tobey bilek Posted February 24, 2014 Share #41 Posted February 24, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) The disconcerting thing is the cameras are all different, m8 m9 m. If I put leica lenses in a Nikon, the file looks much like a Nikon lens, not exactly but close color wise. The M8 has rather inaccurate color even with UV/IR filter. I was not happy until I profiled it. I really wish they went for accuracy instead of a special electronic look. It is easy to push an accurate picture to a creative look and remove one. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 24, 2014 Posted February 24, 2014 Hi tobey bilek, Take a look here Interesting finding: M240 images. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Son of Helm Posted February 24, 2014 Share #42 Posted February 24, 2014 What about substantial flare reduction in Leica glass compared to the competition. This has the effect of keeping shadows relatively free from ligth spread all over the picture, with cleaner colors in the picture everywhere, and higher contrast in the shadows. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Branch Posted February 24, 2014 Share #43 Posted February 24, 2014 .......If you look at the newer lenses as the 50mm Summilux, the 35mm Summilux, 50mm Noctilux, 50mm APO-Summicron and even the new 21/3.4 and 21/1.4 you will see they see better in shadows than the eye. They pick up details. The ability to recover detail from deep shadows has a great deal to do with the control of flare which can be caused by a number of elements in the image chain, not just the lens. As an aside I spoke to a man and his wife in Paris on Saturday who were using M9 cameras. Both turned out to be professional photographers. They use Nikon for all their professional work for reasons of convenience, capability and adaptability but Leica for all their private work because of the superior image quality available if sufficient care is exercised - something which they suggested was not really practical in a commercial environment. I gave my M240 a strong positive review. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted February 24, 2014 Share #44 Posted February 24, 2014 The disconcerting thing is the cameras are all different, m8 m9 m. If I put leica lenses in a Nikon, the file looks much like a Nikon lens, not exactly but close color wise. The M8 has rather inaccurate color even with UV/IR filter. I was not happy until I profiled it. I really wish they went for accuracy instead of a special electronic look. It is easy to push an accurate picture to a creative look and remove one. I would say colour accuracy does not exist unless one starts measuring in a colour-calibrated workfolw.. With dedicated colour profiles it is possible to get cameras as identical in colour rendering as to make no difference. On a sidenote, because of different coatings and glass the difference between the colour rendering of lenses and lens brands shows a comparable variation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted February 24, 2014 Share #45 Posted February 24, 2014 I would say colour accuracy does not exist ..... I would say that colour accuracy sits in the same category as image 'quality'. You have to define the parameters of what you are trying to achieve before any form of 'accuracy' can be determined. IMHO, for the vast majority of images colour 'accuracy' is subjective...... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
arthury Posted February 24, 2014 Author Share #46 Posted February 24, 2014 I agree it's an astonishingly limited view of the world of art. I'm glad you put yourself in such high company, false modesty is an annoying affectation, but then I suppose blind belief is as well. But if you ever knew you have obviously forgotten that even Ansel Adams did not come from a 'high fidelity' world. He grew up a Pictorialist because that is the way people saw photography, as an extension of painting. So are you saying the Pictorialists and their deconstruction of the image were Post Modernists before their time? I just don't think you've thought about that little conundrum have you...... And perhaps also consider your friend Sebastião Salgado who has recently started to use digital instead of Tri-X. His digital images are 'deconstructed' to show grain by using DxO Film Pack, so messing up ultimate fidelity for the mere personal whim that he likes grain. Is that another conundrum for you to ponder? Your high fidelity world is certainly high maintenance when it come to having ideas that get shot down. You see, both Ansel and Sebastião were/are followed/following their own path, not because it is prescribed by the laws of owning sharp lenses but because they made an intellectual decision. Ansel decided Pictorialism wasn't for him and wanted to make a break with painting altogether. And Sebastião because he can see there is more in grain than grain, it has an effect, an emotional effect, it is the mood enhancer as well as the substance that keeps the eye roving over areas of the print with little detail in them. I am sure you will find others in the Leica community that share your perception of 'sparkle', they have a high investment in something or other being 'better' than a Canon or Nikon