Considering the M11

[colint544]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have an M9M camera, and three classic Wetzlar era cameras - M2, M4, and M5. Not been using the M9M a great deal lately, but I will get back to it. I am shooting a lot of colour film, using the M2, at the moment. It's proving to be both costly and time-consuming.

So I'm considering the M11. Wondering about it. I've watched each generation of digital M camera improve on the previous one. The M11 platform looks light years ahead of the M9 platform I'm accustomed to. I just wonder if the files from a colour digital M can ever be special, in the way that colour film can be. The M11 is an expensive camera, albeit one that can be used for many, many years. My M9M was also expensive, but it's still going, ten years later, and I consider it to have paid for itself by now. 

The attached picture, I shot recently. It's from a long-term project I've been working on. I took it using the M2, 28mm Summicron ASPH, and it was shot on Cinestill 800T. I like the grain, and the atmosphere. I know I could take the same shot on an M11, and it would be grainless. It would be exquisitely detailed. Would it be as nice, I wonder?

I've looked at some superb M11 images over on Leica Master Shots. And a few overly processed ones. And one or two with that digital look of blown highlights. Are the M11 files any different really from any other modern digital camera? Or is the whole thing merely about the form factor?

I'd be fascinated to know what anyone else thinks..

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!

[Photoworks]

The M11 camera has a modern look to the images. just like many other modern sensors the noise is clean and can be shot without underexposing too much. It does not have the blower highlights problem of M10 and M10-P.

If you like the grain I would suggest processing the images without sharpening and noise reduction, just use color noise on. Images look beautiful detail with organic grain.

I suggest you try it..

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[hdmesa]

If you’re wanting to emulate the unique character of Cinestill 800T with digital, there are tutorials out there on YouTube. There are quite a few steps involved in Photoshop to get the halation and color right — it’s not a one-click style you can just apply. 

Current digital such as the M11 has the opposite problem of film — too much potential, too many options, too many possible outcomes. It’s like a blank canvas when you edit the DNGs in post, and the outcome is completely on you as the editor.

Many people like to blame the current high dynamic range sensors for lacking something special, when in fact it is them that is found wanting.

[Photoworks]

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!

This is at 3200 iso no noise reduction or sharpening

 

[idusidusi]

12 minutes ago, Photoworks said:

The M11 camera has a modern look to the images. just like many other modern sensors the noise is clean and can be shot without underexposing too much. It does not have the blower highlights problem of M10 and M10-P.

If you like the grain I would suggest processing the images without sharpening and noise reduction, just use color noise on. Images look beautiful detail with organic grain.

I suggest you try it..

I understand that except for "color noise on" - Capture One or Lightroom are you talking about?

[harmen]

Without knowing exactly why, I personally enjoy the images I get from the M11, whereas I had pretty much stopped using my previous M(240) in favour of film.  Highlights, dynamic range, and colour must play a role I presume.  Certainly not stopping with film though!

[Photoworks]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

5 minutes ago, idusidusi said:

I understand that except for "color noise on" - Capture One or Lightroom are you talking about?

there is a noise slider ( go to 0)
and there is a color noise slider ( keep it on )

[idusidusi]

8 minutes ago, Photoworks said:

there is a noise slider ( go to 0)
and there is a color noise slider ( keep it on )

Is this what you meant? Noise Reduction and these are the default setting in my Capture One V22.

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!

[Photoworks]

29 minutes ago, idusidusi said:

Is this what you meant? Noise Reduction and these are the default setting in my Capture One V22.

 

 

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!

[idusidusi]

31 minutes ago, Photoworks said:

 

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!

Interesting thank you, I will set that and see how I go.

[LocalHero1953]

If you want to say something, or tell a story, with your photos (and you do - I enjoy seeing your work), then detail and resolution are not important in themselves - they are only important if your story needs the detail. Otherwise they can distract.

My take on it, which I expect to be blown out of the water, is that a lack of detail adds a degree of universality: your photo is not of the precise location X, but about all locations like X - and that makes the viewer stop and think, rather than look and move on. (None of which is to say that you can't tell stories with high res digital sensors). 

Edited April 26, 2022 by LocalHero1953

[Le Chef]

I would hope @colint544 that a dealer or a friendly owner in Glasgow would let you have a day or two shooting the kind of distinctive images you take that a number of us are drawn to. At least you could then do an "A-B" test and review the results to see whether it would be a good move.

[colint544]

Thanks for all your very kind and helpful replies. 

I suppose we've now reached a point where digital files are rich and detailed. The Leica M form factor is unique, and we all like that. We can use light and composition, and content, to make our pictures work, rather than relying on a 'look' to do the work.

[grahamc]

7 hours ago, hdmesa said:

 

Many people like to blame the current high dynamic range sensors for lacking something special, when in fact it is them that is found wanting.

This is an interesting debate because sometimes I feel digital photography tests / reflects ones skill as an editor more than it does as a photographer. 
 

