Why are M8 BW conversions so much better than M9 conversions?

[goorackerelite]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have both cameras and M8 BWs are much better than M9s. Like they're not even close. M8s look soulful deep and tri-x like. While M9 conversions look flat, boring and blah with the same lenses. I heard that shooting JPG BW in the M9 is better, but I don't wanna believe in that.

[CaptZoom]

How long have had the M9?

[Advertisement]

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

[goorackerelite]

a week or so

[CaptZoom]

a week or so

 

 

Give it a little time. From what I've read, M9 files need to be processed differently.

 

For whatever it's worth, I like the BW conversions with M9. I thinker quite a bit with color relationships (via the sliders in LR). I have no experience with the M8, so can not make a comparison.

[adan]

There's a theory that the M8's IR sensitivity adds a certain something to its files. Although exactly what is never defined, since the IR reflectivity of various subjects is going to be somewhat random.

 

How long have you used the M8?

[goorackerelite]

I've used my M8 every day for the past 3 months.

[Jeff S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The issue, other than the work involved, is whether you can get, though a disciplined workflow, files (and prints) from both cameras to ultimately meet your needs and preferences. Can you?

 

The M Monochrom, for instance, has been said by many to produce flat and no so appealing files right out of camera. Virtually nobody, though, has complained that the files aren't flexible enough to allow one to produce a dramatically different result.

 

I own the M8.2 and M240, but tried the M9 for a brief period (decided to keep the M8.2 for a variety of reasons at the time). Each required a different workflow depending on the pic and the desired outcome. No surprise since there are a variety of technical considerations (sensor, resolution, dynamic range, crop factor, IR filtration, etc).

 

For b/w, you might consider using your UV/IR cut filters with the M9, like I assume you do with your M8. This could be problematic with color and/or wide lenses, but may give you a more satisfactory starting point for some b/w work, if that's important to you.

 

Jeff

Edited June 2, 2014 by Jeff S

[Freddddan]

I do think that it doesnt matter if you put UV IR on a M9 or not. It shouldnt change anything.

[CaptZoom]

The M9 and M240 have weak IR cut filters on the sensor as compared to most other cameras. The M9 behaves poorly in some/certain instances because of IR contamination.

[tobey bilek]

file colors in M8 straight from camera are some engineers interpretation of Kodachrome.

 

Personally I think it is poor colors with or without UV/IR filters. I made a profile of the camera with the Adobe Lab profile editor. Fixed it right there. Colors are now correct.

 

If you like the M8 conversions, shoot a Color Checker with the M8 and M9. Use the color sample tool on the M8 RGB and adjust the M9 so it is the same. Use the HSL tab in ACR and get both to read the same. Do only R,G, and B. Save that as a preset. After conversion they will look alike.

[Jeff S]

I do think that it doesnt matter if you put UV IR on a M9 or not. It shouldnt change anything.

 

Wrong…sometimes.

 

Jeff

[AceVentura1986]

I have both and am primarily a BW shooter. The M8s image is usually contaminated with IR light. This can have a very pleasing look on skin tones and darker hues. To a large extent you can replicate this in the M9 by shifting the blacks slider in Lightroom 50 or 75 points. This lightens the blacks quite a bit and improves tonality in darker areas of the image. Also, I tend to shift the color sliders 20 to 50 points for yellow, red and orange. This has the effect of lightening and smoothing skin tones as all humans have these colors in our skin. Note, this will not work if you're in bluish or magenta light. In that case use those sliders.