MM, M240, MM246 comparison images

[skimmel]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Third - for my work I need two matched bodies, I need colour with the option of B&W

 

Best

 

Just curious, do you now shoot with 2 M240s?  Do you ever use one to "visualize" in B&W while the other is visualized in color?

[thighslapper]

here are links to the original DNG's

 

remember in the posts I equalised exposure and did the best I could with sharpening and NR. M240's were a straight 'convert to B&W' in LR. 

 

m246

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/8936627/m246%20320.DNG

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/8936627/m246%203200.DNG

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/8936627/m246%206400.DNG

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/8936627/m246%2012500.DNG

 

mm

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/8936627/mm%20320.DNG

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/8936627/mm%203200.DNG

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/8936627/mm%206400.DNG

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/8936627/mm%2010000.DNG

 

m240

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/8936627/m240%20320.DNG

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/8936627/m240%203200.DNG

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/8936627/m240%206400.DNG

 

I have a terribly slow internet connection

It may take several hours to upload these to dropbox ...... so don't start posting complaining that the links don't work ..... be patient ....

[Advertisement]

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

[IkarusJohn]

...... you can almost pick a speed, pick an aperture and shoot, regardless of the conditions and know that all the images are going to be eminently usable, irrespective of the iso. 

 

That is what I have done with the original Monochrom (Henri) for some time.

 

Great posts, Thighslapper - thank you for taking the time.  I wasn't in the market for the MM(246) (but I wasn't in the market for the M Edition 60 either  ).  At all ISOs, based on the posted JPEGs, I'm very happy with Henri and there is little to tell the images apart (when not cropped) - those who go looking for differences, with side by side crops, will find them.  But looking at a print on the wall?

 

I'll stick with Henri ...

Edited May 19, 2015 by IkarusJohn

[DandA]

Thighslapper, the links don't work .

 

Not only a superb round of testing of these three cameras, but a simple and well thought out real world approach that can be applied universally. Sure we all have different methodologies for adjusting and evaluating files, but no one approach can address all of them. Well done and we all owe you a great deal of thanks, regardless of the various conclusions we all might have regarding these fine cameras and the images they produce.

 

Oh, why does it show myself as a new member with only three postings? Been a member of these forums for quite a few years with a good number of postings. Moderators, can this be corrected in addition to deleting my empty post an directly above this one please.

 

Dave (D&A)

Edited May 20, 2015 by DandA

[Likaleica]

Unbelievable effort on your part, TS.  You deserve the L-Camera-Forum Medal.  Thank you for saving me countless thousands of dollars, at least until GAS overtakes good sense.  The 246 is phenomenal at higher ISO, but I'm a low ISO, low aperture kind of guy.  I am sure someday I will succumb to the temptation but for now I will be content with my 240 M-P.

Edited May 20, 2015 by Likaleica

[IkarusJohn]

Unbelievable effort on your part, TS.  You deserve the L-Camera-Forum Medal.  Thank you for saving me countless thousands of dollars, at least until GAS overtakes good sense.  The 246 is phenomenal at higher ISO, but I'm a low ISO, low aperture kind of guy.  I am sure someday I will succumb to the temptation but for now I will be content with my 240 M-P.

 

I missed the bit which justifies the comment in bold - the original Monochrom images at ISO 10,000 don't look any worse than the M246 images, even cropped.  Am I missing something?

[Likaleica]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Was referring to 240 vs 246

[Leicakillen]

here are links to the original DNG's

 

I have a terribly slow internet connection

It may take several hours to upload these to dropbox ...... so don't start posting complaining that the links don't work ..... be patient ....

Downloading worked without any problem at all, also fast - I second the motion of giving you the Forum Gold Medal!! What an effort! Thanks, thanks!!!

Best regards

/Anders

[IkarusJohn]

Was referring to 240 vs 246

 

Ah, I see.  Sorry, I misunderstood.

[Berlinman]

Thighslapper, Thank You ! Helped me a lot. I thought about adding a M246 to my M240, but after playing with these your DNGs and my own little test (only in the Leica Store) I think, I will stay with the M240. The M246-files are a little bit better until 3200 and much better from 6400 on, but not as much, that it is (for me) worth a new camera and fiddling with color filters etc.

Final test will be printing these files. Had anyone printed and compared ?

So, may be, I go for a Nocti or an upgrade to an 50APO from my 50lux instead ...

(One of the best threads in my 2 years here !)

[jonoslack]

Thank You for all the work you've done - excellent reference, and I know only too well how much work it is.

 

On a side note, comparing the files side by side is one thing . . . . . but what keeps hitting me is when I process a batch of 246 files - they're just lovely, simple as that. 

[profus]

I missed the bit which justifies the comment in bold - the original Monochrom images at ISO 10,000 don't look any worse than the M246 images, even cropped.  Am I missing something?

 

I don't know....Looking at DNG files - M246 @ iso 12500 is much cleaner than MM @ iso 10000 ?

Am I missing something?

[profus]

here are links to the original DNG's

 

You're the man! Thumbs up!

[thighslapper]

I don't know....Looking at DNG files - M246 @ iso 12500 is much cleaner than MM @ iso 10000 ?

Am I missing something?

