Jump to content

With M10 no longer need MM: Examples


Guest Nowhereman

Recommended Posts

Guest Nowhereman

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I sold my M9-P and MM before getting the M10 and then never missed not having an M-Monchrom, although I always liked than camera. In my view, the extended dynamic range of the M10 and its high -ISO performance are sufficient for what I want to do with digital B&W. One obvious point is that you can decide afterward afterward whether you want the image to be color or B&W. Moriyama Daido has said that this is one of the things he likes about digital cameras. Other people feel that having only the option of producing only a B&W image helps to concentrate the mind and one's vision in B&W. Maybe, but I haven't felt that way for a long time.

 

Below are four versions of the same image the first two in in this post and the second two in the next post.

 

1. Color version processed in LR and Viveza;

2. B&W version processed in Silver Efex and further adjusted in LR.

3. B&W version processed in LR using as a starting point the VSCO preset for L - TRI-X⁺³ -.

4. B&W version processed in LR using as a starting point the VSCO preset for L - Fuji Neopan 1600 -.

 

I like the first version the best because of the colors, particularly in the tinted mirror (left background), which make it easier to see than in the B&W version that it is a mirror. Of the B&W version, I like the Silver Efex version best because of the contrast and treatment of very bright tropical light at noon.

 

I'd be interested in seeing others post example of B&W M10 images that make them feel that they don't need an M-Monochrom.

 

Background on image

This is what Moriyama Daido calls a “no finder shot”: I held the camera in front of my chest after I set the focus and shutter speed. Because the background at the right is very bright, 3-4 stops brighter than the university student, I underexposed her by about ½ stop — that was sufficient not to blow out any highlights. This shows how well modern camera sensors can handle highlights. On the other hand, the background on the left is a tinted mirror with a somewhat wavy surface, as you can see in the reflection of the building behind and to the left of the main subject. It was shot with the M10 and the Summaron-M 1:5.6/28 lens at ISO 800 at f/5.6 and 350 sec

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!

Edited by Nowhereman
Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Nowhereman

Here is the second set of B&W pictures:   

3. B&W version processed in LR using as a starting point the VSCO preset for L - TRI-X⁺³ -.

4. B&W version processed in LR using as a starting point the VSCO preset for L - Fuji Neopan 1600 -.

 

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!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, you can do a lot with an M10 in b&w. But I’ll keep my M9 and MM1. My M9 as a back-up and my MM1 because I cannot reach that special flavor of b&w with the M10-files. The MM1 images have an enormous clarity, which cannot be reached with the M10. Besides, to attain a really satisfying result with the M10, you have to spend a lot more time in pp.

But if you choose to work with a Summaron 28, you’re not interested in clarity, so that’s consistent. The MM1 is in my view much more a project of Leica to attain, in combination with the APO Summicron 50, the look of an 8x10 inch analogue image, but then in a lightweight transportable version

Edited by otto.f
  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, you can do a lot with an M10 in b&w. But I’ll keep my M9 and MM1. My M9 as a back-up and my MM1 because I cannot reach that special flavor of b&w with the M10-files. The MM1 images have an enormous clarity, which cannot be reached with the M10. Besides, to attain a really satisfying result with the M10, you have to spend a lot more time in pp.

But if you choose to work with a Summaron 28, you’re not interested in clarity, so that’s consistent. The MM1 is in my view much more a project of Leica to attain, in combination with the APO Summicron 50, the look of an 8x10 inch analogue image, but then in a lightweight transportable version

I have to agree with otto here, there are certain look that you can’t replicate the BW images MM1 makes..

 

And you were right, I’m one of the person who feels different when I hold a BW camera only..it helps me thinking outside the box ;D

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a very widely discussed topic.  

 

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/274346-m10-black-white/

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/269427-is-m-monochrome-really-worth-if-still-own-m240/

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/277060-m10-vs-m246-no-comparision-for-bw/

 

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/275376-m10-from-type-246/

 

Amazing assertions in some of those threads....

It really comes down to personal choice. I must say however that my M246 has had very little use since I bought the M10.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have to agree with otto here, there are certain look that you can’t replicate the BW images MM1 makes..

And you were right, I’m one of the person who feels different when I hold a BW camera only..it helps me thinking outside the box ;D

Maybe I’m inside my box: I sometimes try to convince myself to put my Summilux75 on the M10 and stick with it for a while. But I can’t, it feels out of place, it just belongs on my MM1. My APO Summicron 90 belongs on my M10, I don’t even think of putting it on the MM1. I’ve got only one lens that goes perfectly on both: the Summicron 35 pre-asph.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have the M10, but just picked up a mint MM that made a trip to Leica for a new sensor and tune- up. Mostly I did this to give me the option to shoot in an all b/w mode. It remains to be seen if I notice any IQ differences, but I won't be taking the time to do any side by side tests. Both are very capable machines within an overall print workflow, which involves myriad variables.

 

I do like the use of color channels, and have stressed those benefits here, but I think pulling out the yellow filters from my film days could also be a fun change of pace.

