kenneth Posted August 25, 2014 Author Share #61 Posted August 25, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) Once you get beyond a certain level of camera (pretty much anything nowadays with a reasonably large chip) it is possible, with solid processing skills, to obtain good quality black and white. I've tended to use Leica exclusively for many years now but when, for whatever reason, I've used a Canon or Nikon, I've not found it difficult to obtain pleasing results. Sticking with Leica, I've found both M8 and M9 as excellent cameras for digital black and white. The latter has an "internet gossip" reputation for being less suited to black and white and, whilst tonally it is different to the M8 and, particularly, the M Monochrom, it is still a very fine camera for making black and white conversions and can be bought for less than half the price of the more esteemed Monochrom.Ian, at no point did you mention the dramatic differences between Japanese and German optics which has to be a major deciding factor when investing in any camera system. I have used Nikon and Olympus in the past and I would say that Nikkor and Zuiko lenses are much punchier than the German equivalents, namely, Leica and Carl Ziess. To my eyes, neither are wrong but I have chosen to come down on the side of German Optic for my cameras, enlagers, loupes and projectors. I do have an old Asahi Pentax S1a fitted with a 55mm f2 Super Takumar but it's age means a rather soft image, but not one I dislike. I have used Alpa cameras in the past. Alpa use Schneider Macro Switar lenses which are very similar to Leica optic but I found they worked well with Agfa CT18 50asa at high altitude Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted August 25, 2014 Posted August 25, 2014 Hi kenneth, Take a look here Thinking of buying a Monochrom M. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
wattsy Posted August 26, 2014 Share #62 Posted August 26, 2014 Ian, at no point did you mention the dramatic differences between Japanese and German optics which has to be a major deciding factor when investing in any camera system. There are of course differences between lenses from various makers but I don't think it is true nowadays that the differences are so marked generally between lenses from Japan (and China) and Germany. Leica lenses are now universally "punchier" (to use your phrase) than they used to be and camera systems are much more global. For instance, Zeiss lenses (for 35mm systems) are largely manufactured in Japan, as are Leica lenses for the T system, Hasselblad cameras nowadays 'partner' with Japanese Fuji lenses, many Nikon lenses are manufactured in China and Thailand, etc. It's very different today than it was back in the 50s and 60s. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted August 26, 2014 Share #63 Posted August 26, 2014 I defy anyone to say, categorically, whether a photograph is taken with a Leica, a Canon, a Nikon or any other "professional" camera, using the best lenses that these systems have to offer, unless something very specialist is being used, such as a Noctilux wide-open. The mass producers make some cheap lenses. Leica don't. That's the difference. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
VictoriaC Posted August 26, 2014 Share #64 Posted August 26, 2014 For what it's worth a rumours site posted last week that Leica had registered a new model number which it speculated implied that there's a new MM on the way that will have wifi capability too! Any which way, as tempting as it is to buy digital right now, I'm holding out for next year's 240 replacement and in the meantime I'll continue with film and its limitations. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted August 26, 2014 Share #65 Posted August 26, 2014 WiFi on the MM - talk about useless clutter.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted August 26, 2014 Share #66 Posted August 26, 2014 WiFi on the MM - talk about useless clutter.... Well, they changed the base plate to accommodate WiFi storage cards. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
349A Posted August 26, 2014 Share #67 Posted August 26, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) Should we keep score of how many times this false rumor of a new MM will be repeated? And who the heck cares if a new MM may come some day. The current one is close to perfection. Go take some photos! