New Monochrom - should I bother?

[Lenshacker]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Having higher resolution makes it even more important to be able to distinguish between "shades of Grey", meaning having a 14-bit M246 is very desirable. As it is now, two pixels next to each other will likely register the same value for a subtle change in intensity- they will not be able to record the difference. They will blend in together. The resolution -number of pixels- is greater, but ability to distinguish levels of light is greatly reduced. I think this is what is going on in Erwin Puts' review of the M246.

[tookaphotoof]

Sometimes I think I'm glad I don't know anything about all this technical stuff.

I only know I liked the end results of the raw files I got to play with. As a matter of fact, I liked it very much.

Same goes for when shooting film. I like HP5plus, I like the end result I. the way I develop it, but I don't care about the technical aspects of that piece of plastic.

Coming back to the M246, anyone printed a photo yet, feeling dissatisfied with the results?

[thighslapper]

I think Leica is based firmly in real world photography.

 

I suspect they printed some 36x24 images and as they could see b*gger all difference decided on the pragmatic choice of 12 bit.

 

Frankly I cannot see any issue with the tonal gradations in my M246 images ..... or for that matter how it would adversely affect the overall image when viewed at normal distances .....

 

I will have to do some MM and M246 comparisons this weekend and see if there is anything startling that shows up.

 

To be honest the M246 DNG's look better out of camera than the old MM's do ....... less 'flat' .... and need less PP to produce nice images. 

 

Coming back to the M246, anyone printed a photo yet, feeling dissatisfied with the results? 

 

will do some this weekend ...... I am beginning to feel a bit lonely on the forum ..... I appear to be the only regular poster who seems to have one ...... no idea where al the other 498 are (someone in Germany said his was arriving last thursday).... 

[Lenshacker]

Preferred film for personal use because I know too much technical stuff with regard to digital. It was fun to work on it and get paid. I also liked doing my own demosaic routine for the M8 and M9 because I used Fortran running on a DOS computer. Same code written in the early 1980s for the first digital Infrared sensors.

[algrove]

Sometimes I am more at ease looking at an image as numbers, which is why I really like monochrome...

 

It's like the new flat screen television sets that use contrast ratio as one of the specifications. An older set with "some arcane technology" that delivered 15000:1 contrast can show more differences in tone than the new one with a less expensive, more flexible technology that has 3000:1. For every "grey level" of the newer 3000:1 set, the older one shows 5 levels. Like the box of 100 crayons vs a box of 20. Now suppose the set with 3000:1 boasted that it could show a scene that was twice as bright- that would mean it had to pack 10 grey levels as seen on the older set into 1 grey level. This is about what the M246 is doing: the dynamic range allows a scene that is twice as bright, but it only has 20% of the levels to divide it into compared with the M Monochrom.

 

I don't know what forced the Leica engineers to make this compromise, but I suspect it was like yanking 80% of their teeth out.

 

And remember what Bob the Blob says about brains, "Turns out you don't need one, they are highly over-rated." I use that line a lot.

 

- Brian

I recall Jono made a comment he was hoping Leica would be commenting on this "situation" very soon. We are patiently waiting.

[Lenshacker]

I suppose the engineer that wanted to limit use to 8GByte 2x SD cards, halt all non-associated operations while the sensor was acquiring data, and send out a signal turning off every cell phone in a 0.5km radius did not get their way to keep the 14-bit firmware. I want that version.

[BerndReini]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

 

 

I will have to do some MM and M246 comparisons this weekend and see if there is anything startling that shows up.

I really hope that no difference can be found. If there was, it would be another big blow for Leica.

[asiafish]

Here's my take. I owned many M9, M9P and Monochrom M. I own and have owned many M240 and M-P and will soon get my first of 2 Monochroms. Just because I spend money like a drunken sailor does not make me a good photographer nor writer, I know. I often get 2 cameras because after sitting in a bar waiting for that elusive image to hit me between my eyes, I can no longer change lenses very rapidly nor with steady hand.  I usually need another beer just to open up my camera bag. To top it off I have but one eye. My good eye is my right eye so I can use Leica M's. Don't ask me what would have happened if my left eye was my good eye! Is all I can say is "Cheers"!

