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

[pgk]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I cannot remember the last time that I shot JPEG files in a camera (iPhone excluded). It must be near a couple of decades ago.

[Adam Bonn]

11 hours ago, elmars said:

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

Steven who had the early info on the M11, that Steven? He got banned?

[Adam Bonn]

9 hours ago, LUF Admin said:

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

Andreas

The one that was rather partial to the M10R?

[analog-digital]

Am 12.5.2022 um 15:19 schrieb elmars:

A bad photographer is able to take bad photographs with the best sensor.

And bad light makes bad photographs even with the best sensor. 

You know very well that this does not correspond to practice. Even a photo that is not optimal in terms of design must look good and, in this case, "have the Leica look.

Everything else is really stupid talk 

[analog-digital]

vor 21 Stunden schrieb KeyofG:

I could use many other examples, but I have a feeling none of them would be good enough. 🤷🏻‍♂️

Maybe you should explain what YOU mean by the Leica Look.

But I agree with you, an M10 or M11 does not make better pictures (even if the subject is TOP). On the contrary, I was also disappointed. Especially when you factor in the price. 

In addition, the sensor is not a Leica development. For this reason alone, everything about the new M's is questionable (price vs. quality).

In addition, the Leica M's will have a hard time keeping up in the future.

Edited May 13, 2022 by analog-digital

[Jeff S]

34 minutes ago, Adam Bonn said:

Steven who had the early info on the M11, that Steven? He got banned?

Yes, right after the M11 formal intro. If you search, you’ll find Andreas’ clear and detailed explanation.  
 

But this thread isn’t from Steven, as Andreas notes.

Jeff

 

[Adam Bonn]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

20 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

Yes, right after the M11 formal intro. If you search, you’ll find Andreas’ clear and detailed explanation.

In the M11 your next camera thread?

21 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

But this thread isn’t from Steven, as Andreas notes.

I think maybe this guy is M10Ruser ("10R last great rangefinder" "M11 is just a Sony"), who then came back as something like 'grittyphoto' to say that the 10R is last great rangefinder

If he comes back again I hope he choses Bobby Ewing's shower as a user name for comedy value

[Jeff S]

10 minutes ago, Adam Bonn said:

In the M11 your next camera thread?

 

Google is your friend… comes up in first link…

Jeff

[Adam Bonn]

2 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

Google is your friend… comes up in first link…

Jeff

I was just reading the final parts of the m11 next cam thread

Thanks Jeff

[Leicaphile]

15 hours ago, Jeff S said:

you could have just  posted in hdmesa’s thread…

Everyone who posted here should’ve posted on hdmesa’s thread. Isn’t it funny how nobody did but everyone did on here? 🤷🏻‍♂️

[Leicaphile]

1 hour ago, hdmesa said:

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. 

The in-camera B&W JPEGs from M cameras are typically so good you can just use that! And just backup the DNG. You’re pretty much done, except maybe a little exposure or a bit of contrast to taste, the picture is done. 
 

Like the OP said, looks like Leica M11 is trying too hard to have the “Leica Look” and that’s why your example looks so bad. 

[Jeff S]

4 minutes ago, Leicaphile said:

Everyone who posted here should’ve posted on hdmesa’s thread. Isn’t it funny how nobody did but everyone did on here? 🤷🏻‍♂️

Largely because the OP raised several other controversial topics… the Leica look, the M11 sensor, JPEG vs RAW, PP skills, etc… that buried the simple fact that he disliked the JPEGS from the M11.  
 

I think most people here don’t pay much attention to JPEG discussion, as hdmesa found.  And his thread title lacked the same click bait appeal.

Jeff

[Leicaphile]

1 hour ago, pgk said:

I cannot remember the last time that I shot JPEG files in a camera (iPhone excluded). It must be near a couple of decades ago.

A typical set up is RAW+Jpeg. JPEGs are typically great for Leica in B&W. It takes time to replicate it exactly. To replicate every tone. Take a photo of a multicolor wallpaper. Should have as many colors as you can find. Then take the photo raw + jpeg. Leave the jpeg on monochrome and standard settings. 

now load the jpeg from the camera (not the M11 but say an M10), and the RAW and try to match it perfectly to the jpeg. Let me know how it goes. Every tone should match. 

