M10 Monochrom ??

[Kwesi]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Love my MM1,but if a M10Mono comes out I will likely be a buyer. I like R lenses so the Visoflex would continue to help, the R-M adapter would also work on it and batteries would be common between my M10.

 

My biggest disappointment with the M246 (I eventually sold it and went back to the MM1) was no DNG histogram. Still today when the MM1 goes from jpeg histogram to DNG histogram I am truly amazed at the different look the histogram gives.  Yes, I am hoping for that feature inan M10Mono.

 

I think for you that would be a good approach. You would also be able to share accessories between bodies.

For me having both M-P240 and M 246, I think its best to skip a generation and look at the M11/M11M generation when it arrives. My gut tells me Leica will have to introduce at least 36mp, starting with the SL sensor to stay relevant. That sensor would then make its way somewhat intact, into the M11.

[Paulus]

I happened to notice today, that there is a sale in some shops in Germany: The M240 the M-P 240 and the Monochrom 246 are sold for price reductions which seems to be the action if a camera is going out of production. 

 

My guess would be that if the Monochrom goes out of production, that the M10 Monochrom will arrive. So,.....Photokina.....

[a.noctilux]

I'd love Leica put in the future M10 Monochrom the original Monochrom CCD sensor.

But as technologies go ahead, this may not happen.

 

My dream would be MM-D : in M10 body as base with CCD sensor and no LCD screen.

I don't need high ISO or LV so CCD sensor is fine.

 

I fear that MM-D would be niche in niche market, so my dream would stay dream.

 

As positive things, I'm happy with what I use now with all that "dream" combined in several Ms.

[4X5B&W]

Personally.....an improved CCD MM1 whether it be the size (as in even more compact than say a M4) or feature driven etc, would be a wonderful update to a "Classic" B&W image making device !!

 

Love my MM1......such film like performance from a compact digital camera, thanks Leica !!

Edited February 16, 2018 by 4X5B&W

[james.liam]

 

I think for you that would be a good approach. You would also be able to share accessories between bodies.

For me having both M-P240 and M 246, I think its best to skip a generation and look at the M11/M11M generation when it arrives. My gut tells me Leica will have to introduce at least 36mp, starting with the SL sensor to stay relevant. That sensor would then make its way somewhat intact, into the M11.

 

 

The introduction of the 36MP Nikon D800 caused all sorts of tumult with long-time Nikkor lens owners. The higher resolution resulted in many long-respected Nikkors rendered inadequate for the sensor, while the small pixel pitch demanded improved technique and very high shutter speeds to avoid exaggerated motion artifact. At this point, if you need MF quality/size files, a Fujifilm GFX 50S or Hasselblad X1D are the better choices and not far off in cost from Leica 35mm.

 

 

I'd love Leica put in the future M10 Monochrom the original Monochrom CCD sensor.

But as technologies go ahead, this may not happen.

 

My dream would be MM-D : in M10 body as base with CCD sensor and no LCD screen.

I don't need high ISO or LV so CCD sensor is fine.

 

 

Sounds like you'd be more than content with an M9M. It remains a superb workhorse. If they're sticking to 24MP, I can't imagine that much will change beyond high ISO; they'll rate it at something like 100,000 but a realistic limit of 25,000 for clean capture. Which in of itself would be extraordinary. 

 

I happened to notice today, that there is a sale in some shops in Germany: The M240 the M-P 240 and the Monochrom 246 are sold for price reductions which seems to be the action if a camera is going out of production. 

 

In the US, I've seen untouched M240 demo models for as low as $3300, something around 2660 euros and £2350. Quite a bargain. 

Perhaps they might alternate even/odd numbered M's with and without video, formalizing the M240/262 dichotomy.

Here's another thought: an MP-type body from the start on the odd-numbered models. And the MD version only on the evens.

Edited February 20, 2018 by james.liam

[Belle123]

The introduction of the 36MP Nikon D800 caused all sorts of tumult with long-time Nikkor lens owners. The higher resolution resulted in many long-respected Nikkors rendered inadequate for the sensor, while the small pixel pitch demanded improved technique and very high shutter speeds to avoid exaggerated motion artifact. At this point, if you need MF quality/size files, a Fujifilm GFX 50S or Hasselblad X1D are the better choices and not far off in cost from Leica 35mm.

 

 

As someone with an X1d and the 246, I agree on the X1d being better choice for IQ except it is a much slower camera. I have done tests between the two and the X1d edges out the 246, but not by much in resolution when doing b/w conversion. But the X1d plus native lenses is still a significant cost difference. Given that the X1d is superior, I have tried to talk myself into getting rid of my 246. But because the M is still more convenient and quick, I keep both. I will also mention the tones out of the X1d may be more pleasing to those that prefer the MM1. Would imagine the GFX would be as good for b/w.

[Luke_Miller]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The introduction of the 36MP Nikon D800 caused all sorts of tumult with long-time Nikkor lens owners. The higher resolution resulted in many long-respected Nikkors rendered inadequate for the sensor, while the small pixel pitch demanded improved technique and very high shutter speeds to avoid exaggerated motion artifact. 