 

Now that you know I "wear" my cameras for prestige, why go out and put clicks on them if it only reduces the resale value down the road. Plus it is so much fun when people come up to and ask what film are you using in your old cameras. I usually say Tri-X, they nod and go off probably not knowing what Tri-X is anyway. If I get a real smart ass I tell him Quad-X just to see how drunk he is and if I can get him to buy me a beer. It doesn't work very often. I must come up with a new line, I guess.

 

So I know this is a long answer to your intial question about whether you should get the M246 or the original Monochrom M. I was going to suggest the next time I am in Durham, England you can buy me a beer and I will tell you my honest opinion. What is your nearest airport, Shannon? I don't go directly into the UK any longer because when using my frequent flyer miles the UK government charges me a $250 landing fee or whatever they call it. Do you know how many beers that will buy me?

 

First, stuff on the internet is very hard to judge. To me looking at an actual print is the cat's meow. But not just any size. I would consider 13x19 smallish with 24x36 about right. That in fact comparison prints can be a tall order since the new camera is not yet available and most guys like me, after sitting the bar all afternoon, cannot afford large printing paper any longer. That means we might have squirreled away a bunch of Iford Gold Fibre Silk paper, but are loath to use it for camera comparisons least we run out of it just when that illusive image appears.

 

Second, only you can determine what you should do. Don't listen to anyone else other than what you are telling yourself.  There is only one exception to this rule. Now if you end up buying me more than one beer when we first meet I will gladly tell you my secret to this important decision.

 

Third, if you practice at PP enough you can make any good image look lousy, but if you practice even more you can perhaps make a lousy image look pretty good. I will give you some interesting input as downpayment on the first beer you will buy me when we first meet. Oh, forgot to mention I do not drink warm beer and I only drink German Hefeweizen dunkel bier. I might be in a real crappy mood when we first meet since my local beer and wine store has decided to stop carrying my favorite bier!  This is like not making CCD sensors any longer (which might corrode) and replace the entire line with CMOS sensors. How ridiculous!  Every one knows that after taking the color out of a sensor, either CCD or CMOS, you can tell the difference in the colors between the two types of black and white sensors. Get real folks.

 

Fourth, do you want better battery life, or LV, or the ability to use awesome R lenses? How about high ISO or better dynamic range? The more grain the better, no? For me, I really need the EVF due my eyesight problems, at least that's what I tell my wife. But the main reason for getting the new M246 over the old Monochrom M is simple--you can tell the wife that you must go out at night to test and perfect your high ISO skills. Heck, just show her an image once in a while and she will be happy.  For me it turns out that the best path for high ISO night time photography passes right in front of my favorite tavern. Well, since I carry 2 cameras, I often have to take a load of my feet and sit down for a beer or two.  Trouble is just when I am ready to go capturing images the moon is rising and it is too bright for both me and camera since I leave my ND filters at home so I can come back tomorrow night.  So I trudge home and once inside tell my wife I am so exhausted from walking forever, I need a beer.

 

Did I answer your question?

 

Hey, got an idea why not just meet me in Munich where my favorite bier is made. They say when a Leica returns home, it sings.  NO, I got that mixed up since when I am in Munich, I sing. Love the English Garden. I know somebody had too much beer to call that huge park in Munich the Englisher Garten. They must serve real good bier there. I'll have a radi too.

 

I am attaching some crappy stuff on the internet to make my point. You really need to see these images in print. I can arrange any image for you on 13x19 paper, signed.  Ask me how much after I quench my thirst the first time we meet. Let's see some images from you taken with your Monochrom. Cheers.

 

 

Louis Foubare: Fluidity and Unpredictability in Street Photography « The Leica Camera

 

Fist, I'm not much of a Heffe drinker, prefer a god English bitter despite being an American with no UK time whatsoever.

 

Second, I'll buy any Leica enthusiast a beer, if nothing else just to drink with someone that has good taste, or at least pretends to.

