M10-P or M10R

[Guest Nowhereman]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

4 hours ago, Steven said:

Is there a profile that I can buy that will make my M10R files looks like my M10P files ? 

Probably not, but Cobalt-Image has a range of digital camera emulations on this page, including the CCD camera emulations. The "CCD Fever" emulations include the following:

Fuji S5 PRO jpg
Leica M8 jpg
Leica M9 JPG
Leica M9 JPG b&w std
Leica M9 JPG b&w high
Leica M9 DNG
Pentax 645D jpg

I haven't tried the CCD Fever emulation package, only the Cobalt Film emulation about which I wrote in the link to the LUF thread in my post #565 above.
_______________________________________
Frog Leaping photobook and Instagram

[jdlaing]

3 minutes ago, Artin said:

I find it fascinating when people talk about the M9 colour and the performance of the CCD sensors. I went through pages of M9 images on the forum and all I saw blown out highlights and black blobs in the shadows with nothing but unrealistic acrylic colour in about 70% of the images.

 Leica has finally come back to where it belongs with the M10R  and the Sl2... in the world of true commercial professional Photography these 2 bodies can hold their own . Now we finally have the means to let the lenses do what they really can. 

I see some blown highlights, if not really close to them, in the image above.

[tom0511]

Am 5.10.2021 um 17:23 schrieb Steven:

I don't mean to throw a bomb in here for no purpose, but after one year of using the M10R, I think that I am going to sell it and downgrade to the M10P again. As much as I want to love it, I can't. I feel like I'm having diner with a supermodel that has no conversation, and I miss my chubby girlfriend. 

so what you don't like about m10r? For me it took a little time but now I really like the r, specially the color.

[jdlaing]

1 minute ago, Artin said:

Sorry none what you see is just on your screen I look at these on a 32 Isod monitor in my office trust me when I tell you the dynamic range on the M10R is great .. and over exposing your images by about 1 to 1.5 stops this will give great shadow detail and the highlight recovery will give you very good images with very nice colour 

I’m looking at it on a high end screen as well. Still dangerously close to blown in some spots. Looks a little overexposed. 

[Jeff S]

3 hours ago, Artin said:

Steven forget profiles learn how to colour correct every image as needed, the best colour profile is in between your ears and your eyes. This is how its done in the commercial world of advertising and publishing. Trust me I have spend millions in the past with Sitex, Hildelberg, Davici, Crossfield , Fuji. these were all Colour correction systems and retouch stations and no matter what there is no replacement for experience and the eye of the operator. 

Not mutually exclusive.  I start with a profile, but always edit my pics/prints to taste. But I agree with 'bioware' vs software comment.

Jeff

[SrMi]

3 hours ago, Artin said:

Steven forget profiles learn how to colour correct every image as needed, the best colour profile is in between your ears and your eyes. This is how its done in the commercial world of advertising and publishing. Trust me I have spend millions in the past with Sitex, Hildelberg, Davici, Crossfield , Fuji. these were all Colour correction systems and retouch stations and no matter what there is no replacement for experience and the eye of the operator. 

There is always a profile applied when importing an image. Maybe it is best to start with a linear profile and tune it from there?

[elmars]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor 8 Stunden schrieb Artin:

I find it fascinating when people talk about the M9 colour and the performance of the CCD sensors. I went through pages of M9 images on the forum and all I saw blown out highlights and black blobs in the shadows with nothing but unrealistic acrylic colour in about 70% of the images.

 Leica has finally come back to where it belongs with the M10R  and the Sl2... in the world of true commercial professional Photography these 2 bodies can hold their own . Now we finally have the means to let the lenses do what they really can. 

Very true!

[Guest Nowhereman]

On 10/5/2021 at 6:28 PM, Steven said:

There was this thread about aesthetics of 24mp vs 40mp...The sensor of the M10R is just too good for me, too detailed, and it makes it look very digital to my eyes...

