MM, M240, MM246 comparison images

[Jeff S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Puts' Comparison Part Two…MM vs MM246

 

http://www.imx.nl/photo/leica/camera/styled-50/

 

Jeff

[BerndReini]

 

 

Puts' Comparison Part Two…MM vs MM246

 

There you have it. Now everyone can argue whichever way they need to in order to justify their purchase.

Edited May 23, 2015 by BerndReini

[Advertisement]

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

[Jeff S]

Easy for me….my benchmark will be b/w prints from my M240 versus the MM246.  The original MM won't enter into the assessment.

 

Jeff

[BerndReini]

 

 

The original MM won't enter into the assessment.

Oh I know that Jeff, but at least for reasons that are undeniable, instead of the obscure CCD vs. CMOS 18mp vs. 24mp myth.

[erudolph]

The Erwin Puts piece is at odds with happy responses from those already shooting and printing with M246s.  Puts is convincing to a degree but I am wondering what method he used to downsize the 246 files to match size to the original Monochrom's.  The method chosen would affect the kind of test he is doing.

[jpk]

Does Puts use out-of-cam JPGs or DNGs...?

[jrp]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I think that he is an Iridient Developer man.

[BerndReini]

The Erwin Puts piece is at odds with happy responses from those already shooting and printing with M246s.  Puts is convincing to a degree but I am wondering what method he used to downsize the 246 files to match size to the original Monochrom's.  The method chosen would affect the kind of test he is doing.

There are not many users already shooting and printing with the M246 that actually make objective comparisons with the MM. 

[thighslapper]

Puts ....... 

 

this is precisely why I used real world images taken by mr. average and processed them to get the best results possible.

 

no normal photographer just takes photos of test charts, uses unsharpened images with no NR (when it helps ...... although Puts is rather vague about precisely what he has done)  and then views them at 200%.

 

one of the very obvious characteristics of the M240 files when it was released was the malleability  of the files without introducing noticeable artefacts ...... and that continues, unsurprisingly into the M246.

 

anyway, thanks to IP it looks like arguments about the merits of these two cameras is likely to get more muddled rather than less in the months to come ...... until a sufficiently large user-base reveals a definitive opinion. 

[BerndReini]

The bottom line is that it will be impossible to distinguish one from the other in prints. Buy the M246 for its tangible advantages like EVF, buffer, shutter, weather-sealing etc., or if you need ISO higher than 3200. But leave questionable arguments about resolution advantage, highlight retention, dynamic range etc. out of the decision making process and you will not be disappointed. We will never get objective answers on these latter issues because the differences between the cameras in the latter areas is so miniscule that it is purely theoretical.

[DandA]

I would agree with all you wrote except that one should choose a M246 if ISO's above 3200 are generally used. Even in large prints from ISO 6400 files, noise characterists will be close and often times some may prefer the look of the MMI images vs. MMII (at such an ISO)

 

Dave (D&A)

[algrove]

I would get the M246 for the eventuality of shooting 3200 and up down the road which I know I will do one day. I had the MM and loved it, but will be happier with the M246 due to the M240 platform it shares which I am now liking better than any other digital M I have used to date. Perhaps 24MP is just the sweet spot for me and my prints.

[DandA]

Lou having the same platform for both cameras is certainly advantagous and thats also one of the reasons I will stay with the MMI, since for image quality alone, I prefer the M9. This is especially when working in the lower ISO range.

 

I certainly don't ascribe to the notion that ISO.3200 is the upper limit of good performance for the MM1. Until the MM2 (M246) came along, many were pleased with ISO 6400 performance of the MM1 and even on occasion higher.

 

Dave (D&A)

[semi-ambivalent]

Until the...came along, many were pleased with...

And so it will always be.

 

s-a

[algrove]

Lou having the same platform for both cameras is certainly advantagous and thats also one of the reasons I will stay with the MMI, since for image quality alone, I prefer the M9. This is especially when working in the lower ISO range.

 

I certainly don't ascribe to the notion that ISO.3200 is the upper limit of good performance for the MM1. Until the MM2 (M246) came along, many were pleased with ISO 6400 performance of the MM1 and even on occasion higher.

 

Dave (D&A)

My needs could be different than most due to failing eyesight where the M240 platform with EVF keeps me going. I remember at Photokina the night Leica introduced the M240 I was shooting in VERY dark conditions with my MM just before the stage was lit up and my ISO5000 images still look good to me on my monitor.

Edited May 24, 2015 by algrove

[DandA]

Lou as you well know everyone has different needs, uses or expectations for particular cameras. The important thing is a camera does for you what you hope and expect. That goes for everyone. They all are capable of superb results.

 

Dave (D&A)

[algrove]

Dave

How true and we often forget they are simple tools for capturing our visions.

[Jeff S]

Puts Part 3….MM246 vs M240….   http://www.imx.nl/photo/leica/camera/styled-51/ 

 

Part 4 on the way, to discuss 12/14 bit, among other things.

 

Jeff

Edited May 25, 2015 by Jeff S

[Hannes Lummes]

The Erwin Puts piece is at odds with happy responses from those already shooting and printing with M246s.  Puts is convincing to a degree but I am wondering what method he used to downsize the 246 files to match size to the original Monochrom's.  The method chosen would affect the kind of test he is doing.

His test part two is obviously failed. The amount of moire and the apparent pixel size in MM2 images tells that something has gone badly wrong in prosessing.

Edited May 25, 2015 by Hannes Lummes

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[thighslapper]

Wilfredo wanted some human photos ..... comparisons will have to wait till I collar my father next weekend ..... but here are a couple of my stepdaughter (who failed as a model so she became a Dermatologist    .....)

 

Guess the iso ........ M246 + 50/2..... this is a crop from quite deep shade ....

 

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!