Jono Slack: Leica M10 Monochrom Field Report

[jonoslack]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

10 hours ago, lamefrog said:

Thanks for the report .  I quickly stopped using my 1st generation MM and went back to b&w film because I couldn't adequately control the highlights, especially in contrasty situations.  Did you find that the M10 Monochrom performed differently in this regard? 

 

Yes, Certainly

It's much less prone to blown highlights than either of it's predecessors - of course, white is white (and holds no information) so it's wise to underexpose a little in contrasty conditions, but I've found this camera to behave really well.

 

[jonoslack]

7 hours ago, m9photo said:

@jonoslack Pardon the rookie question, so how's the difference of files between converting color from M10 to B&W vs M10 Monochrom? does it take a lot of to achieve same tonality?

Hi there

don't apologise! it's a great question. 

The advantage of converting an M10 file is that you can control the colour channels (I particularly like that with our big Norfolk skies). So there is and advantage for the M10 there. on the other hand the resolution and dynamic range is certainly much improved on the Monochrom. 

My feeling is that if you sometimes like to shoot in colour, then it really isn't a fantastic idea to go for the Monochrom, but if you always convert to black and white, then it's a bit of a no-brainer.

All the best

[Jeff S]

A Monochrom camera can also benefit from color filters in front of the lens when shooting, as in b/w film days, but this provides much less flexibility than the use of one or more color channel adjustments in post.  

Jeff

[Mark II]

10 hours ago, jonoslack said:

HI Mark

for a horrible moment I thought you were talking about my snaps in the previous post (glad you weren't).

My feeling is that the battery life hasn't changed significantly - I guess that logically it should be worse than the M10, but it doesn't feel like that. 

best

Jono

Yes, I was referring to the photography blog samples. Your photographs are usually excellent, and probably do more to sell the cameras than Leica’s marketing! It would update be nice if you could perhaps post some DNGs, as there do not seem to be any meaningful examples online at the moment...

Encouraging to hear about the battery life too.

[frithjof.b]

10 hours ago, jonoslack said:

Hi there

The advantage of converting an M10 file is that you can control the colour channels (I particularly like that with our big Norfolk skies). So there is and advantage for the M10 there. on the other hand the resolution and dynamic range is certainly much improved on the Monochrom. 

My feeling is that if you sometimes like to shoot in colour, then it really isn't a fantastic idea to go for the Monochrom, but if you always convert to black and white, then it's a bit of a no-brainer.

I think it is not necessarily  a no-brainer. With color sensor, I do not need to use the old color filters in particular different lenses have different filter threads. In my film days I only shot B&W and always where annoyed with have to carry many different orange and red filters.

Furthermore, for whom is the M10 intended to be used? Looking at the sample images from Leica, they are addressing the avid street photographer and urban traveler, who likes to shoot hand held. Non IBIS, no AF with a rangefinder focusing hand held and 41MP? Does not make any sense to me, since I bet 60-80% of all shots the focal point is not where it suppose to be. Using the M6 film strategy of stopping down to 5.6 or 8 with a preselected focal range gives to a relatively large DOF and good focal zone. However, on a 41 MP sensor with high resolution the DOF when checked on the monitor is much smaller. And, if you operator a  35mm camera like that whats the advantage over an smaller sensor camera? If you buy a 35mm sensor camera you are interested in low light fast lenses with high ISO performance.

Do you really make use of the 41MP? How many times do you print a 90x60 poster?  A 5k monitor needs 20MP, a 20x30cm print 6MP.  People think, that more MP gives them better images. No more time going out to learn and practice to shoot. If rangefinder, I would stick to a color M. However, my eyes got worse over the years so I am happy with a AF Leica. I love to shoot with the Leica CL in B&W since the EVF shows immediate the correct image.  A big plus over a Leica M rangefinder unless you only shoot with the additional EVF.

For me, a Leica M10 with a boosted 24MP sensor with super ISO performance would have made sense form a photographic POV. But that does not appeal to the target market which are still impressed by the MP number on the box. 

 

just my 2ct

       Frithjof

 

[UliWer]

vor 3 Minuten schrieb frithjof.b:

However, on a 41 MP sensor with high resolution the DOF when checked on the monitor is much smaller.

Can you give any explanation for this assumption?