JPEGs from an M10 in monochrome are so good you can just use them as is. Saves time editing a raw. Not as easy as just clicking the monochrome switch on Lightroom. 

[Leicaphile]

13 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

Largely because the OP raised several other controversial topics… the Leica look, the M11 sensor, JPEG vs RAW, PP skills, etc… that buried the simple fact that he disliked the JPEGS from the M11.  
 

I think most people here don’t pay much attention to JPEG discussion, as hdmesa found.  And his thread title lacked the same click bait appeal.

Jeff

Well. IMO, and this is just the way I see it and why I’m here. Lately I’ve been using SOOC JPEGs from my M in B&W. Now usually I don’t do B&W but some photos are just best in B&W, so I set my camera to shoot both raw + jpeg and the jpeg settings are on monochrome. 
 

i tried to match exactly the RAW to an M10 B&W jpeg and I couldn’t do it perfectly. I took a photo of a wallpaper that had a multi color design. Let me see if I can find it and I’ll post it. 
 

anyway, I took the photo and took both the raw and the jpeg. I tried to match the raw perfectly to the jpeg and I just couldn’t do it. When the reds would be perfect the blue would be off. When the blue would match the greens would go out. When the greens would go off and I fixed that then the reds and the pinks would go out again. It was a nightmare to match what the M10 did. 
 

and I HATE editing. I don’t want to spend that long editing a picture. So now if I want something in B&W I just use the jpeg the camera gave me, which looks amazing already, and I do a little bit of editing. Maybe recover some highlight or add a little bit of contrast to taste or whatever and I’m done. It looks great. 

so for me, having a good jpeg from the camera is important. And for a $9,000 camera the jpeg should be unbelievable. If Fuji can do it with a $900 camera so can Leica. They’re supposed to be the best of the best. 

So when we hear the m11 has a sony sensor and we see the results of the engine that drives this sensor trying to look like Leica and giving these JPEGs out one does wonder, what the hell happened?

But it’s a new camera and it may be just a matter of a good update. 

I’m bit hating on the M11, I’m just saying a good jpeg is a useful thing to have, and a Leica should be perfection. That’s why we bought it in the first place. 

Edited May 13, 2022 by Leicaphile

[Jeff S]

3 minutes ago, Leicaphile said:

A typical set up is RAW+Jpeg. JPEGs are typically great for Leica in B&W. It takes time to replicate it exactly. To replicate every tone. Take a photo of a multicolor wallpaper. Should have as many colors as you can find. Then take the photo raw + jpeg. Leave the jpeg on monochrome and standard settings. 

now load the jpeg from the camera (not the M11 but say an M10), and the RAW and try to match it perfectly to the jpeg. Let me know how it goes. Every tone should match. 

JPEGs from an M10 in monochrome are so good you can just use them as is. Saves time editing a raw. Not as easy as just clicking the monochrome switch on Lightroom. 

That would be a waste of PP time.  Color hue and color saturation differences don’t change black and white tonality; only color brightness does that. In the HSL panel, only the L matters when it comes to b&w tonal variances.

Jeff

[Jeff S]

2 minutes ago, Leicaphile said:

Well. IMO, and this is just the way I see it and why I’m here. Lately I’ve been using SOOC JPEGs from my M in B&W. Now usually I don’t do B&W but some photos are just best in B&W, so I set my camera to shoot both raw + jpeg and the jpeg settings are on monochrome. 
 

i tried to match exactly the RAW to an M10 B&W jpeg and I couldn’t do it perfectly. I took a photo of a wallpaper that had a multi color design. Let me see if I can find it and I’ll post it. 
 

anyway, I took the photo and took both the raw and the jpeg. I tried to match the raw perfectly to the jpeg and I just couldn’t do it. When the reds would be perfect the blue would be off. When the blue would match the greens would go out. When the greens would go off and I fixed that then the reds and the pinks would go out again. It was a nightmare to match what the M10 did. 
 

and I HATE editing. I don’t want to spend that long editing a picture. So now if I want something in B&W I just use the jpeg the camera gave me, which looks amazing already, and I do a little bit of editing. Maybe recover some highlight or add a little bit of contrast to taste or whatever and I’m done. It looks great. 

so for me, having a good jpeg from the camera is important. And for a $9,000 camera the jpeg should be unbelievable. If Fuji can do it with a $900 camera so can Leica. They’re supposed to be the best of the best. 