for the money they spent, and are sure to see sparkle as the reason. But it is a contrivance, process a Canon or Nikon image a different way and you would get sparkle, it is simply down to how the RAW converter processes the default image. But one thing is certain, if the banal example's of image's you link to (and why not your own?) is an example of sparkle then sparkle should definitely not be something that is inspirational or aspirational, it should come with a warning! Steve Steve, Take a look at your words ... astonishingly limited false modesty annoying affectation banal warning Perhaps, you should consider popping a chill-pill, Steve. You are getting too serious for your own good and for the good of this website. Consider the fact that if I were a Leica newbie (which I am not) trying to solicit support & sharing this pre-sale sentiment and reading your post, it may just seal the fate of all Leica products for life. Even as a long-time Leica user, your post left an undesirable after-taste in terms of buying Leica products. To the Admin: Let this be a feedback about why my frequency to visit this website has dropped in the last years. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colonel Posted February 24, 2014 Share #47 Posted February 24, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) I would say that colour accuracy sits in the same category as image 'quality'. You have to define the parameters of what you are trying to achieve before any form of 'accuracy' can be determined. IMHO, for the vast majority of images colour 'accuracy' is subjective...... its also about how much saturation there is in each colour band naturally produced by the sensor you can theoretically compensate but if the colour is important to the photographer, the particular sensor either doesn't have a particular band saturated enough for your tastes or the wavelength is just weird, and compensation is difficult/complicated or looks artificial, then it represent a problem For example, probably will get massively flamed, but western skin-tones are a "well known" weak point with Nikon. If this effects the photographer then you rule out using Nikon for people and therefore possibly completely. Compensation is difficult, or impossible, and many folk give up. I never liked the blues of the M9 but didn't find them absent enough not be able to enhance. In a break with many people I think the M240 is extremely close to the M9 in colours, definitely matched by Leica, however the extra colour depth and dynamic range gives more possibility to correct. There is nothing particularly I don't like. In terms of sparkle I have no idea what that is. The main things are contrast, micro-contrast, sharpness and acuity which give some pictures a certain "kick" in the right direction that can't be described but looks excellent. The M8, M9 and M240 are all good at this, but Leica lenses are particularly good, if not the best. There are other cameras that do well in these areas, e.g. the RX1, A7+55mm, Nikon D800E+35mm f1.4G, Canon 6D + 50mm f1.2 are four combinations I would mention particularly, albeit I don't get the precision of these parameters combined that I do with Leica. Lastly, I find people here a whole lot better on average then other forums. I also enjoy seriouscompacts and dyxum. rangefinderforum are ok, fuji-x are mixed and dpreview are nuts Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carbon111 Posted February 24, 2014 Share #48 Posted February 24, 2014 I'm going to try again but this time only links ... <snip> I think those are good examples of how Leica lenses "draw" (microcontrast, resolving power) plus post-processing. I can't say I understand the "sparkle" thing. :/ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted February 25, 2014 Share #49 Posted February 25, 2014 Perhaps, you should consider popping a chill-pill, Steve. You are getting too serious for your own good and for the good of this website. Consider the fact that if I were a Leica newbie (which I am not) trying to solicit support & sharing this pre-sale sentiment and reading your post, it may just seal the fate of all Leica products for life. To the Admin: Let this be a feedback about why my frequency to visit this website has dropped in the last years. And creating some mystical 'sparkle' quality out of thin air isn't detrimental to impressionable Leica newbies who go out and spend thousands of pounds/dollars chasing this illusory quality? One thing I am always careful of is how I push to spend other peoples money. Anyway, I think I'm still waiting to see this sparkle from your own pictures, if it is there it can't be difficult to illustrate can it? Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
