shirubadanieru Posted February 16, 2020 Share #1 Posted February 16, 2020 Advertisement (gone after registration) It’s been a week since I got the M10M, and to be honest I’m not so sure if it’s worth keeping it over the M9M. I feel I have to spend way more time with M10M files to make them look how I like (I mostly shoot street photography and prefer results closer to film). With the M9M I hardly had to do any editing, besides playing with the black / white sliders and add grain, but with the M10M I need to play around with the levels and so forth, and even the grain does not look as good as the M9M...maybe it’s because I just started using the M10M and have overly positive memories with the M9M that might not correspond to the reality ahah...but if anyone here has both cameras (or used both) I’d love to get your thoughts on this topic. 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 16, 2020 Posted February 16, 2020 Hi shirubadanieru, Take a look here M9M VS M10M. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jaapv Posted February 16, 2020 Share #2 Posted February 16, 2020 It always takes some time and effort to get your workflow tweaked just so with a new camera. A bit like getting comfortable in new shoes. Give it a few weeks. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pegelli Posted February 16, 2020 Share #3 Posted February 16, 2020 I think there's a lot of truth in what Jaap said, especially since the switch from the M9M to M10M involves a switch from a CCD sensor to a CMOS sensor. I have always found that finding a good starting point on CMOS is more difficult than for a CCD, allthough that experience is only for colour sensors with a Bayer array. But once you master the CMOS and the way it responds you can get almost identical results 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nowhereman Posted February 16, 2020 Share #4 Posted February 16, 2020 Daniel, I think that you need to consider whether the M10M can give you something that you can't get from the M9M. One thing is that, in my view, the handling aspects of the M10 cameras are better than that the M9 range. But can you benefit from the higher resolution and the higher ISO clean-file capability of the M10, or are there negative factors, for you, to these aspects such as the ones you mention? I think you should give it a few weeks. I've had the M9-P and the M9M, which I've replaced with the M10. At first, I was frustrated with the M10 but now I wouldn't go back to either. At this stage, my feeling is that I prefer to have the possibility of using the color sliders in Lightroom when converting from color to B&W, rather than the inflexibility of using glass filters on the M10M. I also feel that the M10M is a very specialized camera; that is. more so than the M9M; and I would be concerned that the specialization might be more appropriate for other types of photography than street shooting. I am not into street 100%, but I do like what in film days was called the "35 mm aesthetic"; and I have a feeling I can produce that more easily with the M10 and the Ricoh GR III. Indeed, I look forward to knowing what you conclude and hope you'll report on your experience here.________________________Frog Leaping photobook Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
shirubadanieru Posted February 16, 2020 Author Share #5 Posted February 16, 2020 (edited) Thank you all for your comments; indeed the M10 is easier / more reliable to use for sure, and the ISO capabilities are simply amazing to a point I don't even need to care what ISO I set the camera to. Beyond the film look, to me the MM1 also looked amazing with old lenses (which is all I have, the summicron 35mm 8e, 50mm collapsible, 50 lux v1), yet the M10M does not seem to bring out the same 'magical' output from these lens...it's been only a week though and the weather hasn't been the best either so I don't want to make any early conclusions on that yet. But yeah, how I'm feeling now is that with the MM1 every shot coming out of that camera with old lenses (even 1930 lenses like the Hektor 5cm f2.5) was like ''WOW! These lenses shine on this sensor!!!'' whereas the shots with M10M and 35mm 8e (I haven't used the other two yet as they are being CLAed now) have yet to blow me away 😕 Like you all said, though I do need to give it a bit more time but just wondering what are the thoughts / experience of other people in the forum who own both cameras. Edited February 16, 2020 by shirubadanieru 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Abrahams Posted February 16, 2020 Share #6 Posted February 16, 2020 My M9M has been locked away for the past three weeks as I accustom myself to new workflows and other experimenting with the M10M. The M10M is a different camera however not so different from its predecessors. I attempted to re create some of the blurred people shots on the M10M recently and found it quite possible if I use the ND filter. Switching between 160 and 400 ISO enabled me to either shoot at 1/15 sec or 1/250 sec depending whether I wanted the motion or not. The workflow differences between the M9M and M10M are frustrating but I have let go of the idea to emulate the same M9M look with the M10M. It is all about creating a new ideas and ways to shoot and process with one's same ideas. There are some real benefits that come from the larger sensor and increased dynamic range. Some of the limitations of the M9M and processing those files to the limits were in fact part of the creative potentials and structures for some of my past work. The M10 unleashes some of those M9M limitations and presents a whole new set of creative potentials which I am currently still exploring. I won't let go of the M9M and I know I will pull it out soon, once I am satisfied I have made my transitions to then new camera. Below is M10M Self Portrait at 400 ISO using 35 Summicron ASPH 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! 9 Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/306500-m9m-vs-m10m/?do=findComment&comment=3913729'>More sharing options...
