Why do I love the colors of certain Leicas/Cameras but not others?

[Bibowj]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

  First, thank you for reading and providing your insight and opinion....I DO appreciate it.

 

  Im on the cusp of buy an M11 but I hesitate...and its over color. I understand that some of you will say that a sensor a sensor and all are the same and up to the user, but Ive just not been able to match that historically. There are cameras that Ive LOVED in my life and others that I just can't seem to make work for me. Some I keep returning to and some I keep trying and end up selling. My question to you fine people is if I give a list of what I've loved and hated, can you tell me if theres some common thread? I really fear buying the M11 because I don't think I'm going to like the colors.... 

Here's what Ive loved:

Q1- I LOVE the colors. 100%,all in. My fav work of all time. I keep coming back 

M10R

Canon 5Dii

What Ive tried and can't jive with:

Q2: Ive tried like 5 times. GREAT feeling camera but the photos (to me) just look like a high res version of my cell phone.

SL2: Same as above

SL2s was ok... didn't love or hate it.

Sony A7IV

and pretty much every other high res body (Canon R5, Fuji GFX, D850).. all seem fine, but ... I don't know. I just didnt like the photos. 

 

I just did a search on both IG and Flickr under Leica and 90% of what I liked was Q1 and M10/10R. Is there something Im seeing that these cameras have, that newer high res bodies don't? Is it a Sony sensor thing?

  

[M Street Photographer]

I just made a decision too. Almost all cameras perform more or less well in terms of technical performance.
Image effect, color, contrasts, transitions, that was what moved me the most and so I decided on the M10 R.

Spoiled by a beloved M9, I've come a long way across different manufacturers, but what was missing was a sense of touch to my heart and joy even looking at an unedited image. I had that with the M9 and now again with the M10R. Apart from the price, I didn't find what I had been missing for a long time in the M 11. One camera was closer, the Sony A 7C. The color rendering through the firmware in connection with some lenses (Canon 50 0.95 TV, VC 50 1.0 and the 85 1.8) almost gave me what I had repressed and missed.
Now I'm back home, back to the roots, an M and for me with the M10r, the M!.

With the VC 50 1.0, I rediscovered a plasticity on the M 10 R that reminded me a lot of the Fuji medium format. I get back the emotions of the M9.

Based on my own impressions and experience, I would now recommend the M10 R over the M 11.

Now I still need some time to get to know the camera and my lenses well, but I am very confident that I will succeed. The first results enjoy and inspire me very much.

Edited August 17, 2022 by M Street Photographer

[Advertisement]

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

[Photoworks]

M11 color are very beautiful. but the images that come out of the camera are never meant to be the final product.

With all camera it is best to edit the DNG to your taste...

I imagine most images on IG and Flickr are not the JPG out of camera...

 

 

 

[Jeff S]

Well, the M10R is a modern, high resolution camera (40 MP). Its sensor (along with the M10 Monochrom) was derived from Leica S3 sensor architecture. Not a bad family tree, but the sensor manufacturer is not the whole story, as cover glass, micro lenses, filter stacks, software, etc vary thereafter.  Otherwise cameras using the same sensor, e.g., the older Sony sensor used by Fuji, Pentax and Hasselblad, would render the same.
 

Colors are a personal thing, and can be tweaked from any camera via custom profiles, different conversion software and various editing techniques.  But some cameras just seem to have a special ‘signature’ that some find appealing and hard to match. This is further complicated by display methods, including screen vs print, papers, paper profiles, inks, lighting, etc.  
 

Bottom line… if you find a system that suits your tastes, be happy and keep it.  Only way to know, however, is to use it within your own shooting, editing and display workflow. If only the camera (and lens) mattered, all of our work would look the same.

Jeff

Edited August 17, 2022 by Jeff S

[M Street Photographer]

vor 3 Minuten schrieb Photoworks:

M11 color are very beautiful. but the images that come out of the camera are never meant to be the final product.

With all camera it is best to edit the DNG to your taste...

I imagine most images on IG and Flickr are not the JPG out of camera...

Sorry, as i told from the unedited image , i meant RAW.

[SrMi]

54 minutes ago, Bibowj said:

  First, thank you for reading and providing your insight and opinion....I DO appreciate it.