arthury Posted February 25, 2014 Author Share #50 Posted February 25, 2014 I do not own an M240, Steve, if that's what you are trying to get at. So, I am, indeed, discussing the sparkle with the help of other's images. Am I, then, disqualified to talk about the M240 or to verify with others if they have seen this same thing? Is that a 'sin' in your eyes? You said: >One thing I am always careful of is how I push to spend other peoples money. Such assumptions, suspiciousness and constant reading in-between the lines will lead you nowhere, Steve. Read what's typed unless proven otherwise. Why on earth would I even use my time to push others to spend their money. And, if others' money is that easily pushed, then woe unto them for being so foolish. We are all adults here, I hope; then, talk, write and discuss like one. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted February 26, 2014 Share #51 Posted February 26, 2014 Read what's typed unless proven otherwise. Why on earth would I even use my time to push others to spend their money. . Well you tried to implicate me in Leica sales with ... "Consider the fact that if I were a Leica newbie (which I am not) trying to solicit support & sharing this pre-sale sentiment and reading your post, it may just seal the fate of all Leica products for life." ...and so I responded to the point you made (that my allegedly negative attitude was detrimental to sales) by suggesting your 'theory' could be equally negative for the newbies pocket. My allegiance in those circumstances being with the customer and fellow photographer, not a lickspittle for the company. If you want to say these things its mardy to go snitching to 'Admin' if you get an answer you don't like. I remember earlier in the thread you mentioning Post-Modernism,.... and that didn't work for you either. Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mah Posted April 20, 2014 Share #52 Posted April 20, 2014 M 240 shots MAH Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Photoskeptic Posted April 20, 2014 Share #53 Posted April 20, 2014 What I found in my M240 images: better color than expected and better AWB than expected. As a matter of fact I'm dialing back on "Vibrance" from 1 to 9% compared to my M8.2 and Nikon files to which I add vibrance. Back when the D800 came out there were some comparisons on Rob G's site with the latest Canon. What was apparent was the noisier shadows in the Canon. I'm seeing that same noise in the files which have deep shadows from the M240. It is easily fixable in ACR but just something else that has to be taken care of. "Sparkle"? I don't know about that, but my wife really thought the first images I printed had something special that my D800 images don't have (I'm not counting images shot with the Zeiss 55 1.4). So now I've heard from the expert . Addition: I was just now editing some more files shot with the 24 Elmar-M. I'm shocked at the vignetting wide open and also purple edges. Yuck. All fixable in post, but seriously Leica? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herr Barnack Posted April 20, 2014 Share #54 Posted April 20, 2014 @MAH, Were your night cityscapes shot on auto white balance? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
01af Posted April 21, 2014 Share #55 Posted April 21, 2014 I was just now editing some more files shot with the Elmar-M 24 mm Asph. I'm shocked at the vignetting wide open and also purple edges. Yuck. Curiously, pictures taken with the Elmar-M 24 mm Asph on the M9 and M (Typ 240) will turn out better when manually selecting the Elmarit-M 24 mm Asph's profile from the camera's lens menu, overriding the automatic lens recognition. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bephoto Posted April 24, 2014 Share #56 Posted April 24, 2014 I guess some call that "sparkle" dynamic range. some thoughts Leica M is a great fine instrument and I even shoot serious advertising works with it and its a wonderful light compact addition to Hassy and Linhof, at least in my case. as a product and advertising photographer never personally owned a DSLR, IMO a good one is as heavy as a medium format and never delivers the same quality and the best dslr is not even comparable with a technical camera rigged with a digiback, while Leica M is the only compact FF camera with top quality system in and out that convinces me and many pros. NOTE: I know that some canikon aps-c fanboy who spits out every 2 seconds "Nikon is Pro/Canon is Pro" while holding their plastic ingot of a camera will say how we MF/LF users are idiots who waste money on bellows and backs and power packs and other "Medieval" artifacts ... Majority of Leica owners never earned a penny from photography, pure photography lovers and serious amateurs who can get carried away easily by LEICA cultists. I'm a LEICA zealot, thus different Stories and fables about exotic glasses and glows and Fairies polishing lenses and Elves assembling cameras... any optical engineer would laugh at us hearing these Leica Fanboy's Junk Science Jargon Meanwhile in a different dimension there are still M shooters making a living off their cameras as we know many of them in this forum and even more outside because they are shooting not wasting time writing bullshit here. hmmm reminds me of ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mah Posted April 25, 2014 Share #57 Posted April 25, 2014 Thanks. Auto white balance. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herr Barnack Posted April 25, 2014 Share #58 Posted April 25, 2014 With film Leicas it was "glow." So with digital Leicas is it now "sparkle"? ...And the newly launched T camera will positively bedazzle the images which it makes: Amazon.com: As Seen On TV Bedazzler Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.