Jump to content

... my little M10M review on macfilos.com ...


fototom

Recommended Posts

Thank you for this.

However, this image bothers me

 

M10_M10Mono_200crop.jpg

 

I can see the noise issue with the MP on the left – but you describe the M 10 M image on the right as being "softer" whereas to me it seems to be out of focus.

It's the discussions around the forum which refer to the M 10 M being more difficult focus which trouble me

Edited by marcg
Link to post
Share on other sites

vor 14 Stunden schrieb marcg:

Thank you for this.

However, this image bothers me

 

 

I can see the noise issue with the MP on the left – but you describe the M 10 M image on the right as being "softer" whereas to me it seems to be out of focus.

It's the discussions around the forum which refer to the M 10 M being more difficult focus which trouble me

... you´re right, focus was not perfect in this crop on the right. But with "softer" I don´t mean the sharpness. I took this area because it shows the softness of the tonal values well. The monochrome has a slight advantage in terms of the gray value gradation and fineness of the tonal values, which can be seen very well in the chrome of this the oil tank.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks. Yes, I understand that high dynamic range will lead to a more gentle or softer transition from tone to tone. If one wants a more contrasty image then obviously that can be dealt with in post.
What concerns me though is the difficulty of focusing. The discussions I have seen on this forum suggested to me that a high pixel count requires a very high quality of visual acuity in order to be sure of nailing it – whereas with a lower pixel count – such as an M9M, it's not so critical.

 

In the body of your image – on the chromium tank, the softness or out of focus(ness) is not an issue – but at the edges of the tank and also the edges of the chromium downpipes, it certainly seemed to be an issue of focus and not softness.

 

Of course for most prints – A3 and maybe even a bit larger, one wouldn't notice the lack of sharpness – but on the other hand, if one wants to use the pixels either by printing extremely large image or else cropping to detail and printing that out, then sharpness becomes an issue

Edited by marcg
Link to post
Share on other sites

Correct me if I’m wrong, but no firm scientific conclusions can be made unless you have properly calibrated/profiled each image with a grayscale target... Do you own a color checker?  If so, the correct procedure would be:

1. Use a tripod.

2. Place target in the frame making sure there are no direct reflections off the target into the camera.

3. Focus on something static using live view.

4. Start with camera with highest base ISO and set to base ISO.

5. Take multiple exposures with different shutter values and pick the one that has the highest brightness but no blown highlights (a few speckles is ok).  The whitest patch on the target should be around 250.

6. Do the same for camera 2 keeping the lens, aperture, focus and shutter speed the same as camera 1 however this time adjust ISO values to get around 250 on the white patch.

7. Either manually or using a software utility, adjust the profile/curve of each image so that the tone curve matches the target values.

8. Having done that for both the images, create 100% crops of region of interest.  If camera resolution is different, adjust DPI of one of the images to achieve same display size for both.

9. View images on calibrated monitor and make conclusions about Camera 1 versus Camera 2 in terms of noise, sharpness, detail, tonality etc...

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, paulsydaus said:

Correct me if I’m wrong, but no firm scientific conclusions can be made unless you have properly calibrated/profiled each image with a grayscale target... Do you own a color checker?  If so, the correct procedure would be:

1. Use a tripod.

2. Place target in the frame making sure there are no direct reflections off the target into the camera.

3. Focus on something static using live view.

4. Start with camera with highest base ISO and set to base ISO.

5. Take multiple exposures with different shutter values and pick the one that has the highest brightness but no blown highlights (a few speckles is ok).  The whitest patch on the target should be around 250.

6. Do the same for camera 2 keeping the lens, aperture, focus and shutter speed the same as camera 1 however this time adjust ISO values to get around 250 on the white patch.

7. Either manually or using a software utility, adjust the profile/curve of each image so that the tone curve matches the target values.

8. Having done that for both the images, create 100% crops of region of interest.  If camera resolution is different, adjust DPI of one of the images to achieve same display size for both.

9. View images on calibrated monitor and make conclusions about Camera 1 versus Camera 2 in terms of noise, sharpness, detail, tonality etc...

Well, first of all, I don't know how you can make 'scientific conclusions' just by "Viewing images on a calibrated monitor?" there would need to be a system of measuring 'noise, sharpness, detail, tonality' empirically (not just looking). 

More to the point though is to compare the images the way you're planning to use them (which presumably is not by changing the resolution or the profile/curve for each image). 

I acknowledge the problem in results being consistent for different viewers, but I think it's insurmountable as you cannot control the viewer's environment.

On the other hand, simple out of camera comparisons (without messing with the results) are likely to have the same relationship to each other on different equipment (even if they don't look quite the same). 

I like Tom's report and I think it's useful and valid.

All the best

Jono

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 1/28/2020 at 5:49 PM, fototom said:

Hi everybody,

if you like, check out my little review as one of the lucky beta testers of the Leica M10 Monochrom on macfilos.com : https://www.macfilos.com/…/leica-m10-monochrom-compared-wi…/

Thanks to Mike Evans for professional translation ...

Best regards

Tom

Thanks a lot - loved this write up and this weekend I'm takin my M10-M out to get familiar with it. 

  • Like 1
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...