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenneth Posted August 26, 2014 Author Share #68 Posted August 26, 2014 I defy anyone to say, categorically, whether a photograph is taken with a Leica, a Canon, a Nikon or any other "professional" camera, using the best lenses that these systems have to offer, unless something very specialist is being used, such as a Noctilux wide-open. The mass producers make some cheap lenses. Leica don't. That's the difference. Andy, I totally disagree. Japanese lenses produce a totally different image to German glass, I am surprised, given all your experience, that you made this statement. Even as a mere hobby photographer I can see this. By the wayI think I have arrived at a decision with regard to the Leica Monochrom M and that decision is not to proceed. Although it has many attributes and it is obviously a very clever camera the results it seems to produce are more monochrome than black and white, hence the well chosen name. I don't know whether you understand what I mean by that but I guess it is to do with aesthetics. Somehow the images I have seen produced by it are too clinical and perfect to a point that it is almost a false contrived image compared to good old black and white. For sure it is a more convenient process than messing around with chemicals in my cellar in winter when it is too cold to work but I can remember Ansell Adams talking about suffering for his art and breaking the ice in his development trays in the dead of winter. The most direct comparison I can give is CD's versus LP's the later being much warmer and somehow more musical and as a guitarist I am very critical of the nuances of sound and timbre so the M6's and my Rollieflex will reign supreme and the upside is that I am £6,000.00 better off which to a Yorkshireman has to be a great plus. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted August 26, 2014 Share #69 Posted August 26, 2014 Kenneth You are perfectly entitled to your opinion; it just differs from mine, which is fine with me. FWIW, as I have advised before in this very thread, I think that you have made the correct decision about the Monochrom. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotografr Posted August 26, 2014 Share #70 Posted August 26, 2014 K. In the last 45 years the number of B&W photos I've sold can be counted on the thumbs of one hand. Theoretically, the camera can be used. . Practically, it no longer does what I want it to. The SL is my all-time favorite SLR camera but for my purposes it might as well be a doorstop. It still has a partially-exposed roll of TMax 100 in it and has not been used since 2006. That's one point of view. Here's another. In the last month alone, I've sold more b&w prints through my gallery than I can count on two hands--thumbs included. All were shot with my Monochrom. The potential for print sales, however, was never a factor in my decision to purchase the MM. I bought it for image quality and have not been disappointed. I fully expect the camera to give me a solid ten years. My M8 already has eight years and is still going strong. For what it's worth, Kenneth, I'm sorry to read about your decision. With a bit of effort, it is possible to produce remarkable images from the Monochrom that hold up well when printed very large. They do not, to my eye, look the least bit clinical. If one already has a good selection of M lenses and an affinity for b&w images, the Monochrom is an acquisition that will be enjoyed for a very long time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted August 26, 2014 Share #71 Posted August 26, 2014 Japanese lenses produce a totally different image to German glass, As I wrote earlier, we are no longer in the 1960s. Things have moved on, along with the price of bread... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fursan Posted August 26, 2014 Share #72 Posted August 26, 2014 Once you get beyond a certain level of camera (pretty much anything nowadays with a reasonably large chip) it is possible, with solid processing skills, to obtain good quality black and white. I've tended to use Leica exclusively for many years now but when, for whatever reason, I've used a Canon or Nikon, I've not found it difficult to obtain pleasing results. Sticking with Leica, I've found both M8 and M9 as excellent cameras for digital black and white. The latter has an "internet gossip" reputation for being less suited to black and white and, whilst tonally it is different to the M8 and, particularly, the M Monochrom, it is still a very fine camera for making black and white conversions and can be bought for less than half the price of the more esteemed Monochrom. Much obliged Ian, for your opinion and time. Very useful observations, for me at least. Best to you and yours. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenneth Posted August 27, 2014 Author Share #73 Posted August 27, 2014 I had mail from a friend, Pete Myers, whom you will remember I offered a link to earlier, about his reaction to my decision to stay with film and my reasons for this- I enclose a copy of this for your perusal: I think you made a very good decision. I did not want to weight in on it unduly, as my experience with Leica over the Monochrom was simply horrible---and I carry the bad taste with me. But beyond that, there are some issues with the Monochrom. The rear LCD is impossible to view in bright light. There is no anti-aliasing filter, and those ultra sharp lenses will alias the image constantly. These sound like minor issues, until