atufte Posted May 31, 2014 Share #21 Posted May 31, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) Great point. There's a reasonable argument to be made that comparing 400 ISO film to a 400 ISO monochrom file is not an apples-to-apples comparison. Would love to see more of your examples of the monochrom at 6400. Here's a few... 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! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/227928-comparison-of-mm-and-m6/?do=findComment&comment=2601452'>More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 31, 2014 Posted May 31, 2014 Hi atufte, Take a look here Comparison of MM and M6. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
schmolinski Posted May 31, 2014 Share #22 Posted May 31, 2014 Well, I don't have an m6. Only use my M3 occasionally. And I have to confess, that the Tri-x is completely different to the MM. BUT... The MM has its advantages. Underexposed images can be easily dealt with in LR or Aperture. Underexposed images on film not. But if you only go for the old school look, the Tri-X is unbeatable. Otherwise it wouldn't produced any more. For me the MM is the coolest thing in the world. My M3 is the camera for the times that hopefully will never come (back) and of course for time in my life when I need meditative moments. the article I find not very helpful whilst the images are beautiful. My personal conclusions: if you want the Tri-X look buy film and shoot. If you want to have fun without any regrets, by MM and shoot. Your life will change :-)))) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattMaber Posted June 1, 2014 Share #23 Posted June 1, 2014 If high ISO is your main reason you may as well buy a ff canikon and STILL have plenty of cash for processing and film!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted June 1, 2014 Share #24 Posted June 1, 2014 If high ISO is your main reason you may as well buy a ff canikon and STILL have plenty of cash for processing and film!! I think you are sort of missing the point, neither Canon or Nikon make a monochrome sensor camera, and it is the monochrome sensor at high ISO that is the unique factor, not simply the ability to crank up the ISO. Besides which high ISO is only the icing on the cake with the MM, not the reason to buy the camera. The Canon theory also breaks down when you try to fit a Leica M lens to it, so you've bought a camera that can do high ISO and its useless. Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattMaber Posted June 1, 2014 Share #25 Posted June 1, 2014 There's adapters. My point really is that like any digital leica, the mm is A LOT of money to throw at a camera. Sure everything's relative, you may be loaded and £8k is nothing to you, but it's still a lot if cash compared to similar cameras. Purely a b&w sensor, sure but I'd bet you'll struggle to see the difference between many "regular" cameras - especially after you throw pp and noise at it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
baci Posted June 1, 2014 Share #26 Posted June 1, 2014 I think the part of the article that resonated with me was the issue of third party suppliers of parts to the digital Ms and issues of serviceability in the longer term. I simply can't afford to update cameras every few years and the Leica reputation for durability was a factor in my purchase decision. The article led me to doubt that my M9-P may still function in a decade whereas I know an M4 will. The potential for specialist parts manufacturers being able to supply into the indefinite future is significantly (in my book) more tenuous than the likelihood that film will disappear forever. All other arguments are (to me) moot. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattMaber Posted June 1, 2014 Share #27 Posted June 1, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) Exactly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
panoreserve Posted June 1, 2014 Share #28 Posted June 1, 2014 Put it another way...how many ISO 6400 pictures with similar results as 400 ISO film can youtake with your M6? How many perfectly usable pictures can you take in pitch darkness with your M6? And last but not least, I would love to know how you change ISO several times during 36 exposures? So that argument does not hold up i'm afraid... Alex Alex, which are your LR-presets for the M Mono-DNG's - would you tell me/us a little bit more about your "secrets"? Thanks a lot! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Rawcs Posted June 1, 2014 Author Share #29 Posted June 1, 2014 The Online Photographer: Are They Or Aren't They? Thanks Steve, I had read it: very interesting. It does male you wonder if in the future we will be saying "They don't make 'em like inkjet prints anymore". Mike. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJH Posted June 1, 2014 Share #30 Posted June 1, 2014 Matt that is a different point and its one why for the time being I don't feel confident in spending on any digital camera. The point Steve makes still stands though as to make the comparison you may as well buy a Canon film camera rather than an M6, loads of em around either FD or EOS, Ffordes alone seem to have a boat load and there so cheap they are practically giving em away. In fact you can buy a complete Canon film system for the price of a decent M6. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
