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

[frame-it]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

16 minutes ago, hdmesa said:

The restricted MFD of the M system and typical ≤90mm lenses generate a better dimensional rendering with f/2.8 or wider apertures, IMO.

whatever...but my point was more about the distance between the camera and the target, the context of the post to which i replied was lenses, not only M bodies.

[Advertisement]

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

[hdmesa]

9 minutes ago, frame-it said:

whatever...but my point was more about the distance between the camera and the target, the context of the post to which i replied was lenses, not only M bodies.

This is literally and exactly what you said:

2 hours ago, frame-it said:

at a certain "sweet-spot" distance between the camera and the target, almost any lens f4 and lower will give that 3d-pop  look

Me pointing out that f/2.8 is more relevant an aperture is not "whatever" given this is a Leica Forum, and M11 sub-forum, and a thread about the Leica Look.

[frame-it]

2 hours ago, hdmesa said:

given this is a Leica Forum, and M11 sub-forum, and a thread about the Leica Look.

sure you're right.

 

though i was replying specifically about lenses

 

anyways

 

moving on

 

[hdmesa]

25 minutes ago, frame-it said:

sure you're right.

though i was replying specifically about lenses

...

 

I didn't mean to have come across as contradictory, though it seems as if I did. I meant to add M-specific context. And you are right: 135mm at f/4 on M at close distance certainly has pop. The 28 Lux at f/4 and MFD, maybe not so much

 

[Ray Im]

To KeyofG,

I first want to say to you that I am so sorry for what you heard from this thread. It is not fair just judging his photography skills or his preferences from his opinion for M11. I am not a M user and SL&CL user but I can understand what he feels.

I've been through most of camera brands of various models except Pentax. From my experiences, each company has very different interpretation of color theory for their sensor. I've notice that there is a huge difference when company changes its sensor. Even though the sensor works with same engine, each model shows slightly different result with exactly same photograph condition. I remember someone mentioned about M11's issue is not about Sony sensor and I agree. Since Leica's sensor manufacturer has changed, you have to expect this sensor responses very different way in order to get consistent result you had it from M240 to M10R.

It is about differences not quite right or wrong. You just need to find the sweet spot with a new tool. I always needed a time to find it when I switched from film to digital, Canon/Nikon DSLR to Olympus/Panasonic/Fuji/Sony mirrorless, and all other to Leica. 

Different sensor requires different adaption. I believe that you can find it.

[lct]

This is a gear forum where all technical opinions are welcome, whatever the artistic merits of photos displayed, but i sometimes wonder if some critics about colours, sensors, let alone "looks", come from jpeg users. As a raw shooter, i can't seem to perceive the least beginning of problem when editing M11 files i must say. I can get easily the colors and contrast i want w/o having to adjust red clippings the same way as on my M240 that is easy to work with otherwise. I don't use extra sharpening or noise reduction normally and i can go on editing my M11 files the same way w/o having to struggle with banding at high iso. I don't shoot above 6400 iso though, 12800 iso and above being too noisy for my taste but again i don't use extra NR in PP. YMMV.

[hdmesa]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

5 hours ago, lct said:

This is a gear forum where all technical opinions are welcome, whatever the artistic merits of photos displayed, but i sometimes wonder if some critics about colours, sensors, let alone "looks", come from jpeg users. As a raw shooter, i can't seem to perceive the least beginning of problem when editing M11 files i must say. I can get easily the colors and contrast i want w/o having to adjust red clippings the same way as on my M240 that is easy to work with otherwise. I don't use extra sharpening or noise reduction normally and i can go on editing my M11 files the same way w/o having to struggle with banding at high iso. I don't shoot above 6400 iso though, 12800 iso and above being too noisy for my taste but again i don't use extra NR in PP. YMMV.

