From M8 to M6

[Guest stnami]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Where' Vic: ... must have missed this thread.

[jhild]

I don´t comment the M8 - M6 comparison, but how can you test a M6 shutter using b&w

neg film?

I believe a shutter can only be tested with coloured slide film where you can see the results

on a light table and don´t have to believe a lab or printing machine.

 

Jo

[Mark Antony]

I don´t comment the M8 - M6 comparison, but how can you test a M6 shutter using b&w

neg film?

I believe a shutter can only be tested with coloured slide film where you can see the results

on a light table and don´t have to believe a lab or printing machine.

 

Jo

 

That's pretty easy, you look at the negs an a light box.

Negative evaluation is an acquired skill, but after a while you can judge how to print, both paper grade wise and exposure wise by just looking at the negs.

We used to hang a white fluffy towel over a line, meter off the towel and then call that zone V you then expose 5 stops either side of the metered value.

develop your film as normal, then contact print so that the 4 stops over is nearly white and the 5 stops over is pure white (zone X).

 

So yes I can look at B&W negs and see, but then I've been a professional handprinter for many years.

[frc]

See it as a cyberneg.

 

Scan and check the histogram;-)

[budrichard]

LOOK at your negatives with a magnifier and compare to what the scanned image looks like. Only way to tell what is going on!-Dick

[Michael-IIIf]

but I'm definitely in, I gonna buy this M6...

 

Christophe,

 

I will happily exchange my mint M6TTL for your M8

 

Seriously, the price you quote isn't bad. I was looking at some M6s yesterday here in London and they ranged from GBP £699 to £999. Say EUR €1000 to €1500.

 

I know where you are coming from on all this. There is something different about film. The arguments over which is "better" have raged on the internet for years and there will never be a simple answer. They are different and if you like the look and feel of one over the other then that is the one for you.

 

Just be warned: scanning is time-consuming and painfully boring. Film is cheap, home developing is easy (and great fun) but scanning is one of the most tedious activities yet invented. However with most of the world abandoning film there has never been a better time to buy a bargain used scanner on eBay.

 

Good luck with your adventure.

 

Michael

[Guest stnami]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

..... your older out of date computer is great for scanning, scan and do other stuff on your current evil one!!!!!!

[peterv]

Where' Vic: ... must have missed this thread.

 

LOL

 

Vic are you perhaps on a long assignment working with an M8?

 

Or are you scanning your summer holliday pics?

 

C'mon let us know what you think...

 

Cheers,

 

Peter

[Joop van Heijgen]

Hi Joop,

Thanks for your reply even if that kind of statement won't help me at all.

I began photography 20 years ago with Exacta bodies and Angénnieux Lenses and was more often in the dark room of my (architecture) school than in the class room...

 

What I'm expecting from acknowledged people here is more :

 

- Is these shots seem to be (technically) good ? Is this M6 seems OK, its cell accurate, the RF well adjusted, etc... ;

- Is the scans seems to be fair enough for general purpose and what extra quality could I expect with a best scanner except from this mid-resolution (18 Mb) ?

- Is the "fringing" I see on the shot taken with the CV12 seems normal, abnormal or due to scanning quality ?

- Is the shot taken with the Summilux seems as sharp as I can expect from such an extraordinary fast lens (the strange lady is taken wide open of course) ;

- Etc...

 

I did this roll (38 shots) very quickly (one hour) for test purpose only even if I tried to make "real condition" photos that is : street, difficult subject (people I don't know), available light and back light, etc... instead of very easy well illuminated bunches of flowers...

 

You get it Joop ?

 

'I began photography 20 years ago with Exacta bodies'

 

I am afraid that your photos still have the quality of your Exacta bodies....

 

With these photos you cannot really prove the quality of film in contrast with digital photography!

[peterv]

This solution (dev + scan for 20€) is quite attractive but I'm a bit disapointed with the quality and I think this is more in that aspect that I was expecting too much (for the money) rather than what a Leica M can provide.

Cheers

 

Hi Christophe,

 

I just went the same route; first an M8, and now an MP...

 

I can very well understand you wanting to shoot film again.

 

Congratulations on your M6!

 

As for scanning: Here's my film/scan workflow...

 

- Have the films developed only.

- Batch-scan my rolls with the V750 PRO in a resolution good enough to judge the photo's.

- Don't worry too much about colour correction.

- Negatives I really like and want to print for customers, I just have scanned by a pro lab.

 

the difference between the V750 PRO and the Nikon scanners is, I think, not as interesting as the difference between Epson/Nikon and professional Imacon/Heidelberg scanners.

 

The money and time I save batch scanning my rolls of film on the V750 PRO, is well spent on the pro-lab scans when I really need the quality.

 

BTW the scanning quality of the V750PRO is quite good, and one roll of film doesn't take a whole lot of time.

[ron110n]

I just finished scanning 2 rolls of 6x6. Not too bad on 35mm, but imagine how much scan it will take for a media that's 5 to 6 times bigger.

 

My question to myself is why am I carzy to scan 35mm films and later upgraded to 120.

Oh well... there are film characteristics that you just can't get in digital.

Especially when I look at the subject and say... this gotta be film and it's gotta be this particular brand of film.

Dynamic Range on 120 is not a once in a while thing... "It's always there at any given shot"... if you can stand the bulk.

 

Last weekend I was playing model photographer with my cousin who gladly posed.

That task is absolutely digital and auto focus. An M8 will be fine but I'm not as quick. Maybe if they design a Digital AF M and I will surely plunge my doe. 4/3 RF is fine with me.