 

[scott kirkpatrick]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It depends on how you define the DOF.  If you want the distance behind or in front of the image plane at which a sharp point has become blurred to the size of a pixel, smaller pixels require smaller distances to no longer discriminate sharply.  That means less DOF for the 100% pixel-peeper.  But if everything is viewed as a full-frame A4 print at a normal distance, the DOF does not depend on pixel size.  And since everyone's definition of a finished picture differs, there is a wide range of opinions on this subject.

[UliWer]

I think it depends on how much you enlarge your photo. If you enlarge a photo with 24 MP or 41MP to the same format there will be no difference of DOF. The assumption that you might loose DOF is only justified if you assume that you use stronger enlargements with more MP - which of course is a fair point since the main reason for having more MP is the ability to make bigger prints.

[jaapv]

 

 

Yes and no - at larger magnification (of both high and low resolution images) the definition of the details will be more precise on the high-resolution view, making DOF appear more pronounced.  After all, DOF is an optical illusion created on the (in)ability of our eyes to resolve detail. Thus things like amount of detail and contrast will affect DOF.

 

10 minutes ago, UliWer said:

I think it depends on how much you enlarge your photo. If you enlarge a photo with 24 MP or 41MP to the same format there will be no difference of DOF.

 

[UliWer]

Yes, you‘ll see more „unsharp“ details and accordingly less DOF on a larger print only if you keep the same viewing distance. If you step back from the gorgeous results of lots of MP the DOF increases.

[geoffreyg]

One of the benefits of the extra Mp is the ability to crop and still have plenty left. This allows for more use out of a single lens, similar to what Leica does with the Q2. There a single 28mm lens is on a high res sensor with enough Mp to give reasonably sized files, even if cropped for a 35mm or even a 50mm field of view. Soon the M10M, one can “get” more use out of a single lens, and not have to change so much. 

[FrozenInTime]

14 minutes ago, geoffreyg said:

One of the benefits of the extra Mp is the ability to crop and still have plenty left. This allows for more use out of a single lens, similar to what Leica does with the Q2. There a single 28mm lens is on a high res sensor with enough Mp to give reasonably sized files, even if cropped for a 35mm or even a 50mm field of view. Soon the M10M, one can “get” more use out of a single lens, and not have to change so much. 

I think that's why all the press/launch cameras show a 35 Summilux, which is not the sharpest lens at the edge of frame, but the center holds up well and hence works well for anthropological subjects. cf. The M9M highlighted the 50mm APO Summicron. ( one for the CCD evangelists :  can 18Mp CCD with 50 APO really have more fine contrast than 40Mp CMOS ? )

I also like the idea of using the 28 Summicron , which holds well across the frame and cropping as per a shift lens holding architectural features square. 

[snooper]

DOF does not start and end at precise points before and after the focus plan. If you are focussed at let's say 10m, there is not a point at 9m where everything will be OOF and a point at 9,01m where everything will be in focus. It's rather looking like a gaussian curve with a point from where it's acceptable, before and beyond the focus point. Having said that, one might have a different definition of acceptability... 

In theory, there is only one plan of focus and everything outside is acceptably (or not) seen as focused.. But I would be glad to have a demonstration of the contrary 🙂

[FrozenInTime]

21 minutes ago, snooper said:

DOF does not start and end at precise points before and after the focus plan. If you are focussed at let's say 10m, there is not a point at 9m where everything will be OOF and a point at 9,01m where everything will be in focus. It's rather looking like a gaussian curve with a point from where it's acceptable, before and beyond the focus point. Having said that, one might have a different definition of acceptability... 

In theory, there is only one plan of focus and everything outside is acceptably (or not) seen as focused.. But I would be glad to have a demonstration of the contrary 🙂

And this is where lens symmetry and other design choices make a departure from the ideal gaussian spread - to one with skew and kurtosis,  differentiating the drawing out of the blur i.e. defining the quality of the bokeh.

[shirubadanieru]

I read reidreviews on the M10M in which he states there are no concerns regarding focus accuracy / blur, or lens resolution with the M10M 41MP sensor. I wonder why so many people here are expressing concerns around that when no reviewer who has actually used the camera states this as being an issue or concern. 