Agreed. Whatever look my M11 is producing seems great to me. It's basically a full-frame rangefinder version of the GFX 100S I had. The GFX has better noise handling at base ISO when the files are heavily edited in post, but the M11 color is the same, IMO. I think it would greatly benefit Leica to develop some, well how do I put this... less lazy JPEG film simulations? Really it doesn't get any lazier than just offering color/natural, color/standard, color/vivid and monochrome/natural, monochrome/high-contrast. Partner with Mastin Labs or RNI film sim if they have to. Offer tone curve adjustments to the JPEGs in addition to iDR.

Sunset after a dust storm yesterday with the air still hazy:

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!

Edited May 22, 2022 by hdmesa

[Segal]

On 5/12/2022 at 3:59 PM, KeyofG said:

Well  ok  diffused light, shallow depth of field  interior shot

M11 + Summilux 50

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!

 

Diffused light. shallow depth of field. Interior shot. This one is not even a Leica lens.

M10R + 28f2 Ultron II

I understand I’m wrong and none of my examples prove anything. 

I'm just saying. I see things. 

This is me in the first photo - it was one of the first pictures I took with my M11, so pardon the lack of sharpness and my crazy happy smile . The light isn’t diffused, it’s actually quite harsh, coming from my 3 displays, desk lamp, and, more importantly, an Elgato Key Light (I work from home, and use it for Zoom calls). All five sources of light were in front of me.

Also, on the topic - I’m not an expert or anything, but I’ve used Sony cameras for years and currently own A1 and A7R3. I also used Leica Q and Q2, and I find that they produce very different images with similar lenses under the same conditions. I recently took pictures of my son with A1 / Sony GM 50mm f/1.2 and Leica M11 with Summicron-M 50 mm f/1.4 literally seconds apart, and they looked like they were shot in different light conditions.

Here is another selfie I took with M11, this time with the light coming through a window. It was around 2 PM but the light was not as harsh as in the first example, even though I wouldn't call it diffused either. 

Edited May 22, 2022 by Segal
Added another example photo

[PeterGA]

Nice self portrait @Segal - what do you think of the 28f2  from Voigtlander?

Edited May 23, 2022 by PeterGA

[Segal]

7 hours ago, PeterGA said:

Nice self portrait @Segal - what do you think of the 28f2  from Voigtlander?

Thank you!

I don't have it I figured I don't need a 28mm lens for Leica because I still have my Q2. If I sell it (I got an offer from a friend), then I'll look into getting something wider than 35mm for my M11

[gotium]

23 hours ago, hdmesa said:

Agreed. Whatever look my M11 is producing seems great to me. It's basically a full-frame rangefinder version of the GFX 100S I had. The GFX has better noise handling at base ISO when the files are heavily edited in post, but the M11 color is the same, IMO. I think it would greatly benefit Leica to develop some, well how do I put this... less lazy JPEG film simulations? Really it doesn't get any lazier than just offering color/natural, color/standard, color/vivid and monochrome/natural, monochrome/high-contrast. Partner with Mastin Labs or RNI film sim if they have to. Offer tone curve adjustments to the JPEGs in addition to iDR.

Sunset after a dust storm yesterday with the air still hazy:

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!

Off topic, is that the Catalina Foothills? So beautiful!

[hdmesa]

56 minutes ago, gotium said:

Off topic, is that the Catalina Foothills? So beautiful!

Similar geography: Placitas, New Mexico near the Sandia Mountains.

[vikasmg]

On 5/12/2022 at 3:59 PM, KeyofG said:

I see things. 

This whole thread seems to have started with that.  Is there really a Leica look.  Don’t shoot this messenger either - I’m not sure I see the thing.  

And I’ve used Leica’s off and on since the IIIg (no, I’m not quite that old.  It belonged to my father and I had no money to buy anything.

[SrMi]

8 hours ago, vikasmg said:

This whole thread seems to have started with that.  Is there really a Leica look.  Don’t shoot this messenger either - I’m not sure I see the thing.  

And I’ve used Leica’s off and on since the IIIg (no, I’m not quite that old.  It belonged to my father and I had no money to buy anything.