 

  Im on the cusp of buy an M11 but I hesitate...and its over color. I understand that some of you will say that a sensor a sensor and all are the same and up to the user, but Ive just not been able to match that historically. There are cameras that Ive LOVED in my life and others that I just can't seem to make work for me. Some I keep returning to and some I keep trying and end up selling. My question to you fine people is if I give a list of what I've loved and hated, can you tell me if theres some common thread? I really fear buying the M11 because I don't think I'm going to like the colors.... 

Here's what Ive loved:

Q1- I LOVE the colors. 100%,all in. My fav work of all time. I keep coming back 

M10R

Canon 5Dii

What Ive tried and can't jive with:

Q2: Ive tried like 5 times. GREAT feeling camera but the photos (to me) just look like a high res version of my cell phone.

SL2: Same as above

SL2s was ok... didn't love or hate it.

Sony A7IV

and pretty much every other high res body (Canon R5, Fuji GFX, D850).. all seem fine, but ... I don't know. I just didnt like the photos. 

 

I just did a search on both IG and Flickr under Leica and 90% of what I liked was Q1 and M10/10R. Is there something Im seeing that these cameras have, that newer high res bodies don't? Is it a Sony sensor thing?

  

Are you talking JPEGs or raw files? The camera determines the colors with JPEGs. The raw file colors are up to you, depending on the color profile you are using and the raw processor. 
The underlying sensor silicon (e.g., Sony) is monochrome. However, the CFA is typically specific to the camera manufacturer, and so is the firmware that creates the raw data.

[Bibowj]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 minute ago, SrMi said:

Are you talking JPEGs or raw files? The camera determines the colors with JPEGs. The raw file colors are up to you, depending on the color profile you are using and the raw processor. 
The underlying sensor silicon (e.g., Sony) is monochrome. However, the CFA is typically specific to the camera manufacturer, and so is the firmware that creates the raw data.

Im talking 100% raw.... some cameras file just sing once you start editing (to me) others I can never make work.

[MJB]

34 minutes ago, M Street Photographer said:

Sorry, as i told from the unedited image , i meant RAW.

I believe the point that @Photoworks was making is that you can't judge a camera's output by what other people are posting on social media.  You have no idea what their post-processing workflow looks like, and you've never seen their RAW images.  Are you doing any post-processing at all, or just expecting to love the colors right out of the camera?  If you're shooting .jpg, well, I'd argue that Leica's .jpgs suck (relatively) and if you're shooting .DNG, I'd argue that those are meant to be a starting point.  In my opinion. post-processing has WAY more impact on what your final image looks like than your camera.

[PeterGA]

2 minutes ago, Bibowj said:

Im talking 100% raw.... some cameras file just sing once you start editing (to me) others I can never make work.

Post an example if you want specific feedback - otherwise it is just another thread on a photograph forum which is all words blah blah blah

[Bibowj]

7 minutes ago, PeterGA said:

Post an example if you want specific feedback - otherwise it is just another thread on a photograph forum which is all words blah blah blah

Not exactly very nice. My apologies if I wasted your time.

[Photoworks]

18 minutes ago, Bibowj said:

Im talking 100% raw.... some cameras file just sing once you start editing (to me) others I can never make work.

Almost sounds like a post processing skill issue. 

I use and have used most of the cameras you have listed and out of most of them I get professional results.

[PeterGA]

9 minutes ago, Bibowj said:

Not exactly very nice. My apologies if I wasted your time.

How do you expect people to comment on your 'issue' - which is just a preference btw - sans reference to specific examples? If you think this is not very nice - my apologies.

There are tools out there that allow someone who has just a base level of understanding about post processing to achieve any 'look' they want from any modern sensor. 

 

 

 

[Kwesi]

1 hour ago, Bibowj said:

  First, thank you for reading and providing your insight and opinion....I DO appreciate it.

 

  Im on the cusp of buy an M11 but I hesitate...and its over color. I understand that some of you will say that a sensor a sensor and all are the same and up to the user, but Ive just not been able to match that historically. There are cameras that Ive LOVED in my life and others that I just can't seem to make work for me. Some I keep returning to and some I keep trying and end up selling. My question to you fine people is if I give a list of what I've loved and hated, can you tell me if theres some common thread? I really fear buying the M11 because I don't think I'm going to like the colors.... 