Yes, that is what I feel as well. Years ago with film, people on various Leica forums typically used to say that, if you wanted to print larger than 11x14 inches, you should shoot medium format. However, I always preferred the "35 mm aesthetic", even for 150x100cm prints (60 x 40 inches). Still do — and that is one of the reasons I've had no interest in the M10-R. 

Since Covid, the little that I have shot has been with the Ricoh GR III, whose color files require less processing, and none, or little, of the excessive under-exposure that I often need for the M10. Also, the SOOC presets ("Positive Film" for color and "High-Contrast B&W") are good: these can be adjusted and tuned to  what you want (and kept as "recipes"), which makes it practical to use mainly the JPGs — and, of course, you always have the DNG "just in case" you want to do more drastic post  processing.

The GR III has a 28mm EFOV and there is a 21mm wide-conversion lens that I like. Now, Ricoh has come out with the GR IIIx which is identical the GR III, but has a 40mm EFOV lens. I'll be getting this new camera, but am considering selling my M10 because the two Ricohs will be enough for what I need; and traveling with the M10 and a brace of M-lenses on my annual moves between the US and Paris and Bangkok/Chiang Mai is just too cumbersome. I'll probably also sell my M3 and M6 and my M-lenses...
_______________________________________
Frog Leaping photobook and Instagram

[KFo]

33 minutes ago, Nowhereman said:

Yes, that is what I feel as well. Years ago with film, people on various Leica forums typically used to say that, if you wanted to print larger than 11x14 inches, you should shoot medium format. However, I always preferred the "35 mm aesthetic", even for 150x100cm prints (60 x 40 inches). Still do — and that is one of the reasons I've had no interest in the M10-R. 

Since Covid, the little that I have shot has been with the Ricoh GR III, whose color files require less processing, and none, or little, of the excessive under-exposure that I often need for the M10. Also, the SOOC presets ("Positive Film" for color and "High-Contrast B&W") are good: these can be adjusted and tuned to  what you want (and kept as "recipes"), which makes it practical to use mainly the JPGs — and, of course, you always have the DNG "just in case" you want to do more drastic post  processing.

The GR III has a 28mm EFOV and there is a 21mm wide-conversion lens that I like. Now, Ricoh has come out with the GR IIIx which is identical the GR III, but has a 40mm EFOV lens. I'll be getting this new camera, but am considering selling my M10 because the two Ricohs will be enough for what I need; and traveling with the M10 and a brace of M-lenses on my annual moves between the US and Paris and Bangkok/Chiang Mai is just too cumbersome. I'll probably also sell my M3 and M6 and my M-lenses...
_______________________________________
Frog Leaping photobook and Instagram

Funny you mention the GR cameras.  I have been a big fan/user (I like the GRII - built in flash) of them as well.  Every time there is a weight sensitive mission (hiking for example) the Ricoh wins.  I’ve also noticed that I really like the DNG files and the JPG from the Ricoh and much of my better work is with the Ricoh.  I’m not selling the Leica’s yet, but it’s on my mind as well.

[Jeff S]

8 hours ago, Steven said:

Never have spent a dime on profiles, never will. I know how to edit colours. 

 

Sure you have… every time you’ve bought a camera… or a computer/operating system…or monitor… or editing/conversion software…, or (future) printer or printing paper, etc.  The whole color management chain is open to profiling and editing opportunities at every stage.  I question how you can fully control the editing of colors if you just had to ask what a color profile was.  BTW,  I never said you could get anything out of any camera.

Jeff

[Jeff S]

30 minutes ago, Steven said:

I suppose I do everything manually each time? of course, there is always space for progress. I don't think profiles and pressets are the answer, though... 

The profiles are there, built in or by default at each stage, whether you like it or not.  You either accept as is or modify. I assume you at least calibrate your screen, with your own desired settings (brightness, contrast ratio, black/white point, etc) rather than leave at manufacturer default settings. If so, you’ve profiled your screen using calibration software/hardware.  Profiling a camera with a color chart tool (or making/buying a preset), is no different; merely tweaks the color output to a desired starting point.  
 

