter response. Better RF viewfinder with more accurate framing (very apparent when shooting the studio shots), Controls improved, yet accomplished without making it foreign to M9 users. Even the little thumb rest ... perfect. But M240 owners already know all that. Yet, some folks here were right ... until you get the camera in hand, it is all just words. Hands-on brings it home. For me, the decision to get a M Monochrome was a no brainer. IMO, it is a long term keeper that meets my needs for B&W rangefinder work. Not so sure about the M240 ... not because it is flawed, but because it feels more transient as technology moves on. It is a major financial decision that I'd have to live with for some time. That Sony has brought a "Mighty Mouse" 36 meg FF camera to market @ 1/3rd the price hasn't helped. Yes, I know it isn't a rangefinder, and yes it is not nearly as stealthy nor as superbly made, and yes, it doesn't work with all M lenses. However, hands on with a A7R was a revelation ... state of the art EVF made focusing a M50/0.95 easier than ever before in the lighting conditions where one would likely use such a lens ... darned thing can literally see in the dark like night vision goggles. I nailed focus in 95% of my Nocti shots with the thing. Same for the 75/AA. Perhaps the REAL question is ... what can I sell so I can have both ... LOL! All the best to all of you for your input and feed-back. - Marc Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 25, 2013 Posted November 25, 2013 Hi mwilliamsphotography, Take a look here M240 Color Test ... Oh, oh!. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Peter Branch Posted November 25, 2013 Share #62 Posted November 25, 2013 Or better said: the parameters defined for the beta tests. It seems nobody took it into really harsh tropical conditions. The only time I have had a problem with IR using the M240 was in very bright, direct midday sunlight; 75mm f/2 Summicron-M ASPH, no filter, synthetic fabric. I've never experienced the problem with artificial light sources or normal daylight. As an amateur I found it easy to correct using CS6 but I fully understand that a busy professional would find having to custom manage many images unacceptable. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted November 25, 2013 Share #63 Posted November 25, 2013 And the answer is...... M240 shot is Mz, and M9 shot is Mx. I will say that this particular lighting (or clothing) seems to be extra-IR-rich, because I have never seen this much magenta in 4 years of shooting the M9. And the M240 seems to be neither worse nor better in that regard. I did make some outdoor shots with the 240 and an IR-pass filter, but the weather and season were wrong to get a classic "IR" black-sky-and-white-trees picture - cloudy skies and no foliage. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted November 25, 2013 Share #64 Posted November 25, 2013 I will say that this particular lighting (or clothing) seems to be extra-IR-rich, Some of the rugged synthetics are super-reflective of IR. Very much of the black so-called 'tactical' gear favored by wanna-be commandos shows up as brilliant white in IR Night Vision. Police and military know this. All they have to do is flash the IR light source for a second to reveal them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 25, 2013 Share #65 Posted November 25, 2013 The only time I have had a problem with IR using the M240 was in very bright, direct midday sunlight; 75mm f/2 Summicron-M ASPH, no filter, synthetic fabric. I've never experienced the problem with artificial light sources or normal daylight. As an amateur I found it easy to correct using CS6 but I fully understand that a busy professional would find having to custom manage many images unacceptable. I’ll happily enlist your help to process some of my files Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Richardson Posted November 25, 2013 Share #66 Posted November 25, 2013 Marc -- the M sounds like a great camera, but the issue you bring up is one of the reasons I have steered clear. Not so much because I feel like the color would not be manageable, but because switching out cameras can be such a tumultuous task, particularly when you have a long history with the camera being replaced. (This is not to mention the fact that usually a new Leica means a few months dealing with repair and camera/lens pairing issues, at least for me). Since we are both S2 shooters, I am guessing you also are familiar with the way that the M9 and S2 work together -- the files are very complementary. I would not say they are identical, but I find that they can be used together without any special effort. I did a magazine shoot earlier this year using both, and the selected shots blended together easily and perfectly...to me, this ease and familiarity is worth far more than any small gain in resolution or dynamic range. I realize there are other improvements with the M, but most of those are almost totally superfluous to me (movie mode, EVF etc). I have the S2 if I need the best possible quality and most photographic heavy-lifting (literal and figurative!), and the M9 for compactness, discreetness and travel. They have a synergy together that appears to transcend the technological improvements...at least to my mind. At this point, the M9 is still more than good enough for any photographic situation I would choose it for, and for when it is not, I have the S2. I may be tempted to upgrade at some point in the future, but it will have to be a bigger jump, and even then, I do not really look forward to it...at least not to the teething period! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted November 26, 2013 Share #67 Posted November 26, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) (This is not to mention the fact that usually a new Leica means a few months dealing with repair and camera/lens pairing issues, at least for me). I like the M as a traditional RF camera, not because of the new EVF, etc. But one benefit of having live view is that one can easily determine if there's a focus issue with the camera and/or lens. Too bad Leica has such issues, but LV at least demonstrates them quickly. When you say "camera/lens pairing issues" I assume you know that Leica does not do calibrations together; rather the camera and lens are each calibrated to independent standards. So, once calibrated, there should be no "mating" issues to worry about when lenses are used with a new camera. I had my lenses checked when I used my M8.2, and now they perform equally superbly on the M, without further need for calibration. Leica asks folks to send in camera and lens(es) for calibration, but that's because they want to check everything to avoid questions, but not because they pair them for calibration; they don't. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwilliamsphotography Posted November 26, 2013 Author Share #68 Posted November 26, 2013 Marc -- the M sounds like a great camera, but the issue you bring up is one of the reasons I have steered clear. Not so much because I feel like the color would not be manageable, but because switching out cameras can be such a tumultuous task, particularly when you have a long history with the camera being replaced. (This is not to mention the fact that usually a new Leica means a few months dealing with repair and camera/lens pairing issues, at least for me). Since we are both S2 shooters, I am guessing you also are familiar with the way that the M9 and S2 work together -- the files are very complementary. I would not say they are identical, but I find that they can be used together without any special effort. I did a magazine shoot earlier this year using both, and the selected shots blended together easily and perfectly...to me, this ease and familiarity is worth far more than any small gain in resolution or dynamic range. I realize there are other improvements with the M, but most of those are almost totally superfluous to me (movie mode, EVF etc). I have the S2 if I need the best possible quality and most photographic heavy-lifting (literal and figurative!), and the M9 for compactness, discreetness and travel. They have a synergy together that appears to transcend the technological improvements...at least to my mind. At this point, the M9 is still more than good enough for any photographic situation I would choose it for, and for when it is not, I have the S2. I may be tempted to upgrade at some point in the future, but it will have to be a bigger jump, and even then, I do not really look forward to it...at least not to the teething period! Thanks Stuart, I've had to send in M lenses that were not calibrated correctly also ... Leica checked the camera to spec, and the lenses to spec ... but I had to repeatedly send a few lenses back for adjustment. Since then, they seem to have been fine on all subsequent Ms. I hear you regarding the trauma a new camera brings to one's shooting life. The S2 trek was enough for me for a while. Once you get something working well, moving to something else is a daunting prospect. Yes, the S2 and M9 are quite simpatico ... However, I sold my M9P to pay for a MM as I tend to do mostly B&W for rangefinder applications anyway ... a carry over from my M film days. Most candid color work I do tends to demand really fast AF where even anticipation isn't possible sometimes, and I only have one chance ... so I have to have a 35mm DSLR (at least until I jettison those sort of assignments). Neither Leica S or M excels at focusing in many of those situations. After leap frogging from Canon to Nikon then back again, plus throwing in the occasional Contax ND and Leica DMR to get to the lenses, ... I simply had a belly full. Moving to the Sony A900 and subsequent Sony A99 solved all that, and I haven't budged or been tempted to move since. The rub is that I would like a small, easy to carry color companion for my MM when traveling, personal family sorts of things, and even for some