Here's what Ive loved:

Q1- I LOVE the colors. 100%,all in. My fav work of all time. I keep coming back 

M10R

Canon 5Dii

What Ive tried and can't jive with:

Q2: Ive tried like 5 times. GREAT feeling camera but the photos (to me) just look like a high res version of my cell phone.

SL2: Same as above

SL2s was ok... didn't love or hate it.

Sony A7IV

and pretty much every other high res body (Canon R5, Fuji GFX, D850).. all seem fine, but ... I don't know. I just didnt like the photos. 

 

I just did a search on both IG and Flickr under Leica and 90% of what I liked was Q1 and M10/10R. Is there something Im seeing that these cameras have, that newer high res bodies don't? Is it a Sony sensor thing?

  

My suggestion to you is: don’t buy the M11. 

Not because of the M11 but rather because of you. Based on your post, you’ve tried and returned enough cameras by now to have a solid sense for what will work for you. 
Trust your instincts. 

[m410]

21 minutes ago, Bibowj said:

Not exactly very nice. My apologies if I wasted your time.

NO NEED to apologize to people like that.  There are a few of them on the Forum, thankfully not many.  Ask your questions as you are comfortable with and for the purposes you wish.

Any question submitted here on the Forum doesn't deserve a smart-ass response...please feel free to ask away.

 

[MJB]

I really don't think @PeterGA's response was smart-assed or rude - he's just made the very good point that this whole conversation has no visual reference, and as such, how could any of us possibly provide constructive feedback.  We're literally describing color with words alone here, when the forum supports image posting.  Just a thought.  It would be helpful if the OP would post some examples of what he perceives to be "good" color versus "bad" color.

[SrMi]

1 hour ago, Bibowj said:

Im talking 100% raw.... some cameras file just sing once you start editing (to me) others I can never make work.

Yes, some cameras can fit one's expectations initially, but some need more work. The same is with profiles and post processors.
Which color profiles and post-processors are you using to look at the raw files?
I do not see much difference in my M10-R and M11 files after I have processed them. However, I do not remember that the M10-R files require less post-processing work.

I am using Adobe software (LrC) and various Cobalt profiles.

[THEME]

The M11 RAW files are very elastic so to say, with amazing dynamic range, they can really be stretched. OOC is okay, but takes some practice, as with any other camera. Capture One workflow nails it for me. Even blown highlights, haven't come across many yet that don't hold usable data. I shoot RAW exclusively, pleased with the output. 

But of course it's not like hey this camera is pricey, perfect shots guaranteed. The M11 delivers high-quality raw material files. Up to the photographer how to work this raw data. But of course if the OP exactly knows what he's after, the M11 in-camera data processing might not be up his alley.

[hdmesa]

3 hours ago, Bibowj said:

  First, thank you for reading and providing your insight and opinion....I DO appreciate it.

 

  Im on the cusp of buy an M11 but I hesitate...and its over color. I understand that some of you will say that a sensor a sensor and all are the same and up to the user, but Ive just not been able to match that historically. There are cameras that Ive LOVED in my life and others that I just can't seem to make work for me. Some I keep returning to and some I keep trying and end up selling. My question to you fine people is if I give a list of what I've loved and hated, can you tell me if theres some common thread? I really fear buying the M11 because I don't think I'm going to like the colors.... 

Here's what Ive loved:

Q1- I LOVE the colors. 100%,all in. My fav work of all time. I keep coming back 

M10R

Canon 5Dii

What Ive tried and can't jive with:

Q2: Ive tried like 5 times. GREAT feeling camera but the photos (to me) just look like a high res version of my cell phone.

SL2: Same as above

SL2s was ok... didn't love or hate it.

Sony A7IV

and pretty much every other high res body (Canon R5, Fuji GFX, D850).. all seem fine, but ... I don't know. I just didnt like the photos. 

 

I just did a search on both IG and Flickr under Leica and 90% of what I liked was Q1 and M10/10R. Is there something Im seeing that these cameras have, that newer high res bodies don't? Is it a Sony sensor thing?

  

You're not crazy, but it's not just the cameras, it's the available profiles for these cameras in your post-processing program of choice.