I still manually edit every pic I make and print, but that doesn’t mean I need to start with the default camera/software settings that someone else cooked up. Making a camera profile takes minutes, can be done once, and doesn’t preclude further edits.  Regardless, one can’t ultimately control color output without some basic understanding and use of color management from device to device, from camera to final display, and steps between. Basic stuff in the digital workflow.

Jeff

Edited October 7, 2021 by Jeff S

[Jeff S]

38 minutes ago, Steven said:

You assume wrong again ! You're too geeky, Jeff. I have the latest Mac. Don't they make the best colours out there ? I don't know if its calibrated perfectly; but at least I know that what I see is what half of the planet will see too ! 

Good thing you don’t print; you’d waste lots of time and money on paper and ink. 
 

I far prefer Eizo or NEC to stock Apple screens for editing and viewing photos.  But if you really think others viewing your pics online, even on the same brand screen, are seeing exactly what you see, good luck with that fantasy.

Much of the stuff I do, or gear I buy, is to avoid the need for geekiness, which is definitely not my strength.  But then you also think I lack a sense of humor.

 

 

Jeff

Edited October 7, 2021 by Jeff S

[SrMi]

2 hours ago, Steven said:

I suppose I do everything manually each time? of course, there is always space for progress. I don't think profiles and pressets are the answer, though... 

What software are you using to post-process? I assume you rely on whatever profile the software applies for you. With LrC, it depends on your settings which profile will be applied by default. Adobe also may change the default profile as they upgrade the software.

Increasingly, I am starting with a linear profile. This may be overkill for many, but I find files easier to modify that way. Especially the highlights benefit when using linear profile.

Edited October 7, 2021 by SrMi

[NigelG]

.

Edited October 7, 2021 by NigelG

[Jeff S]

The profiling/color management process I describe is for the user’s benefit, not for other online viewers.  The LUF picture display quality already presents challenges, even before screen differences (including size), brightness/contrast settings, etc.  Even room lighting can change the viewing experience.  TV retailers have figured out many of the tricks, only to have customers wonder why their sets don’t look the same at home.

Jeff

[aristotle]

This is all a very interesting window on how different folks approach things.  From what I infer, the folks who are preferring the M10-P seem to value out-of-the-camera results (or prefer to minimize fiddling), and also happen to like the look of the P over the R straight out.  The people who are finding it difficult to see how anybody could prefer the P to the R (price not withstanding) seem to have workflows that are more involved, and treat the camera output as a starting point.  I happen to fall into the latter camp, but I tend not to process a huge volume of photos, and to me, it's not complete until I physically print....so who am I to say what's right for somebody else putting out a ton of stuff on the web?

I do happen to believe that the output of the P and the R can be made to look indistinguishable for any given subject, sized to the same resolution.  Or at least my 262 and my R outputs can be made to, and I gotta believe that the P is no farther apart straight out of the camera.  Or more to the point, either camera can be made to produce the final result that most anybody is looking for, though it might take more effort for a given camera than some are willing to make.

For me personally, and this is only after a week of using my 262 and R side by side, the difference in ISO performance is a non factor for my shooting.  And I find myself scratching my head at all of the talk about recovering "blown" highlights on the R.  There is a difference in how the two cameras meter and provide exposure feedback after the fact (on screen and via the histogram) but my brain calibrated that out after the first day.  But blown is blown.  It may be the case that what looks blown on the R's screen or via historgram isn't actually "blown", but you can't actually recover from an A/D that is truly saturated.  And although the controlled test results that I've read indicate that dynamic range performance of the R is better, in practice, I don't notice a real-world difference. 

Having said all of that, to me, the option to crop into the photo when no other choice presents itself, combined with the relatively small price difference, makes the R a better deal than the P.  I happen to futz with raw files of any photo that I'm working on, so out of the camera performance isn't relevant.  And even if it were, I doubt that I'd find the P "look" preferable to the R based on the web content that I see.