 

no ..... I noticed it too (and others have mentioned it above) .... and it also responds much better to NR. 

 

that's the whole point of doing proper comparisons ..... sometimes the results are a bit surprising. 

[IkarusJohn]

Clearly I am ...

[profus]

Well, I have now played a bit with those DNG files, though I took a bit different approach to them. I didn't try to make files from those 3 cameras to be as similar as possible - I just processed the files to my liking - as I would normally do...Didn't apply any NR either...

 

As I see it - up to ISO 3200 we're actually splitting hairs - all 3 cameras are great! Was very ( positively! ) surprised by M240's performance. As an owner of M-P I was very glad to see that!
I almost felt, that most differences was more due to my PP than anything else. But if I had to choose a winner - that would be MM ( original monochrome ) because of its incredible resolution and details...

 

ISO 6400 and up - there is no doubt. M246 is clear winner if clean image with least noise is the target. But again - even @ iso 6400 I was really happy with M240's performance ( color version of image was acceptable too, but not that good )

 

I can post images & crops the way I processed them, if somebody should be interested.

 

My conclusion ( analyzing only those images, which of course is not sufficient ) would be:

 

-- if you are a low light shooter and high ISO >6400 is important to you - M246 is a great step forward. Buy it!

-- If you mainly shoot at ISO <3200 I see no reason for upgrade from MM ( out of image quality perspective - in every other way M246 is better camera than MM as M240 is compared to M9 ). 
   Actually not even from M240, which - I have to say again - performed really good...

 

Your findings of course might be different...

 

Best regards / Alex

[IkarusJohn]

Well, I have now played a bit with those DNG files, though I took a bit different approach to them. I didn't try to make files from those 3 cameras to be as similar as possible - I just processed the files to my liking - as I would normally do...Didn't apply any NR either...

 

... ISO 6400 and up - there is no doubt. M246 is clear winner if clean image with least noise is the target. But again - even @ iso 6400 I was really happy with M240's performance ( color version of image was acceptable too, but not that good )

 

 

Hi Alex,

 

I'm surprised you're that unequivocal, but then you're seeing things that I'm not.

 

Taking the images on their own, without side by side cropping, I'm happy with the original Monochrom at any ISO, and to be honest, cropping side by side as Thighslapper has done, I don't see a "clear winner".  I think we're at a point of dancing on the head of a pin, and I certainly can't think of an image where the differences you're seeing are significant (in terms of image quality).  That said, I'm not in the market for an M(246) and I won't be converting images from my M Edition 60 to B&W - the Monochrom does everything for me (and more).  I have a 1 metre (long side) landscape taken with my Monochrom and printed by WhiteWall above my dining table, and it is stunning (though it wasn't taken at ISO 10,000  )

 

Cheers

John

Edited May 21, 2015 by IkarusJohn

[DandA]

Alex I played around with ISO 6400 filed from both Monochromes and although the files from new one have less noise and smoother, a case could be made for some to prefer the look and character of files from the original monochrom...whereby the additional noise and other characteristic worked in its favor. Did you at all also get that impression. Its of course lighting and subject deoendent too.

 

Dave (D&A)

[BerndReini]

One day I took a good picture with my M9 and a bad picture with my MM. Should I send it to Wetzlar?    I think we are down to the nitty gritty, and statements like on another website, which I shall not name, that sound something like "the clearly superior dynamic range and detail of X vs. Y" are pure science-fiction.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[profus]

I'm surprised you're that unequivocal, but then you're seeing things that I'm not.

Taking the images on their own, without side by side cropping, I'm happy with the original Monochrom at any ISO, and to be honest, cropping side by side as Thighslapper has done, I don't see a "clear winner".  I think we're at a point of dancing on the head of a pin, and I certainly can't think of an image where the differences you're seeing are significant (in terms of image quality). 

 

 

Processing > ISO 6000 DNG images with no NR applied I really can't help but see a difference between new M246 and MM - in terms of clearly less noise...if that is significant difference, well that is very subjective...

It might be for me, but not for you. Or vice versa... And if that makes images any better - that is a whole different story...

That is what I see, but I respect if your impression is a bit different. By the way - cropping thighslapper has done was on the files after he applied noise reduction - I haven't done any.

 

Alex I played around with ISO 6400 filed from both Monochromes and although the files from new one have less noise and smoother, a case could be made for some to prefer the look and character of files from the original monochrom...whereby the additional noise and other characteristic worked in its favor. Did you at all also get that impression. Its of course lighting and subject deoendent too.

 

Yes Dave, I actually agree with you - some people would definitely prefer the look or as you say character of files from original MM. I also said that in case of  >ISO 6000 M246 would be a clear winner "...if clean image with least noise is the target".

 

One day I took a good picture with my M9 and a bad picture with my MM. Should I send it to Wetzlar?    I think we are down to the nitty gritty, and statements like on another website, which I shall not name, that sound something like "the clearly superior dynamic range and detail of X vs. Y" are pure science-fiction.

 

Again - I agree. While I haven't had a chance to play with new M246 yet and only can form my opinion based on few DNG files I found on the net - I really cannot see "the clearly superior DR and detail" he mentions in his "1st look" text... 

Edited May 21, 2015 by profus