 

-Ron

 

________________

Caveman's Gallery

[joechan]

It looks to me like the photo of the boy at the lake has been edited to adjust the sky or foreground. The "fringing" looks like an automatic selection tool has been used and missed the parts of the sky that meet the trees. When I do this kind of correction, I select the area to be adjusted manually.

[Guest Bernd Banken]

Christophe,

 

lucky man to live in Paris:D

 

Last year I got a Nikon Coolscan V via ebay just to start scanning some rolls of films of the family. Simple thinking " all good pics on a DVD for the kids instead of the famous shoebox".

To get familiar with the software I started with my 35 years old b/w negatives.

Long story short: I had some keeper without knowing because I didn't print all shots in the past.

 

Last year I started (again) to walk through the cities for my beloved streetfotography (as I did in Paris:D ), bought a Nikon D200 and in December 06 I got a leica M6, just to get in touch with rangefinders, again Ilford HP5 and the bathroom developing...

 

Now I have a M7 with 0.58 finder, last version as the MP finder, fits well my 28mm and glasses on the nose.

 

So get your M6, learn and enjoy the art of film, Paris has enough space for both systems!

 

A Bientot

Bernd

[valtof]

It looks to me like the photo of the boy at the lake has been edited to adjust the sky or foreground. The "fringing" looks like an automatic selection tool has been used and missed the parts of the sky that meet the trees. When I do this kind of correction, I select the area to be adjusted manually.

 

Hi Joe,

Not at all, no editing on this example, only simple manipulations over the original file (recovery and a bit of lens vignetting correction in Lightroom).

My lab told me that this fringing effect is indeed a digital artifact due to "poor" scanning quality, as John Brewton was presuming.

[valtof]

I am afraid that your photos still have the quality of your Exacta bodies....

With these photos you cannot really prove the quality of film in contrast with digital photography!

 

Joop,

I don't really understand you.

If your talking about the "artistic" quality or my ability of photographer, I won't comment because it was not the purpose of my original thread, that is, I reiterate : I borrowed an M6 to my dealer to see if I could stand going back to film and handle again its less versatile and more expensive work flow as well as testing the camera itself, that is essentially its rangefinder precision, before taking the decision to buy it.

(My M8 is totally misaligned and inconsistent for months so I’m aware that’s something you have to check on a M camera).

As to the Ekacta quality, sorry but, apart from the ease of use and reliability, the “technically good” photo a camera can deliver is more about the quality of the film, the lens and the processing. The Zeiss and Angénnieux lenses I had at that time had really nothing to be ashamed of in comparison to the Leica lenses of the same period, as far as I remember and if I look at the amazing prints I still have on my walls…

 

As to compare film and digital, that’s a big debate that generally leads to stupid polemics.

My concern was more to compare two systems that use the same amazingly good lenses :

A M6 with film and a M8 with its high resolution sensor.

Here is a simple comparison.

This is not a serious and meticulous test but with this first roll, I made again a shot I already took with the M8 some weeks before in more or less the same situation with the same lens (CV12mm). Of course this lens becoming a 16mm on the M8, the same area of the shot is obviously 30% more defined…

BUT, see yourself…

 

First shot : M6, CV12mm, Fuji B&W 400 iso (100% detail of original scan 2032x3092 pix) ;

Second shot : M8, CV12 (16mm equiv.) @ 320 iso (according reduction to match the above scan…)

 

Cheers

.

.

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!

[Mark Antony]

First shot : M6, CV12mm, Fuji B&W 400 iso (100% detail of original scan 2032x3092 pix) ;

Second shot : M8, CV12 (16mm equiv.) @ 320 iso (according reduction to match the above scan…)

 

Cheers

.

.

 

That first shot is awful, I'm not sure what has happened there, possibly its the obvious flare or maybe a poor scan.

Here is a shot taken with a 1950's Elmar;

 

another from a cheaper (not Leica camera)

 

You should be able with a little practice to get good results from your M6, certainly as good (up to 400 ISO) as an M8.

Mark

Photo Utopia

[valtof]

You should be able with a little practice to get good results from your M6, certainly as good (up to 400 ISO) as an M8.

 

Mark,

I really hope so.

I will get three more rolls processed tonight... and I'll see !

 

That first shot is awful, I'm not sure what has happened there, possibly its the obvious flare or maybe a poor scan.

 

Of course this shot is in harsh situation (back light and big flare of the sun just in front) but consider also that this is a quite small detail of the following image :

.

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!

[Mark Antony]

Yes, thats quite a crop from the centre of a wide lens, also a 400 speed film with pretty bad flare.

I would expect that if you used the same lens, and light and base ISO that results would be similar.

The M8 is a good camera but it's not as high resolution as film (up to 400 ISO) in my opinion.

here are some images with 100% crops taken with lowish ISO films Fomapan 100 and Gigabit (40)

Photo Utopia: March 25, 2007

 

A lot depends on your scanner, printing conventionally yields best results as a scanner is simply sampling digitally.

Mark

[vic vic]

hahah imants ......... ya .. i guess i missed the train with this one.....

 

no no......... i dont have m8 )

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[dfbldwn]

@valtof

 

I believe you've solved the questions about your 50mm lens

 

In the Cv 12mm lens photo of the young boy, I agree with the comment

"digital artifact due to "poor" scanning quality, as John Brewton was presuming"

when I look at the "franging" at the boy's head.

 

However, the edges between trees and background sky remind me of this

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/film-forum/29511-diafine-development-assistance-request.html#post308536

 

which turned out to be infra-red dust & scratch removal in the scanner. See if your lab can disable it the next time they scan. My one-hour photolab can't, but its never a problem like this example.