To me it’s less apparent in the Leica user spaces (selfishly I like to think that perhaps it is because Leica attracts a more “purist” style of photographer), but a very quick look around forums or pages dedicated to other major manufacturer will soon leave us wondering if the producers of the images are ‘photographers’ or ‘graphic designers’ and whether the galleries should be re-named accordingly. Eg photoshop edit of the month 😁
 

 

[grahamc]

With regards your original question Colin I would have to re-look at some of your digital images but the grain and analogue feel to images such as this really do add to the viewing experience for me personally. 
 

Certainly if images like this were exceptionally clean they wouldn’t be as interesting to me (personal preference), and if you were to spend time in post production trying to emulate it (or succeeding to emulate it) to arrive at a similar image then I guess the question becomes what are you gaining from that.  The answer may be quite a bit ! (Convenience, weight-saving, malleability of files etc).   But to touch on the cliche would some inherent magic have been lost !   
 

Considering you use the M9 you are obviously not adverse to digital per se and I can only imagine you’d get another solid decade out of it.  
 

 

[colint544]

10 hours ago, grahamc said:

This is an interesting debate because sometimes I feel digital photography tests / reflects ones skill as an editor more than it does as a photographer. 
 

To me it’s less apparent in the Leica user spaces (selfishly I like to think that perhaps it is because Leica attracts a more “purist” style of photographer), but a very quick look around forums or pages dedicated to other major manufacturer will soon leave us wondering if the producers of the images are ‘photographers’ or ‘graphic designers’ and whether the galleries should be re-named accordingly. Eg photoshop edit of the month 😁
 

 

It is an interesting debate. It's one that all too often ends with someone saying, 'If you like the film look, just shoot film. Simple', and I'm so glad nobody has said that here.

And, as much as I find it time consuming to have film developed, then scan it, the resulting images need little to no work done on them. They look nice right off the bat. When I first got my  M9M, it took a long time to find a way to make the pictures look consistent. The files were so malleable, that you could bend them in different directions, to the point they looked unrealistic. You can really disappear down a rabbit hole with editing, and this almost undoes the advantage of digital over film. Editing can take up a lot of time.

The Guardian photographer Sarah Lee shoots on both an M10, and an M11, and she is a prolific poster on Instagram. If anyone doesn't know her work, you can see it here. I don't know what special sauce she uses in the edit, but her images are wonderful. Mostly down to her skill as a photographer, of course, but she certainly proves that pictures shot digitally need not have high contrast, blown highlights, and lurid colours.

[grahamc]

1 hour ago, colint544 said:

It is an interesting debate. It's one that all too often ends with someone saying, 'If you like the film look, just shoot film. Simple', and I'm so glad nobody has said that here.

And, as much as I find it time consuming to have film developed, then scan it, the resulting images need little to no work done on them. They look nice right off the bat. When I first got my  M9M, it took a long time to find a way to make the pictures look consistent. The files were so malleable, that you could bend them in different directions, to the point they looked unrealistic. You can really disappear down a rabbit hole with editing, and this almost undoes the advantage of digital over film. Editing can take up a lot of time.

The Guardian photographer Sarah Lee shoots on both an M10, and an M11, and she is a prolific poster on Instagram. If anyone doesn't know her work, you can see it here. I don't know what special sauce she uses in the edit, but her images are wonderful. Mostly down to her skill as a photographer, of course, but she certainly proves that pictures shot digitally need not have high contrast, blown highlights, and lurid colours.

Thanks for the referral to Sarah’s work Colin, lovely ! 
 

In my limited experience Leica sensors and glass appear to play much more elegantly with post processing than other systems I have migrated from.  So we definitely have a head start in avoiding those very digitised results, if we wish.  

Good luck with the decision and I look forward to seeing the output regardless of the medium  

[Photoworks]

Most negative look grainy when you scan them. Negative film is meant to be projected on paper and that process of soft light reduces the grain effect becoming a good image, similar to what you get with digital.

Film has other qualities too, exposure range, such in process, and print in different ways. 
The benefit of digital is that you start with a very neutral look, with film photography you are set and constrained by the emulsions look, color and contrast.

Few people attempt to make preset for the Cine film.

https://jamiewindsor.com/presets4

 

If you are interested in getting the gain into you photos I would suggest using Capture one pro over Lightroom. Lightroom has only one option , Capture one has 6 different grain look and they are best in industry for recreating realistic film looks.

[colint544]

3 minutes ago, Photoworks said:

Most negative look grainy when you scan them. Negative film is meant to be projected on paper and that process of soft light reduces the grain effect becoming a good image, similar to what you get with digital.

Film has other qualities too, exposure range, such in process, and print in different ways. 
The benefit of digital is that you start with a very neutral look, with film photography you are set and constrained by the emulsions look, color and contrast.

Few people attempt to make preset for the Cine film.

https://jamiewindsor.com/presets4

 

If you are interested in getting the gain into you photos I would suggest using Capture one pro over Lightroom. Lightroom has only one option , Capture one has 6 different grain look and they are best in industry for recreating realistic film looks.

Agreed, and thank you very much

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[idusidusi]

7 minutes ago, colint544 said:

Agreed, and thank you very much

I much prefer Capture One, I did not get on with Adobe products and their interface plus I don't like subscriptions. Fortunately, this is true "Capture one has 6 different grain look and they are best in industry for recreating realistic film looks." - there are also some excellent custom styles too (Overgaard and Cobalt).