The thread started with the claim that M11 lost the Leica look that was visible with M10-R. IMO, a dubious claim. It was originally not about whether Leica look exists or not.

[Viv]

If there is not a Leica "look", the M11 can't have lost it.

If there is a Leica "look", I am not sure what it is or whether it can be measured.

Based on my limited experience with my new M11, the images look fine to me. YMMV.

P.S. I do not use Leica lenses. I may be crazy, but I'm not THAT crazy, in view of the prices.

Edited May 24, 2022 by Viv

[lct]

2 hours ago, Viv said:

If there is a Leica "look", I am not sure what it is or whether it can be measured.

Simple .Take any digital camera. Remove electronic effects like glowing eyes, smearing to hide skin pores and digital noise, etc. Now add contrast, saturate colors and sharpen edges if needed in PP. This is the current Leica look, which has little to do with the one HCB used to like but i'm not sure web reviewers and other people referring to "the" Leica look have a clue about that.

[Viv]

1 hour ago, lct said:

Simple .Take any digital camera. Remove electronic effects like glowing eyes, smearing to hide skin pores and digital noise, etc. Now add contrast, saturate colors and sharpen edges if needed in PP. This is the current Leica look, which has little to do with the one HCB used to like but i'm not sure web reviewers and other people referring to "the" Leica look have a clue about that.

Too much effort for little return.

[charlesphoto99]

IMO the 'Leica look' stemmed from the fact that a portable 35mm camera had a very different look (and shooting style) than a Speed Graphic or Rolleiflex. Also the reliance on medium wide to normal lenses vs the extremes of an SLR, and something about the inexactness of framing that can give it a Leica 'sense' more than a defined image quality per se. Optically, IMO, most lay people would be pressed to tell the difference from other well made cameras/lenses, esp after competent post was done. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[hdmesa]

3 hours ago, Summilux-asph said:

Well, it was posted with examples, which then turned into a real issue the M11 has. Something funky is happening with out of camera B&W JPEGs for sure. 
 

Definitely has its own….LOOK shall we say 😀

 

50 summilux M11

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!

50 summilux M10R

 

Second image looks like Cinestill 800T shot in daylight and seems like nonsensical comparison.

I swear there are bot accounts on here are trying to gaslight us.

[hdmesa]

22 minutes ago, Summilux-asph said:

Every time someone posts any comparisons, this is the response. “They edited differently”. somehow it always turns out the M11 is edited to look quite “UNIQUE”. Must be an internet conspiracy  

I think the members should start posting their own shots. 

The only unedited raw files I’ve seen were from an M11 and an A7RIV using the summilux. They pretty much looked identical. 
 

There are so many images everywhere. It’s very hard to get someone to post a side by side comparison of the M10R and M11 with the exact same lenses, just unedited raw files, taken exactly in the same way, at the same moment looking at the same thing. 
 

So what can we do? (Because many people are asking for this so they can see), All we can do is go on the internet and see different photos from different people. Different lenses and scenarios. Different editing. Etc etc. 

And if you do that long enough you start to see a pattern emerge. And the pattern I notice is the M11 definitely has it’s own UNIQUE LOOK…. shall we say. 
 

I don’t think it’s necessary to reply to these photos that they’re not the same, they’re apples and oranges, they’re not edited the same. Not the same lenses. Etc etc. This isn’t news to me. But I explained above why I think the M11 has a unique look that is different from the other M’s. It’s a pattern you see over many photos. But if someone has both cameras. Please do a comparison without editing the raw files. 
 

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!

 

If we look at these 2 other examples, it’s the same pattern again for the photos I posted above. 

I don't understand the obsession with finding a comparison like that, maybe because I owned the M10-R before the M11. I didn't buy the M11 for any kind of different rendering of the sensor/camera but only for the increased resolution and other changes like live metering in rangefinder mode and longer battery life. If the M11 had the M10-R sensor, I would have still bought it. The output difference between them are negligible. The M11 has a bit more resolution and a bit more dynamic range. That's it.