assignments. I also do not need video or other "stuff" ... The A99 is probably more suited for any video applications I may ever want to engage in anyway (highly unlikely, since motion work was how I made most of my living prior to retiring, and I fully realize what is involved to do it well). Oddly, while I prefer the starkness of the MM and M9 ... and even the M240 ... in terms of rangefinder applications ... the Sony A99 has introduced me to tech-tack-ons, and seemingly frivolous features that wormed their way into my working expectations. I've grown accustomed to an EVF and the ease it provides when focusing fast lenses in low light, or the "Origami" type fold out LCD that actually is a knee and back saver ... and reverses back into the camera to protect the LCD when transporting. Clever stuff. Right now I am leaning toward skipping the M240, a first in almost 40 years of M models. The color is an issue for me and I really do not look forward to all that entails even if it is doable ... and frankly, the camera is too big and I wish there was a M6 Classic sized M digital, or better yet, a CL sized FF M mount digital. - Marc Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Branch Posted November 26, 2013 Share #69 Posted November 26, 2013 I’ll happily enlist your help to process some of my files It was not technically difficult - but it was very time consuming. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter H Posted November 26, 2013 Share #70 Posted November 26, 2013 ……...... and frankly, the camera is too big and I wish there was a M6 Classic sized M digital, or better yet, a CL sized FF M mount digital. - Marc Its identical to the M9 in all practical respects. And so much nicer to use: it really is the nicest, most intuitive and responsive digital camera I ever have used. I know this is tremendously subjective Marc , but It seems a shame that you'll miss out on the experience! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted November 26, 2013 Share #71 Posted November 26, 2013 ... and frankly, the camera is too big... But, as Peter says, it's virtually identical to the M9, with only the thumb rest protruding a bit, and you said that you actually liked that aspect. Methinks color rendition is your real issue, or else you don't find the other advantages of the M over the M9 are worth another purchase. Each person of course has to make his/her own assessment, based on whatever is deemed important. I find the improved RF (interestingly the only aspect never marketed by Leica) and smooth, quiet shutter action among the compelling aspects. Improved weather sealing is also a big plus. But I, too, would be fine without video...and at a minimum, the ability to change the button command...I've accidentally triggered it twice. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkP Posted November 26, 2013 Share #72 Posted November 26, 2013 Its identical to the M9 in all practical respects. And so much nicer to use: it really is the nicest, most intuitive and responsive digital camera I ever have used. I know this is tremendously subjective Marc , but It seems a shame that you'll miss out on the experience! Peter, I completely agree with you. The camera is a joy to use and I love the files - I know it's heresy to state this but one of the reasons I also prefer the output to that of the M9 is that it is a bit more colour neutral - I always found that I was damping down the colour in those 'Kodachromesque' M9 files. The M240 still doesn't deliver B&W like the Monochrom. Just a shame that the Monochrom doesn't have these user refinements (esp. shutter and optical viewfinder). However, I must say that I agree with John in that we are paying a lot of money for what is in the end rapidly dating electronics in the Leica M-digital bodies. That is not to say that the image quality deteriorates over time - just that the technology marches on. Leica really should now have a system for modular updating of the electronics/sensor, etc in M cameras. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter H Posted November 26, 2013 Share #73 Posted November 26, 2013 And Mark, I agree with everything you say. It's too good really, but I suppose deep down I'm very glad that such physical, tactile quality exists, even though a far cheaper body (Sony, for example) will before long be producing photos that make those qualities largely redundant. Every time I suggest up-gradable sensors and electrons, there's a howl from the people who understand these things far better than I do explaining why it simply isn't possible or viable. And yet that's the type of innovation that I'd find inestimably more attractive than anything Sony or anyone else has thrown at us so far. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwilliamsphotography Posted November 27, 2013 Author Share #74 Posted November 27, 2013 I think that the issue today, more than ever, is that the past attributes of tactile machine age excellence are clashing with the transient impermanence of the digital age. Anyone who has been shooting with some of the finer gear over the years relishes it, doesn't want to lose it, want's to perpetuate it. It is part of the joy of making photographs.The creative act doesn't rely on it, but it makes the act more "familiar", attractive and pleasurable. Unfortunately, the imaging part of the tool is so transient, and the onslaught of tools that up the techno-ante every two years, while relentlessly reducing the cost to acquire it, makes it ever more difficult to indulge. A FF 36 meg DSLR for under $3K? The 24 meg Nikon D3X was $7,000 just a few years ago for crying out loud. Now a 24 meg FF camera smaller than a Leica M for $1,600? Really? FF 36 meg for $2,400? WTF! Leica truly is a luxury brand. You pay to play. Of Leica's image leading products ... the M Monochrome is unique, and in a way immune to rapid advancements. While we wouldn't mind a better LCD or finder, and a few other tweaks, those are lesser aspects. It provides the tactile experience, and delivers the B&W imagery. The S2 is unique, a mobile and very versatile CCD system. While the meg count may increase in future and probably go to CMOS, the original S2 will remain viable for most users for a very long time. BTW, the S system is twice as valuable to those who use lighting ... like me. PersonalIy, I had hoped the new M would build on its' unique rangefinder status ... A return to a M6 sized camera (I thought the M9 was too big); Less do-dads not more; Some unique imaging aspect ... less like CanoNikoSony, not more like them. It's a fine camera ... I got an extension on the demo, and hopefully can get more into it taking snaps over the Thanksgiving Holiday. - Marc Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted November 27, 2013 Share #75 Posted November 27, 2013 Almost every photo I take has a person in it. Skin tones are the number one evaluation for me. Preliminary M240 images shot in normal levels of indoor tungsten @ ISO 640 to 1600 using a custom WB off a grey card show overly magenta skin with the remainder of the environmental scene being reasonably correct (as long as there isn't any artificial black material). This is difficult to correct without a lot of effort. Unless you are shooting in private homes, I wouldn't be surprised if those are compact fluorescent or some other kind of high efficiency light "masquerading" as tungsten. Of course if you find that another camera does better under the same situation, then that may be the easier way to go. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 27, 2013 Share #76 Posted November 27, 2013 Peter, I completely agree with you. The camera is a joy to use and I love the files - I know it's heresy to state this but one of the reasons I also prefer the output to that of the M9 is that it is a bit more colour neutral - I always found that I was damping down the colour in those 'Kodachromesque' M9 files. The M240 still doesn't deliver B&W like the Monochrom. Just a shame that the Monochrom doesn't have these user refinements (esp. shutter and optical viewfinder). However, I must say that I agree with John in that we are paying a lot of money for what is in the end rapidly dating electronics in the Leica M-digital bodies. That is not to say that the image quality deteriorates over time - just that the technology marches on. Leica really should now have a system for modular updating of the electronics/sensor, etc in M cameras. One Leica CEO was fired for saying this…. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dikaiosune01 Posted November 27, 2013 Share #77 Posted November 27, 2013 going back to the original topic about the colour shifts in the bag shown in the oringal post; are there any lightroom editing tips that can be utilized to minimize the colour shifts in images I already have? in the meantime, i'm on my way to purchase some 486 UV IR cut filters. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 27, 2013 Share #78 Posted November 27, 2013 You can take a white balance correction off the magenta but that will give a green cast on other blacks which has to be corrected locally. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
diogenis Posted November 27, 2013 Share #79 Posted November 27, 2013 Just a hint on how revolutionary and advanced the new M is, Leica predicted that IR lights have no place in our A+++ world (seriously, why do they even exist in the first place) and it made the camera ready for the future. Those lights are mostly good for heating, not illuminating We live in the era of LED lighting why on earth does people need tungsten lighting for? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
farnz Posted November 27, 2013 Share #80 Posted November 27, 2013 … We live in the era of LED lighting why on earth does people need tungsten lighting for? Personal preference for the colour of light produced by tungsten filaments? Not everything has to be totally utilitarian. Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.