 

Third, My M-E and M Monochrom (original) are paid for, so for close-up, video or live view I'll use my D Vario or X 113, which are also both paid for.

 

Fourth, I (very slightly) prefer HP5+ to Tri-X, but depending on mood.  Both are in the bag with my M5.

 

Fifth, why oh why did all of my local stores and bars stop carrying Fullers ESB and 1845?

 

Sixth, there is no sixth.  I just ordered another beer, and then will maybe (if I'm able to walk and actually want to) go out in the dark and play with my Monochrom, which even without the extra 1.5 stops of the new model is still a pretty kickass tool in available darkness, especially with the 78-year-old Zeiss 5cm (they didn't have millimeters yet in 1937) f/1.5 Sonnar.

[jonoslack]

I really hope that no difference can be found. If there was, it would be another big blow for Leica.

If Sean Reid and especially grEGORy Simpson can't find a difference (egor expected one and really really tried) then I don't think you should be too worried

[jonoslack]

I recall Jono made a comment he was hoping Leica would be commenting on this "situation" very soon. We are patiently waiting.

Hi there Lou

they still are, not certain when though

[jonoslack]

I think Leica is based firmly in real world photography.

 

will do some this weekend ...... I am beginning to feel a bit lonely on the forum ..... I appear to be the only regular poster who seems to have one ...... no idea where al the other 498 are (someone in Germany said his was arriving last thursday).... 

Don't feel lonely. I'll try to post more regularly!  I've still got a prototype, but I'm expecting mine quite soon.

[jonoslack]

Algrove ........

 

If you set up a review subscription site like Reid Reviews I will gladly subscribe. 

 

There is very little that caters for the financially incontinent .......  or with tips on how to cover a debauched lifestyle by use of 'photography'

 

Short and pithy reviews like 'looks great ..... expensive ..... buy it !' would help a great deal with the occasional guilt feelings I have when I hand over the credit card  

I quite agree that Lou should start doing reviews. I'd certainly read them

as for the short and pithy, that's what I try for..... Isn't it working for you?

[jonoslack]

 

 

In the end, the choice between the MM1 or MM2 will be visceral for some, and rational for others.  If you are a "Right Brain" creative type like myself, I believe it will be the MM1 for you; if you are more of a "Left Brain" rational type, it will be the MM2 for you.

 

Cheers!

Hi Wilfredo

thanks for your post.

I like to think of myself more as a creative type with my photography.....as an antidote to the very rational other side to my life. But in the CCD/CMOS debate I fear that there is leakage from my left brain to my right, Unlike very real but unquantifiable differences between the 'drawing' of lenses I'm still not convinced there is a difference in 'drawing' of sensors which can be pinned on the sensor type.

But like everything else which is unquantifiable, there will never be a real answer!

[biglou]

I feel the new monochrom will be an even more niche camera than the older one.

Older one had an obvious resolution edge over the M9 and fantastic image qualities.

All reviews say the new monochrom and M240 resolve about the same.

What is especially good with the new monochrom is the ability to retain its intrinsic qualities at high iso.

High iso, a low noise shutter, this could make the day (or rather the night) of photographers that need to make bw pictures in very low ambient light, no flash, without driving attention on them.

This is appealing but not enough for me, i like color in these conditions, theater, concerts etc...

 

Other than that the old monochrom will be as good and the M240 also, with the added advantage for the former of being able to emulate bw filters in post.

 

Hence my actual feeling, i will wait for the next M Leica camera and keep M9 and monochrom that are still very satisfying and that i already have.

Hopefully the next M will have a better EVF and who knows will produce more detailed pictures than the MM1, MM2 or M240.

[Lenshacker]

 I'm still not convinced there is a difference in 'drawing' of sensors which can be pinned on the sensor type.

But like everything else which is unquantifiable, there will never be a real answer!

I suspect it's more like comparing a Sonnar formula lens with a Planar formula lens- the basic formula defines some of the drawing characteristics, but the "prescription" of the specific lens defines exact characteristics. This is akin to CCD vs CMOS. CCD's are more efficient in collecting light, CMOS adds the ability to perform on-chip signal processing (both analog and digital domain) and convert the pixels to digital before going to the camera. The specific "drawing" is still very much of the implementation of the specific sensor and it's associated off-chip processing in the camera.  