a.noctilux Posted February 16, 2020 Share #7 Posted February 16, 2020 Advertisement (gone after registration) Daniel, maybe "lack of grain" in the new Monochrom ? I see somewhere that you add "grain" in your post-prod. of Monochrom. Give the new Monochrom some time to please you. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jager Posted February 16, 2020 Share #8 Posted February 16, 2020 I confess to being perplexed at the notion that post-processing from the M10M is harder or more difficult than the M9M (I own both cameras). Different, yes. Difficult, no. If you're shooting raw, both cameras will require some amount of PP. In both cases, for most images, you are literal seconds from your starting DNG representation to something very good and very close to your end goal. I also think the notion that lens signature changes with the recording media is largely a myth. Lenses certainly have unique ways of drawing, of course. But with film we happily changed up emulsions without worrying that we were somehow changing how our glass behaved. And in my experience digital sensors don't either. Both our optics and our sensor affect how our final image is rendered, for sure... but those two qualities are unique and distinct from each other. Absolutely, the M9M generates a different look from the M10M (or M246). If "grain" is your thing, the earlier camera might be best. 4 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SrMi Posted February 16, 2020 Share #9 Posted February 16, 2020 The initial 'look' of the raw files also depends on the post-processing software that you use. Are you using the latest Adobe software? It's possible to apply your favorite initial look through import presets. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted February 16, 2020 Share #10 Posted February 16, 2020 Might help to work diligently on a few nice nice pics that represent your preferred style(s) until your satisfied. Then create some presets/defaults to better mimic those outcomes, at least as a starting point. In particular, based on other posts, it seems the tone curve is an important place to start (along with grain for you). There’s not much that effective PP can’t do these days with considered choices and techniques. For me, it’s the print that counts, so other variables (ink, paper, lighting conditions, etc) also play an important role. Time will tell. The MM1 satisfies my needs, but I wish it were packaged in the much more refined and robust M10 platform. Jeff 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Abrahams Posted February 16, 2020 Share #11 Posted February 16, 2020 The grain is there however one needs to select around 270 grain value in Slvefx and crop into the image to really see it. It is a very fine grain and probably most desirable when printing large. One could always create a texture mask taken from the M9M however one might also just continue using the M9M. Not all my work is grainy movement but that particular project and style will be left for the majority of, to the M9M to complete. 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! 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/306500-m9m-vs-m10m/?do=findComment&comment=3914251'>More sharing options...
