M10 - the Image Thread

[Paul J]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The lighting is completely different in these two pictures too.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Artin]

Could be Paul like I said I may be wrong , a more controlled environment will tell the tale. See for me, the first and foremost absolute highest priority in a digital Image is dynamic range more then anything.

I looked for it when I was purchasing Drum scanners back in the day. and the first thing I look for in digital cameras.

[thighslapper]

I'm not sure you can come to any firm conclusions from handheld snapshots ...... from past personal experience trying to achieve perfect repeatability and conditions is very challenging.....  and spurious results are very common. 

[Artin]

one way to tell is the exposure in the mid tones if they look consistent then its not exposure 

 

what is odd is in the EXIF data the M240 is shot at 1/15th of second while the M10 is at 1/90th 

 

And another little detail which is even more important the M10 Image is shot at base ISO 100

While the M240 Image is shot at ISO 100 which is not optimum in fact it will have even better dynamic range at ISO 200 

Edited January 19, 2017 by Artin

[Paul J]

Nothing odd about it. The lighting is just different.

[pico]

I would be happier if postings to DNG files included images that were properly focused.

.

[Artin]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Nothing odd about it. The lighting is just different.

 

it looks like it was taken minutes apart 

the guy with the bike is still on the street 

how different could the lighting get ?

if same aperture and ISO that is a difference of 2.5 stops between 1/15th and 1/90th 

something just does not jive 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Paul J]

No conspiracy, its the lighting. Look again.

[Artin]

Paul I am not saying its conspiracy, I just know with past experience a lot of times Higher ISO performance came with the sacrifice of dynamic range. Canon was notorious for this.

 

Now you as a professional (studio) environment photographer you know that it is a huge setback if that is the case, specially when it comes to Fashion photography and the fabric detail that comes with that.

 

It may not be a big deal in street or journalism 

 

and again I may be wrong a more controlled environment test will tell the tale. 

 

I still consider the M10 a welcome addition to the M family 

 

My favourite in the film cameras was my M5  it was by far my workhorse for years. 

 

and I have a feeling the 240 is going to take that roll 

[Artin]

anyhow this is a picture thread I do not want to hijack it lets take this up some ware else 

I am sorry guys post some pics and lets celebrate any M is a great M in this world of playstation inspired cameras 

 

Cheers and enjoy Arthur

[NZDavid]

Looks like better highlight details on face in the M10 compared with M240. That may be significant.

 

Both shot in very dull light. Street scene lighting on bricks is completely different so hard to tell.

[Paul J]

Paul I am not saying its conspiracy, I just know with past experience a lot of times Higher ISO performance came with the sacrifice of dynamic range. Canon was notorious for this.

 

Now you as a professional (studio) environment photographer you know that it is a huge setback if that is the case, specially when it comes to Fashion photography and the fabric detail that comes with that.

 

It may not be a big deal in street or journalism 

 

and again I may be wrong a more controlled environment test will tell the tale. 

 

I still consider the M10 a welcome addition to the M family 

 

My favourite in the film cameras was my M5  it was by far my workhorse for years. 

 

and I have a feeling the 240 is going to take that roll 

 

 

 

It's just a difference in exposure caused by different lighting between shots.

 

Crops above the bike:

Hello guest!
Please register or sign in to view the hidden content.
Hallo Gast!
Du willst die Bilder sehen? Einfach registrieren oder anmelden!

Edited January 20, 2017 by Paul J

[waterlenz]

here is the result on this set 

M10 first set M240 second set 

You guys call it 

I was able to bring down the white shirt and get rid of the CA at its edge. However, the image is focused on the hairs on the back of his neck and not the beard or face so not able to judge resolution.

I was able to bring up the darkness around these bushes but this part of the pic is OOF possibly due to the large aperture. The image is quite sharp on things in the background.

Both these images that an M10 image is quite malleable in post using Lightroom. Thank you for posting the DNGs.

Edited January 20, 2017 by waterlenz

[Printmaker]

Somebody please shoot a Macbeth color checker or an xRite Color checker Passport under controlled light with both cameras using the same lens. Until you do, you are just pissing into the wind.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Artin]

Post some pics and enjoy we will get to Image nit picking when the dust settles 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[chris_tribble]

Some more from today.  And yes, the woman's hair color and jacket are exactly as they were in real life -- this doesn't record colors hot, the way the M240 seemed to at first.

John - thanks for posting these. Encouraging.  Now waiting to hear what's happening to the body I have on order.  

A question - have you been able to see how the M10 fares with IR contamination?  How black are the blacks of artificial fabrics?  REALLY interested to see if there's an improvement - the SL definitely won over the M240 on this count.

[microview]

Would be interesting to see the couple on the balcony (posting No 11) at larger size – the purplish jacket would be telling.

[Tobers]

Yes, apologies for the mis-focus. It definitely wasn't a controlled environment. The intention was to be able to get samples that allowed DNG manipulation particularly of the highlights and shadows, and detect any colour differences. Sharpness wasn't really a factor (fun at f/1.4 for the portraits as usual). Exposures were a few mins apart so that would account for some light changes.

 

Also the exposure settings were different. The M10 gave me 1/90th at f/5.6 with ISO100 and the M-240 gave me 1/15th with the same settings when metered on the road surface. While the images vary slightly in brightness, the big difference in shutter speed seems to suggest differing exposure calculations between the two cameras, notwithstanding needing to take the "pull100" ISO setting of the M-240 into account.

[Artin]

Tobers. How many minutes apart were the exposures?

[Artin]

I was able to bring up the darkness around these bushes but this part of the pic is OOF possibly due to the large aperture. The image is quite sharp on things in the background.

Both these images that an M10 image is quite malleable in post using Lightroom. Thank you for posting the DNGs.

I understand that the shadows can be recovered in post process , and so can the highlights, there is always some sort of exposure latitude in any sensor , specially in CMOSS sensors more then CCD. However this is no replacement for pure dynamic range.

It,s like colour negative film vs. Reversal film (colour transparency) colour negative has a much more exposure latitude while reversal film has much better dynamic range .