[jonoslack]

I suspect it's more like comparing a Sonnar formula lens with a Planar formula lens- the basic formula defines some of the drawing characteristics, but the "prescription" of the specific lens defines exact characteristics. This is akin to CCD vs CMOS. CCD's are more efficient in collecting light, CMOS adds the ability to perform on-chip signal processing (both analog and digital domain) and convert the pixels to digital before going to the camera. The specific "drawing" is still very much of the implementation of the specific sensor and it's associated off-chip processing in the camera.  

This is a nice analogy, but I'm still not very convinced that the technical distinctions between the sensors have a visual effect. To go back to your analogy, my feeling is that it's all in the 'prescription'. 

[jonoslack]

I feel the new monochrom will be an even more niche camera than the older one. Older one had an obvious resolution edge over the M9 and fantastic image qualities. All reviews say the new monochrom and M240 resolve about the same. 

Do they? I certainly didn't (and I missed anyone else saying it). I reckon there is nearly twice the resolution in the new MM over the 240- pretty much exactly the same as the M9 vs the MM

[thighslapper]

I'm afraid I can't get my head around the 12 bit/14 bit moans and groans.

 

The most reliable source I can find states that the human eye in perfect conditions can distinguish a tonal difference of 2% ..... equating to approx 50 grey shades ...... or 6-7 bit . The most optimistic and unverifiable figures quote a max of 500. So for a start you can't see even the difference in 12 bits, let alone 14. 

 

12 bit is over 4000 shades ....... and with a sensor of 6000x4000 pixels even if the image varied by one discrete tone per pixel it would cover almost the whole sensor......... most images would have much bigger increments between adjacent pixels, so any increased depth in bit level would be effectively lost in the actual image. 

 

Whilst I can see purists claiming that having a 14 bit image may allow more PP before discernible problems are visible it strikes me as pointless overkill...... and for that matter it is not clear to me that this resolution is reflected in the printing capabilities of my printer (3880)

 

I remain entirely unconvinced that this has any practical implications for normal photography. 

[wilfredo]

For image quality (which is what we're discussing here) compared to a print? …oh my…we live in different universes.   Like asking if I get a visceral reaction to seeing a Vermeer online as opposed to standing in front of one.  That's why I collect vintage photos from some of the greats in addition to the books….both give pleasure, but for far different reasons...only one 'sings'. Otherwise I sure could have saved a ton of money…and time.

 

Not only don't I care about screen pics for most generalized statements about IQ; I care even less based on others' images and interpretations, which depend on myriad variables.  I make my judgments by doing the work, since ultimately I'm limited by my skills, not someone else's.

 

Your left/right brain comment is subtly condescending….as if anyone who is satisfied with a print that came from a CMOS-based camera must not be capable of a visceral reaction, or else not capable of judging the difference.  I have, and have seen, some of the most stunning silver prints ever made….I think I know a gorgeous print when I see one…skin and all.

 

Jeff

I think there has been a breakdown in communication somewhere.  That's one of the risks with online chats.  Perhaps we have misunderstood each other?  However, we can agree to respectfully disagree.  I think we both agree that a print is utlimately the best judge of a fine photograph.  We can disagree on whether or not an online image will provide an adequate rendering demonstrating differences between a CMOS image, and a CCD image.  Personally, I can almost always see the difference on the screen. 

 

Sensors have different "looks," and that's not unlike film.  I have a favorite film when shooting B&W, and a favorite film when shooting color.  I see differences in the various film options, and if posted on a screen, I can these differences.  So let's agree to disagree, and call it day.  For now, I'm sticking to the "classic" CCD Monochrom Leica.  Cheers!

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!

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[biglou]

 

Do they? I certainly didn't (and I missed anyone else saying it). I reckon there is nearly twice the resolution in the new MM over the 240- pretty much exactly the same as the M9 vs the MM

 

 

 

You are a very good photographer, a good beta tester and also excellent at jokes.

Kind regards,

Joël