Leica M11 Sony Sensor - Doesn’t have the “Leica Look”

[LUF Admin]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor 1 Stunde schrieb elmars:

The last one who argued like KeyofG (insisting without real reasoning) called himself Steven. 

No, this was another member having several accounts already banned…

Andreas

[andybarton]

Yes, and he has been banned again.

[tashley]

44 minutes ago, andybarton said:

Yes, and he has been banned again.

Out of interest was one of his handles ‘Trickness’? Because if so, he sometimes has discussions with himself…

[Tailwagger]

2 hours ago, andybarton said:

Yes, and he has been banned again.

Seems like there's a need for a new internet forum to accommodate the disgruntled. Trap flies with honey, so to speak. Permit me to suggest a few potential domain names. 

• dontlikaleica.com 
• l-trolls.edu
• summasucks.org

😁

[tom0511]

vor 12 Stunden schrieb KeyofG:

See @Overgaard’s reply above. 🤷🏻‍♂️
 

it is what it is. Like I said. Don’t shoot the messenger. I’m seeing things. And the things I see I don’t like. 

Hi,

sure what counts for you is what you see. One question: The images you look at - which workflow did they get? jpg or dng? if dng, converted in which converter. I ask this because I am not happy with M11 LR profiles. And M11 DNG look different in LR than in C1?

 

 

[Stuart Richardson]

9 minutes ago, tom0511 said:

Hi,

sure what counts for you is what you see. One question: The images you look at - which workflow did they get? jpg or dng? if dng, converted in which converter. I ask this because I am not happy with M11 LR profiles. And M11 DNG look different in LR than in C1?

 

 

If you don't like the M11 Lightroom profiles, you could try Cobalt Image...they make very good profiles. I am not positive they have the M11 yet, but I would imagine they might. I did not like the Lightroom profiles for the S3, which had a very pronounced "look", including what seemed like clarity and desaturated shadow detail. The Cobalt profiles got rid of it and gave a much nicer baseline look. And they have a number of versions to choose from too.

[Tailwagger]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

9 hours ago, hdmesa said:

I made a post about this and got zero comments....  B&W JPEGs look like warmed-over dogshit in their current state. 

Not due to stunned silence, I'd wager.  More likely the byproduct of resignation.  None of the four M versions I've owned have ever wowed me with any ability to generate a competent JPG SooC, B&W or Color.  Plenty of threads here over the years seem to reflect that others have a similar impression. I suspect that for many, expectations in this area are nearly non-existent. 

[lct]

I happen to have a great photog (meaning much greater than me ) around me and he hates having to bother with post production. Fact is some cameras are more competent than others as far as OoC jpegs are concerned. My old Canon 5D1 was a good example. Or my M8.2 in B&W. Leica should do some more efforts towards OoC photogs IMHO.

[pgk]

16 minutes ago, lct said:

Fact is some cameras are more competent than others as far as OoC jpegs are concerned.

Interesting. Predictive capabilities in a camera? Must get one because, as yet, I have still to find a camera which produces JPEG files that I am happy with.

[tashley]

1 hour ago, Tailwagger said:

Not due to stunned silence, I'd wager.  More likely the byproduct of resignation.  None of the four M versions I've owned have ever wowed me with any ability to generate a competent JPG SooC, B&W or Color.  Plenty of threads here over the years seem to reflect that others have a similar impression. I suspect that for many, expectations in this area are nearly non-existent. 

You're entirely right - and of course, for those who do feel that a particular camera's SOOC 'pegs are great, that's just coincidence that their eye is similar to that of the guys who did the programming..... as proven by LCT's comment below....

Edited May 13, 2022 by tashley

[lct]

1 minute ago, pgk said:

Interesting. Predictive capabilities in a camera? Must get one because, as yet, I have still to find a camera which produces JPEG files that I am happy with.

I have no idea but i used to use my 5D1 with R lenses and i sometimes felt OoC jpegs were OK as is. Another example was the Epson R-D1 with M lenses. Not always but from time to time i had the feeling that my tastes were understood by a camera maker.  

[pgk]

18 minutes ago, lct said:

I have no idea but i used to use my 5D1 with R lenses and i sometimes felt OoC jpegs were OK as is. Another example was the Epson R-D1 with M lenses. Not always but from time to time i had the feeling that my tastes were understood by a camera maker.  

I must be using the wrong cameras ..... 😁.

[Tailwagger]

7 minutes ago, lct said:

I have no idea but i used to use my 5D1 with R lenses and i sometimes felt OoC jpegs were OK as is. Another example was the Epson R-D1 with M lenses. Not always but from time to time i had the feeling that my tastes were understood by a camera maker.  