you get behind it for a while and figure out differently. I hear rumors that a new model might be announced at PhotoKina, but again isn't it interesting that the guy (me) that brought digital monochrome to Leica for development (late 2006), is once again out of the loop. There is that bitter taste again! hee hee hee! Film has a real grace to it. It never aliases. Each frame is a new, clean image sensor. And the perfection, is in the imperfection---which is what I will be talking about in my October column. I now pay $80US for drum scans of those negatives that I really find unique. It is a lot for a scan, but so is the quality of the result. Instead of putting the money in technology, I feel fortunate to be part of the scanner operators income for the year. The economy of film was local--- and with digital cameras, it either goes to Japan or Germany. I think it was much healthier for the photo industry when photography was local. As I have mentioned in my columns, the biggest issue I have seen with digital, and not with film, is how the lens couples to the film differently then an image sensor. Image sensors are so thin , even with a micro lens array, that the light coming out of the rear of the lens just hits it like a brick wall. With 25 or more microns of depth, film just gracefully records the light three-dimensionally through the emulsion. That is a thing of beauty. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted August 27, 2014 Share #74 Posted August 27, 2014 If this man considers that the lack of an anti-aliasing filter is an "issue", then I fear he completely misunderstands what the Monochrom is all about. I have seen lots and lots of Monochrom shots and in the hands of a photographer who knows how to use it, and process the files (a necessary skill when using ANY digital camera), they look superb. There is no other camera like it. In my opinion there is no need for you to continue to justify your decision. You have decided to stick with film, and that's great. So have I, but for different reasons. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted August 27, 2014 Share #75 Posted August 27, 2014 I cannot recall a single image on my Monochrom that had aliasing problems... And his beloved Kodak had no anti-alias filter either Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
349A Posted August 27, 2014 Share #76 Posted August 27, 2014 If this man considers that the lack of an anti-aliasing filter is an "issue", then I fear he completely misunderstands what the Monochrom is all about. I have seen lots and lots of Monochrom shots and in the hands of a photographer who knows how to use it, and process the files (a necessary skill when using ANY digital camera), they look superb. There is no other camera like it. In my opinion there is no need for you to continue to justify your decision. You have decided to stick with film, and that's great. So have I, but for different reasons. Agree 100% While I too love film, we're beyond opinion here and into troll territory. There is a place for film and the Monochrom as many of us know. Moire? Never had one sign of it on my Monochrom. Not one. Clearly he is looking to argue, whats the point? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted August 27, 2014 Share #77 Posted August 27, 2014 Another strange thing-he prefers to shoot film, yet he complains about chimping the LCD.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NikonJeff Posted August 28, 2014 Share #78 Posted August 28, 2014 Another strange thing-he prefers to shoot film, yet he complains about chimping the LCD.. I was wondering who else picked up on that... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted August 28, 2014 Share #79 Posted August 28, 2014 my experience with Leica over the Monochrom was simply horrible---and I carry the bad taste with me. ...there are some issues with the Monochrom. The rear LCD is impossible to view in bright light. There is no anti-aliasing filter, and those ultra sharp lenses will alias the image constantly......isn't it interesting that the guy (me) that brought digital monochrome to Leica for development (late 2006), is once again out of the loop. There is that bitter taste again! hee hee hee! Sour grapes? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted August 28, 2014 Share #80 Posted August 28, 2014 Note the date too, Ian. Leica was in the late stages of developing the M8, which was a desperate gamble, given the financial state of the company. Can anybody seriously suggest that they would even contemplate a niche-within a niche camera at that juncture? The possibility was always there, as Kodak always gave the option to have a Bayer or non-Bayer version of their sensor, as more sensor makers do. The decision to build the Monochrom was taken when the company could afford a possible non-success. I have a less charitable qualification of this bit of history rewriting... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.