[Steve Ash]

Am 5.10.2021 um 23:23 schrieb Steven:

I don't mean to throw a bomb in here for no purpose, but after one year of using the M10R, I think that I am going to sell it and downgrade to the M10P again. As much as I want to love it, I can't. I feel like I'm having diner with a supermodel that has no conversation, and I miss my chubby girlfriend. 

For my better understanding - what do you mean with having a conversation...🙃

[Jeff S]

16 minutes ago, Steve Ash said:

For my better understanding - what do you mean with having a conversation...🙃

 

in·ter·course

/ˈin(t)ərˌkôrs/

noun

1. communication or dealings between individuals or groups.

    

    

    

[Guest]

21 hours ago, Nowhereman said:

Yes, that is what I feel as well. Years ago with film, people on various Leica forums typically used to say that, if you wanted to print larger than 11x14 inches, you should shoot medium format. However, I always preferred the "35 mm aesthetic", even for 150x100cm prints (60 x 40 inches). Still do — and that is one of the reasons I've had no interest in the M10-R. 

Since Covid, the little that I have shot has been with the Ricoh GR III, whose color files require less processing, and none, or little, of the excessive under-exposure that I often need for the M10. Also, the SOOC presets ("Positive Film" for color and "High-Contrast B&W") are good: these can be adjusted and tuned to  what you want (and kept as "recipes"), which makes it practical to use mainly the JPGs — and, of course, you always have the DNG "just in case" you want to do more drastic post  processing.

The GR III has a 28mm EFOV and there is a 21mm wide-conversion lens that I like. Now, Ricoh has come out with the GR IIIx which is identical the GR III, but has a 40mm EFOV lens. I'll be getting this new camera, but am considering selling my M10 because the two Ricohs will be enough for what I need; and traveling with the M10 and a brace of M-lenses on my annual moves between the US and Paris and Bangkok/Chiang Mai is just too cumbersome. I'll probably also sell my M3 and M6 and my M-lenses...
_______________________________________
Frog Leaping photobook and Instagram

Interesting Mitch.........Interesting that you are considering stepping away from the M's and going even smaller, more compact, one that's perhaps more amenable to travel..............and yes I get that. Even an M kit can get too bulky at times. My "go-to" camera for this kind of thing for the past couple of years has been a Panasonic Lumix GX-80, it's the same sensor size as the Ricoh's, ( I think ? ), but the real advantage for me is it's EVF, ( ok a pretty mediocre EVF for sure but nice to have alongside the option of shooting with the LCD ), as I dislike LCD shooting like as with a 'phone camera........There's also the advantage, for me, that it takes interchangeable MFT lenses so I can use those that I already have for my GH4 kit. I've the 12-32 lens pretty much "bolted on" to the GX-80, but I also like the 14mm fixed FL lens too for it's compactness. 

Also there's the question of why would you want to carry a camera these days, even one as compact as the Ricoh, when 'phone cameras are so "pocketable" and are getting so damn good? As most people carry a 'phone anyway, ( as "Luddite" I mostly do not, but that's another story ), why carry a compact camera too? If you want to carry a compact camera wouldn't it be a better thing to at least have one like the GX-80 that at least has more physical options to offer than cameras like the Ricoh or come to that, a 'phone?........All personal choices of course, must not dismiss that we all have different needs and approaches.

Edited October 8, 2021 by petermullett
added

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Guest]

25 minutes ago, Steven said:

I can answer that one. Because my Ricoh GR3's IQ is far far above my the images produced by my iPhone 13 Pro. No debate here. 

Good to know Steven, and I've no doubt that it's IQ is much better, of course it would be............But you would be much more demanding of the quality of the images you make than the majority of people who would be quite content I believe with their 'phone's output. Since it came on the scene the "phone has pretty much killed off the compact camera market except thankfully for people like yourself, Mitch and others that want the higher quality that cameras like the Ricoh provides.............and good for you for demanding that and providing a niche for manufacturers like Ricoh and others.

Edited October 8, 2021 by petermullett
addition