So when we hear the m11 has a sony sensor and we see the results of the engine that drives this sensor trying to look like Leica and giving these JPEGs out one does wonder, what the hell happened?

But it’s a new camera and it may be just a matter of a good update. 

I’m bit hating on the M11, I’m just saying a good jpeg is a useful thing to have, and a Leica should be perfection. That’s why we bought it in the first place. 

You might spend a lot less time editing by watching the above video lecture.

Jeff

Edited May 13, 2022 by Jeff S

[Leicaphile]

9 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

That would be a waste of PP time.  Color hue and color saturation differences don’t change black and white tonality; only color brightness does that. In the HSL panel, only the L matters when it comes to b&w tonal variances.

Jeff

Found it! 

take a photo of that and try to replicate the monochrome jpeg from the camera. why even bother if the jpeg is already perfect?

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!

[Leicaphile]

8 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

You might spend a lot less time editing by watching the above video lecture.

Jeff

Not the point. I’m saying why spend any time if the jpeg is already done? The camera did it already. 🤷🏻‍♂️ 

[Jeff S]

1 minute ago, Leicaphile said:

Not the point. I’m saying why spend any time if the jpeg is already done? The camera did it already. 🤷🏻‍♂️ 

Lots of reasons for me.  I create my own renderings, picture by picture. JPEG is someone else's interpretation. It's not a time concern for me (myriad ways to make workflow efficient); it's a quality issue. If everyone's pictures rendered alike, I'd give up photography. I couldn't care less how long it takes me to make a fine print of a worthy pic.  It still would be far less than in darkroom days.

Second, software changes over time. I've taken prints that I made more than ten years ago and re-processed them, taking advantage of new software technology/processing engines, as well as my own changing tastes (Ansel revised Moonrise many times over 34 years), and made far better prints.  Couldn't have done that with JPEGS.  And I have no need to clog up my storage with JPEGs in addition to DNG files, which should remain viable over time.

There's more.  

Jeff 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Leicaphile]

28 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

Lots of reasons for me.  I create my own renderings, picture by picture. JPEG is someone else's interpretation. It's not a time concern for me (myriad ways to make workflow efficient); it's a quality issue. If everyone's pictures rendered alike, I'd give up photography. I couldn't care less how long it takes me to make a fine print of a worthy pic.  It still would be far less than in darkroom days.

Second, software changes over time. I've taken prints that I made more than ten years ago and re-processed them, taking advantage of new software technology/processing engines, as well as my own changing tastes (Ansel revised Moonrise many times over 34 years), and made far better prints.  Couldn't have done that with JPEGS.  And I have no need to clog up my storage with JPEGs in addition to DNG files, which should remain viable over time.

There's more.  

Jeff 

I think what makes photos unique isn’t the color or B&W tweaking. Gilden and Elliot used the same camera and film. Their tonality probably look almost exactly the same (I haven’t checked their photos carefully so this is just me saying). Their style and approach is what made it different, not their film processing. 

I get it. Do it in the luminance panel. That would require me to load the raw in my desktop which I never use, and then open the picture in Camera Raw (because I don’t have Lightroom) and start editing this thing to match what the camera already gave me.

I would rather start with a really great B&W SOOC jpeg and then adjust for exposure, highlights, little contrast, whatever and it’s done. 🤷🏻‍♂️

I never said shoot in jpeg and forget raw. I use the jpeg rarely. Only for B&W because I don’t need to bother editing it. The raw is still there. 
 

There’s no room for shitty JPEGs on a Leica M. That’s all there is to it.

Edited May 13, 2022 by Leicaphile