shirubadanieru Posted February 22, 2020 Author Share #12 Posted February 22, 2020 (edited) Reporting back after using the camera a bit more: 1) I am definitely happier with the output than I was in the beginning, and feel my editing has also gotten better 2) I feel I like the tonality more when shooting with a yellow filter; I also tried a orange filter but the effect was a bit too strong for my taste 3) My vintage lens from the 1950s definitely are much sharper wide open than with any other digital Leica; this is something I'm still getting used to and it has its pros/cons 4) ISO / Usability wise, the M10M is simply much better than the M9M, and a joy to use In the end, even though I feel some nostalgia for the M9M I will keep the M10M as my only digital (hopefully long term) camera. Thanks everyone for sharing your thoughts! Much appreciated : ) Edited February 22, 2020 by shirubadanieru 5 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotografr Posted February 22, 2020 Share #13 Posted February 22, 2020 I've spent a lot of time looking through the M9M images posted here and comparing them to the M10M images. The most obvious difference is that the M10M images seem to lack the "pop" that has traditionally been part of the appeal of b&w photography. I think the reason for this is that the M10M produces images that have considerably more detail in both the highlight and shadow areas, so there isn't that sharp jump to clean white and deep black that comes with M9M photos. It's possible to produce the same look with M10M images, but doing so often requires clipping both highlight and shadow areas in post processing, or, as has been mentioned previously, using a yellow or orange filter to increase the contrast. Most of us aren't used to seeing so much detail in the light and dark areas of our images, or having such a rich tonal scale represented. It may take time to get used to this but ultimately I feel the M10M will change how we view and appreciate b&w photography. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted February 22, 2020 Share #14 Posted February 22, 2020 (edited) Nothing new, just requires an appropriate adjustment to the tone curve (and other PP controls) for the desired rendering. Apparently Adobe has tweaked the curve in the latest profile, but this is only one of myriad possible interpretations. There is no need whatsoever to clip highlights or shadows unless desired. The fact that people are relying on online pics for conclusions about inherent camera performance is also remarkable. Maybe someone can start a new thread comparing the M10M to the Bayerless Phase 150 MP true medium format camera, and we can scrutinize tiny online pics... based on unknown PP actions...on our uncalibrated laptops. Does anyone make prints? Jeff Edited February 22, 2020 by Jeff S 4 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotografr Posted February 22, 2020 Share #15 Posted February 22, 2020 27 minutes ago, Jeff S said: Maybe someone can start a new thread comparing the M10M to the Bayerless Phase 150 MP true medium format camera, and we can scrutinize tiny online pics... based on unknown PP actions...on our uncalibrated laptops. Does anyone make prints? Jeff Of course some of us make prints, but they are rather difficult to post on a web forum. 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted February 22, 2020 Share #16 Posted February 22, 2020 Just now, fotografr said: Of course some of us make prints, but they are rather difficult to post on a web forum. Exactly. Jeff Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoffreyg Posted February 22, 2020 Share #17 Posted February 22, 2020 Haven’t used the M10M except for z as boy in the store - and it is quite lovely to use. Was very impressed. Also downloaded two night time raw files, shot at 6400 and 50,000 iso. Processed in C1. Was totally satisfied w the lower iso shot, a bit less do with the other. Need to print them both. Of course, there was very little light (shot of a bicycle by the harbor at night), and the file size is nice and large. This helped calm the urge to upgrade. It’s clearly a better camera but it was nice to see some limitation. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotografr Posted February 22, 2020 Share #18 Posted February 22, 2020 2 hours ago, Jeff S said: Exactly. Jeff I could be completely wrong in this assumption, but I suspect a very high percentage of people on this and other photography forums display their images almost exclusively on web pages. If that's correct, it makes sense to me that discussions about the characteristics of images posted here stay within that context. If that's unacceptable, you might consider starting a thread for discussion of the characteristics of photos printed from M10M files versus those from other Monochrom cameras. Brent 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted February 22, 2020 Share #19 Posted February 22, 2020 3 hours ago, fotografr said: I could be completely wrong in this assumption, but I suspect a very high percentage of people on this and other photography forums display their images almost exclusively on web pages. If that's correct, it makes sense to me that discussions about the characteristics of images posted here stay within that context.to If that's unacceptable, you might consider starting a thread for discussion of the characteristics of photos printed from M10M files versus those from other Monochrom cameras. Brent And I'm just as free to comment on your conclusions, with which I find fault. Jeff Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted February 22, 2020 Share #20 Posted February 22, 2020 8 minutes ago, Jeff S said: And I'm just as free to comment on your conclusions, with which I find fault. Jeff Why “fault”? Different preferences, different approaches, disagreement is fine. Fault is a little pejorative, don’t you think? Even if you know your approach is right ... 1 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.