Rather interesting, coincidence or otherwise, that both these camera are approaching two decades old.  Perhaps, back in those days, more effort was being expended on producing acceptable results in camera. Given digital photography for the masses was in its infancy at the time and raw processing was a rather exotic notion, SooC JPG results were far more important for sales.

[hillavoider]

47 minutes ago, Tailwagger said:

Rather interesting, coincidence or otherwise, that both these camera are approaching two decades old.  Perhaps, back in those days, more effort was being expended on producing acceptable results in camera. Given digital photography for the masses was in its infancy at the time and raw processing was a rather exotic notion, SooC JPG results were far more important for sales.

good point, my 5DM2 had superb jpegs, and the general consensus back then was jpegs are for Pro's and raw for enthousiastes 

but i cannot complain about the M11 jpegs

Edited May 13, 2022 by hillavoider

[lct]

45 minutes ago, Tailwagger said:

Rather interesting, coincidence or otherwise, that both these camera are approaching two decades old.  Perhaps, back in those days, more effort was being expended on producing acceptable results in camera. Given digital photography for the masses was in its infancy at the time and raw processing was a rather exotic notion, SooC JPG results were far more important for sales.

I don't know but a modern camera like Pixii seems to give nice OoC results, i mean OoC raw files as i have no experience with native jpegs.

[tom0511]

vor 3 Stunden schrieb Stuart Richardson:

If you don't like the M11 Lightroom profiles, you could try Cobalt Image...they make very good profiles. I am not positive they have the M11 yet, but I would imagine they might. I did not like the Lightroom profiles for the S3, which had a very pronounced "look", including what seemed like clarity and desaturated shadow detail. The Cobalt profiles got rid of it and gave a much nicer baseline look. And they have a number of versions to choose from too.

Thanks, I might try. But at the moment I have started to use C1 more often again. Its not only the M11 LR profiles which I dont like, but also the LR Canon R5 which I dont like so much. And both raws look much better in C1, without having to do any adjustments. So right now for me LR for importing and catalog, and c1 for conversion.

Edited May 13, 2022 by tom0511

[lct]

Funny i just retrieved an old OoC jpeg of mine. I would perhaps adjust horizon in PP but i liked it as is and i still do. "Leica look" by Canon (Canon 5D1, Summicron-R 90/2)

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!

 

[Herr Barnack]

4 hours ago, Tailwagger said:

Seems like there's a need for a new internet forum to accommodate the disgruntled. Trap flies with honey, so to speak. Permit me to suggest a few potential domain names. 

• dontlikaleica.com 
• l-trolls.edu
• summasucks.org

😁

The issue is not the M11. 

The issue is that some people are not happy unless they are unhappy.

[hdmesa]

5 hours ago, Tailwagger said:

Not due to stunned silence, I'd wager.  More likely the byproduct of resignation.  None of the four M versions I've owned have ever wowed me with any ability to generate a competent JPG SooC, B&W or Color.  Plenty of threads here over the years seem to reflect that others have a similar impression. I suspect that for many, expectations in this area are nearly non-existent. 

My issue with the M11 B&W JPEGs is the output quality of the JPEGs, not necessarily the creative choices they made with the look of the images. The tone curve they apply would be fine if it didn't showing such strong banding. When that happens, the JPEG is essentially ruined (for my uses). However, if I import the M11 B&W JPEGs alongside their respective DNGs into LR/C1, make contrast/curve adjustments to the DNG so that it matches the in-camera B&W JPEG exactly, and export the DNG to JPEG format – none of that banding exists in the JPEGs I made. 

My guess is that Leica is trying to have it both ways with the M11 B&W JPEGs – strong tone curve along with strong compression. 

Edited May 13, 2022 by hdmesa

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[hdmesa]

5 hours ago, pgk said:

Interesting. Predictive capabilities in a camera? Must get one because, as yet, I have still to find a camera which produces JPEG files that I am happy with.

I would not call it predictive, just well done JPEG film sims. Fujifilm (in particular with the GFX cameras) has incredible in-camera film sims for b&w. Their red and green film sims are particularly good – better than a real red or green filter on a monochrome sensor in many situations. But it's not surprising that Fujifilm does well in this arena given their history.

But to be clear, I'm not expecting nor asking Leica to compete with Fujifilm for in-camera film sims, I just want the M11 b&w JPEGs to be better from a technical standpoint, free from excessive banding and compression artifacts.