I’m pretty used to shooting a 35mm lens at 1/15 or 1/30 and never had any issues with the M10 or any other Leica cameras; if that’d be an issue with the M10M it would be counterintuitive and defeat the purpose of a rangefinder over an SLR (ie ability to shoot at slow shutter speeds without camera shake). Would love to hear more on this from people in this thread that have actually used the camera

[elmars]

You are right. Please read here too (last section):

 

[AceVentura1986]

14 hours ago, Jeff S said:

A Monochrom camera can also benefit from color filters in front of the lens when shooting, as in b/w film days, but this provides much less flexibility than the use of one or more color channel adjustments in post.  

Jeff

In my experience, adjustments to the color channel provide options not available in the Monochrom but do have certain limitations. For example, darkening a sky in Lightroom can result in separation of blue from neighboring colors. I’m working off memory here, but I believe cyan is included in the color sliders. So, darkening the blue pixels might cause a noticeable separation of tone from adjacent cyan pixels. This can result in posterization of the sky. I have experienced this in both my ME and my Canon 6D. Choosing a red filter for my M9M will avoid this problem completely while also uniformly darkening the sky. This does, of course, add the cost of acquiring the filters, the complexity of carrying them and remembering to change them when necessary as well as the slight degradation of quality that comes with placing a sheet of glass in front of the lens. For me, I’ve found that I prefer to work with my M9M and either an orange or red filter, depending on the circumstance. 

As with all things in photography compromises and trade offs are the norm. 

I do suspect, however, that for someone accustomed to shooting with filters the new M10M will be a phenomenal camera for fine art landscapes. For a working landscape artist who prints large, BW images and is ok with using filters should find this camera to be something like a holy grail. 

For me, however, I’ll keep my M9M until it becomes functionally obsolete. YMMV. 

Edited January 19, 2020 by AceVentura1986

[Jeff S]

5 minutes ago, AceVentura1986 said:

For me, however, I’ll keep my M9M until it becomes functionally obsolete. YMMV. 

I have no plans to sell my MM1, nor am I on any M10M list.  But I am waiting for an SL2 to complement the MM and my M10 for different shooting requirements. It will take me quite a while to learn and to incorporate one new system into my process; no need to add more, especially when print quality hasn’t been an issue. 

Jeff

 

[nicci78]

We should wait for the rumoured M10-R in order to compare between 40.9MP black & white only vs 40.9MP colour. 

There is a huge gap between 41MP M10 Monochrom and 24MP M10-P. The B&W one is equivalent to a whopping 82MP vs only 24MP in colour. 

A 41MP M10-R should compared more favourably. Do we really need 82MP equivalent pixels ? 

One positive, is that you can settle with a Summilux-M 1.4/28mm asph + APO-Summicron-M 2/75mm asph. and cover every classical M focal lengths.

With the 28mm, you can play with the frame selector to preview 28 ; 35 or 50mm crop.

With the 75mm, you will preview 75 ; 90 or 135mm crop through the different frame available. 

It is quite crazy to be able to have a digital zoom à la Q2 with an M camera. 

 

By the way, just use colour filtre with Monochrom. Orange one is so gorgeous. No need for post processing.

 

 

Edited January 19, 2020 by nicci78

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[SrMi]

3 hours ago, AceVentura1986 said:

In my experience, adjustments to the color channel provide options not available in the Monochrom but do have certain limitations. For example, darkening a sky in Lightroom can result in separation of blue from neighboring colors. I’m working off memory here, but I believe cyan is included in the color sliders. So, darkening the blue pixels might cause a noticeable separation of tone from adjacent cyan pixels. This can result in posterization of the sky. I have experienced this in both my ME and my Canon 6D. Choosing a red filter for my M9M will avoid this problem completely while also uniformly darkening the sky. This does, of course, add the cost of acquiring the filters, the complexity of carrying them and remembering to change them when necessary as well as the slight degradation of quality that comes with placing a sheet of glass in front of the lens. For me, I’ve found that I prefer to work with my M9M and either an orange or red filter, depending on the circumstance. 

As with all things in photography compromises and trade offs are the norm. 

I do suspect, however, that for someone accustomed to shooting with filters the new M10M will be a phenomenal camera for fine art landscapes. For a working landscape artist who prints large, BW images and is ok with using filters should find this camera to be something like a holy grail. 

For me, however, I’ll keep my M9M until it becomes functionally obsolete. YMMV. 

I was always thinking that color filter's main disadvantage is loss of light, e.g., red filter is typically 2-stops. Good that M10M has excellent high ISO results.