 

A point blithely overlooked by those panting for a high resolution M body.  The consensus seems to be that high resolution is "a free lunch" that Leica is arbitrarily denying us.

Edited February 20, 2018 by Luke_Miller

[pico]

I cannot imagine an M10 monochrome because I have over fifty years experience as a B&W film photographer and have lived through and adapted through films  evolution.

 

I hope people understand that a true monochrome sensor can never be like film except for a couple primitive emulsions. If being film-like is not your objective, then very well and welcome to the other world of true monochrome. The profound difference is that modern films modulate color rendering.

 

Again, if that is what you like, then enjoy but understand what you are doing, or not doing.

.

Edited February 21, 2018 by pico

[jaapv]

You are missing something, Pico. No, a monochrome digital is not like film -why should it?-, but it is not like a converted colour image either.

[pico]

You are missing something, Pico. No, a monochrome digital is not like film -why should it?-, but it is not like a converted colour image either.

 

What, exactly, am I missing?

[jaapv]

That people do not use a Monochrom because they want to imitate film. They take digital monochrome phototographs. If I want a photograph to be like film I use my M6 and ummm.... film.

[jdlaing]

There is a greater tonal depth and variation with a monochrome sensor and greater detail than an image that has the color removed.

[pico]

That people do not use a Monochrom because they want to imitate film. They take digital monochrome phototographs. If I want a photograph to be like film I use my M6 and ummm.... film.

 

The point was made about an M10 monochrome and by inference any monochrome sensor. Using a monochrome sensor becomes an entirely different paradigm, for better or worse.

 

Let's not sidetrack, please.

Edited February 21, 2018 by pico

[pico]

There is a greater tonal depth and variation with a monochrome sensor and greater detail than an image that has the color removed.

 

Luminescence, brightness is color bound. It cannot be rendered in monochrome. 

[jdlaing]

Luminescence, brightness is color bound. It cannot be rendered in monochrome.

 

I didn’t say anything about brightness.

[Paulus]

Luminescence, brightness is color bound. It cannot be rendered in monochrome. 

 

When I asked Ralph Gibson during the festivities of the " Monochrom Ralph Gibson " if he still would be using a film M on occasion, he answered me in an angry manner: " What do you think I am supposed to say now? That I still use it? I won't . "

 

I kept wondering about his reaction...He seems, at least in his books, convinced that we have a good replacement for the b&w film....

[Jager]

Ralph Gibson does, indeed, like his Monochrom.

 

(Picture made, appropriately, with a Monochrom...)

 

[duoenboge]

imho before we´ll see a new Monochrom, Leica will launch a M10-P.  It would be the logic of M9 and M. An "professional" version with sapphire glass and again with a fat screw on the forehead instead of the logo  

Maybe we get a revolution and the camera will offer a professional feature like an electr. level.

I don´t expect a new  Monochrom in 2018.

[MarkP]

One area that some users were requesting for a long time - long exposure time, has it been addressed with new M10?

 

Unfortunately no. This and the lack of virtual horizon in the M10 are my only complaints about what is an otherwise fabulous camera.

 

I also still have my Monochrom v1 and have had no interest in upgrading it.

Edited February 21, 2018 by MarkP

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[LichtUndDunkelheit]

The introduction of the 36MP Nikon D800 caused all sorts of tumult with long-time Nikkor lens owners. The higher resolution resulted in many long-respected Nikkors rendered inadequate for the sensor, while the small pixel pitch demanded improved technique and very high shutter speeds to avoid exaggerated motion artifact. At this point, if you need MF quality/size files, a Fujifilm GFX 50S or Hasselblad X1D are the better choices and not far off in cost from Leica 35mm.

IMHO that was mostly an argument to make you buy new lenses.

 

But the total resolution of a system is always determined by both lens and sensor. No lens is so perfect that you get 100% of the resolution of the sensor, no sensor is so high resolution that you get 100% of the resolution of the lens. Thus the only thing that changed is that now the lens is more often the limiting factor. However you still get more resolution from using a higher resolution sensor than you would have gotten from using a lower resolution one.

 

And resolutions of about 50 Megapixel on small format are not an archievement of the digital age; this was archieveable with low ISO film already. In fact some microfilms reached resolutions of the equivalent of Gigapixels on small format; these however wouldnt be used for regular photography.

 

And the fact that it was an argument to make you buy new lenses was showcased by the list Nikon provided what lenses you're supposed to buy for the new sensors. It was all modern lenses with highest profit rates. The AF 55mm f2.8 micro is according to Ken Rockwell the sharpest lens Nikon ever produced, yet it doesnt appear on this list. Not even the successor AF 60mm f2.8 micro, which after all is still current production, appears on this list. Only the most profitable, newest generation, the AF-S 60mm f2.8 micro, is officially recommented.

 

 

And as it has already been pointed out, larger sensors come with advantages to image quality and, yes, resolution, but they dont offer fast operation. Though that might change in near future (3-5 years ?), at least for the still relatively small 44x33mm sensors. Especially if organic sensors with lossless global shutters will be a reality.