2wk Posted June 1, 2014 Share #31 Posted June 1, 2014 There's adapters. My point really is that like any digital leica, the mm is A LOT of money to throw at a camera. Sure everything's relative, you may be loaded and £8k is nothing to you, but it's still a lot if cash compared to similar cameras. Purely a b&w sensor, sure but I'd bet you'll struggle to see the difference between many "regular" cameras - especially after you throw pp and noise at it. Unless you are referring to EOS M, Show me an adapter to mount a Leica M lens on a Canon or Nikon... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattMaber Posted June 1, 2014 Share #32 Posted June 1, 2014 Hmm at an 8th of the cost for the camera and lens I'm happy I spent a bit more on my m6 compared to a mm or m9 or m240 than a canikon film kit. It's all about choice of course. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 1, 2014 Share #33 Posted June 1, 2014 Unless you are referring to EOS M,Show me an adapter to mount a Leica M lens on a Canon or Nikon... Matt didn't specify what camera: M-lenses go on the 7 series Sony. For now, more to follow. Show Matt a digicam to need yellow, orange and red filters for the sky. Or green for skin tones. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
atufte Posted June 1, 2014 Share #34 Posted June 1, 2014 Alex, which are your LR-presets for the M Mono-DNG's - would you tell me/us a little bit more about your "secrets"? Thanks a lot! I do not use LR Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MOZ Posted June 1, 2014 Share #35 Posted June 1, 2014 Hmm at an 8th of the cost for the camera and lens I'm happy I spent a bit more on my m6 compared to a mm or m9 or m240 than a canikon film kit. It's all about choice of course. I've just bought a Fuji last week, great camera, i'm loving it. It's a GW 690, so a bit different from yours but i enjoy it a lot. Gives me 10K files (once scanned with Imacon) on par with my MM, anyway... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dante Posted June 1, 2014 Share #36 Posted June 1, 2014 As someone who has moved to film I find the constant internet infatuation with tri-x and making definitive comparisons to everything based on tri-x like it is the only thing in the film universe really depressing. Agreed. Tri-X is versatile and has its uses, but as a 35mm film, it's the second-best film for any given application. It's great in 6x6 and larger, but in rinky-dink sizes, it has more grain than it is entitled to. Dante Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 2, 2014 Share #37 Posted June 2, 2014 I think the part of the article that resonated with me was the issue of third party suppliers of parts to the digital Ms and issues of serviceability in the longer term. I simply can't afford to update cameras every few years and the Leica reputation for durability was a factor in my purchase decision. The article led me to doubt that my M9-P may still function in a decade whereas I know an M4 will. The potential for specialist parts manufacturers being able to supply into the indefinite future is significantly (in my book) more tenuous than the likelihood that film will disappear forever. All other arguments are (to me) moot. +1 on this. But the boatloads of Canon and Nikon film cameras mentioned in an other post, do not contain any like-new 1V o F6 bodies. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tookaphotoof Posted June 2, 2014 Share #38 Posted June 2, 2014 Too me it isn't all about detail. I usually don't pixel peep. I like the MM files, and I find the example of the photo with the animals lovely, make no mistake. I have an M240 myself which also produces files I like, be it color or b/w. The high iso possibility combined with the high shutter speed makes you extremely flexible in the way you want your depth of field during the day. Walking from a sunny place into the shadows and back out in the sun within 10 minutes, it doesn't matter with digital. Ultimately, I prefer the look of certain film. Portra, Ektar, HP5+, to name a few. Digital files somehow always have some sort of perfection. Although I'd love to have the MM and possibly will get one eventually, I don't see myself giving up on film. I just see it as another "type of film" I like, next to HP5+. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sblitz Posted June 2, 2014 Share #39 Posted June 2, 2014 how many rolls of film = cost of MM. here in nyc, about $30 per roll for film, develop, and scan all shots on roll at a top notch place. MM is $8000. Simple math, that comes to 267 rolls of film. If you are a pro, a roll a day, one year's worth. Unless on vacation, I venture to say about a roll a week for me, say two to be liberal. At a roll a week, a little more than 5 years for payoff. Just the math side of the equation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
xalo Posted June 2, 2014 Share #40 Posted June 2, 2014 Interesting discussion (and pictures!). The initially advertised opinion paper appears to me more limited — not setting out for more than triggering thought, perhaps. Very personal choice/preference, with so much in the play from perception of aesthetics to personal feel for a given medium, besides appearance of image quality in low res on a screen. Quite certainly more visual information available from a MM high iso file than a scan of a Ilford Delta 3200 pushed by a stop (not to speak of Tri-X @ iso 8000 — which I can only imagine to be quite — binary?). Let alone potential productivity of the digital process. But it does not give you a material image, a different medium to work with, to store and behold without electronic help. Another thing that is not simple is the math. The rate for film, development, scan varies widely depending on the places and methods, but film allows choosing among sorts and prices, development can be done at home. With the MM, the initial investment and cost is there, whether you need it's potential productivity or not. Costs entailed by digital imaging also tend to spiral out of sight, if you go for faster machines, bigger harddrives, cards, software, let alone potentially costly repairs and loss of value of the camera. I was seriously tempted by selling gear to get an MM, but for my type of slow-paced use I found that a high-res scan of a keeper negative (they're not so numerous) from T-Max or Ilford Delta 400 (for example) did yield the texture and depth I like. Cheers, Alexander P.S.: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.