 

I do, however, like the VF, build quality, quietness and weather sealing on the M10 compared to the MM, but the cost of the older model was quite reasonable. If I really enjoy the b/w workflow that the MM provides, I'm sure there will be an M10 Monochrom at some point to consider.

 

Jeff

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The personal preferences over the nuances of CMOS v's CCD are as valid as the nuances different lenses bring to the image.

But they are, in the end, just the personal preference of the photographer.

Everyone else will judge the image by it's content and the emotion it invokes.

 

I shoot colour and sometimes post process in B&W. Given the tools available I have no need for a dedicated MM camera.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The personal preferences over the nuances of CMOS v's CCD are as valid as the nuances different lenses bring to the image..

Nah - still not convinced - until someone can give me some evidence that there is a difference in image quality which hinges around whether the camera has a CCD or a CMOS . . Then logic doesn’t seem to provide any reason for believing there is one. (Especially for monochrome).

 

. . . On the other hand . .

I think there’s a huge difference between results from the MM1 and the MM2, and also from converted black and white from the M10 - so the discussion and arguments still have perfect validity in terms of personal preference (and sometimes objective observations).

 

I suspect that the ’lovely’ colours of the M9 are largely serendipity (and the ‘less lovely’ ones from the M240 also, largely serendipity) - I do absolutely acknowledge that people prefer the M9 colour over that of the M240 (from blind tests of identical photos, not just prejudice). The colour of the M10 on the other hand seems to me to be the result of a huge amount of work on the part of Leica (and also Adobe for their standard). Perhaps it doesn’t have the perzazz of the M9 colour - but I think it has more subtlety, without losing character.

 

As for black and white conversions .. . I still have my MM (and my M9 actually) and I do use them occasionally, but usually I’m seduced by the technical advantages of the M10, and I think the black and white conversions are good (still like Silver Efex Pro best).

 

It’ll be interesting to see what the M10 Monochrom (if there is one) has in store.

 

Best

Edited by jonoslack
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to say but there is nothing about that photo which suggests an M10 is better than an M246. Still, I fully acknowledge the fact that the M10 black and white conversions are so good (and the M240 was as well) that if you really need colour then there is no need to also buy an MM/M246. Both the M240 and M10 are adequate. I still don't think the quality of a black and white conversion is on par with the file from MM/M246.

 

I think I've seen the argument that the M246 can be likened to cameras with 50 megapixels because of lack of noise, RGB filter etc. If you could post photos of large prints with a black and white conversion of a photo from the M10 in direct comparison with an equally large print from a an M246, then I believe the M10 wouldn't be up to the standards of the MM9 or M246. For standard picture size, forum pictures, social media etc it really doesn't mean much of a difference on what you use. I bet my old Nikon D70S would be quite nice too.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I have the M10, but just picked up a mint MM that made a trip to Leica for a new sensor and tune- up. Mostly I did this to give me the option to shoot in an all b/w mode. It remains to be seen if I notice any IQ differences, but I won't be taking the time to do any side by side tests. Both are very capable machines within an overall print workflow, which involves myriad variables.

I do like the use of color channels, and have stressed those benefits here, but I think pulling out the yellow filters from my film days could also be a fun change of pace.

I do, however, like the VF, build quality, quietness and weather sealing on the M10 compared to the MM, but the cost of the older model was quite reasonable. If I really enjoy the b/w workflow that the MM provides, I'm sure there will be an M10 Monochrom at some point to consider.

Jeff

Jeff,

 

What are your thoughts on the MM compared to the old M240 now that you’ve shot the MM a bit, presumably?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeff,

 

What are your thoughts on the MM compared to the old M240 now that you’ve shot the MM a bit, presumably?

I'd probably need to shoot for another year to see how I bond with the camera, but so far no surprises. The ISO capabilities of the MM exceed that of the M240, and the experience of shooting in all b/w mode, without choice, is refreshing. The M240 was a more refined machine, with a much nicer shutter sound, better VF, etc. Both cameras, though, are fully capable IQ wise, and work well in my print workflow, which doesn't include enormous prints.

 

Mostly so far I like the mindset the MM fosters. I was beginning to get into a bit of a rut photographically, and I'm now considering some projects involving small b/w print series. Any tool that gets me off my butt to do something creative is probably a win already.

 

Jeff

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

If I only did portraiture I think I would be perfectly happy with B&W conversions from my M-240 (or an M10 at some point).  However I also love to photograph the (US) Revolutionary War era buildings located near me.  In those shots I want to show the fine detail of old masonry, pealing paint, and weathered wood grain.  My M-246 does a much better job at that due to its higher resolving power.  Resolving power my portraiture subjects would most likely not appreciate.  :D

 

So to me the answer to the question of which is better for B&W photography depends on what you intend to photograph.  

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've converted files from the M10 many times successfully as far as b+w's are concerned but I can not reproduce the beautiful tones of my MM v.1. There's a lot to be said for b&w that requires b&w film or a Monochrom, not just the mindset.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...