This is all just my opinion based on how I see things, how I edit, and the fact that I most often edit in Capture One:

Q (original) – At low ISO in beautiful light rendered a photo with color that remains unmatched. High ISO was not so great. Shadow recovery fidelity shows its age today. Samples:

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!

SL (original 601) – same sensor as Q, same look in C1 with a good lens (no samples)

Q2 – terrible profile in Capture One, and I didn't want to be forced to use Lightroom exclusively. I made some nice photos with the Q2, but it's not been my favorite. Samples:

SL2 – never used it

SL2-S – The heir apparent to the original Q. But: you can't use shit lenses with it and expect it to look as good as the original Q did (not a full-on 28 Lux, but close enough). If the SL2-S didn't impress you to the level of the original Q, it's likely you're not used to the wide dynamic range out of the DNGs before editing. Samples:

 

M10-R – very close to the original Q. Great color a notch above the M11. (no samples)

M11 – a notch below the SL2-S and M10-R as far as color goes in C1. I shot them side-by side and always preferred the SL2-S version. If I didn't have the SL2-S at the same time, I'd probably have put them on the same level in my mind until ISO hits ~6400. (no samples)

-|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- 

I'm not going to keep posting photos, because throw them all together and no one, including me, could tell what camera shot what. Lens choice often makes more difference. But that doesn't mean we can't have our own preferences based on CAMERA + PROFILE + HOW WE SHOOT + HOW WE EDIT.

 

Edited August 18, 2022 by hdmesa

[PeterGA]

4 hours ago, m410 said:

NO NEED to apologize to people like that.  There are a few of them on the Forum, thankfully not many.  Ask your questions as you are comfortable with and for the purposes you wish.

Any question submitted here on the Forum doesn't deserve a smart-ass response...please feel free to ask away.

 

Here we go a self appointed stereotyper who can't read and replaces valid commentary with insult for good measure- smart arsery personified.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[PeterGA]

2 hours ago, hdmesa said:

You're not crazy, but it's not just the cameras, it's the available profiles for these cameras in your post-processing program of choice.

This is all just my opinion based on how I see things, how I edit, and the fact that I most often edit in Capture One:

Q (original) – At low ISO in beautiful light rendered a photo with color that remains unmatched. High ISO was not so great. Shadow recovery fidelity shows its age today. Samples:

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!

SL (original 601) – same sensor as Q, same look in C1 with a good lens (no samples)

Q2 – terrible profile in Capture One, and I didn't want to be forced to use Lightroom exclusively. I made some nice photos with the Q2, but it's not been my favorite. Samples:

SL2 – never used it

SL2-S – The heir apparent to the original Q. But: you can't use shit lenses with it and expect it to look as good as the original Q did (not a full-on 28 Lux, but close enough). If the SL2-S didn't impress you to the level of the original Q, it's likely you're not used to the wide dynamic range out of the DNGs before editing. Samples:

 

M10-R – very close to the original Q. Great color a notch above the M11. (no samples)

M11 – a notch below the SL2-S and M10-R as far as color goes in C1. I shot them side-by side and always preferred the SL2-S version. If I didn't have the SL2-S at the same time, I'd probably have put them on the same level in my mind until ISO hits ~6400. (no samples)

-|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- -|- 

I'm not going to keep posting photos, because throw them all together and no one, including me, could tell what camera shot what. Lens choice often makes more difference. But that doesn't mean we can't have our own preferences based on CAMERA + PROFILE + HOW WE SHOOT + HOW WE EDIT.

 

Everyone of your examples merely presents your opinion - which is fine. However how does this help in the discussion - except to underline the fact that perception is opinion or preference? 

If one wishes to change the treatment of a raw file and or reject the canned profiles presented as a fait accompli by LR and or C1 and or whoever - it isn't exactly rocket science to make one's own profile to get the base line output that satisfies the user.

Blaming a camera's sensor or heaping praise on its "100% raw output" ( which is a laughable concept in itself )- doesn't address the bottom line responsibility that each photographer takes for how their tools work.

C1 has its own standard raw processing for each camera it supports as does LR as do whatever other raw processors people care to employ - but these processors don't define what a camera's sensor can or can't look like - that is the photographer's responsibility.

Sensors aren't 'film types ' raw files aren't 'film' types  where the manufacturers decide on the 'look' - but hey if people wish to ignore the technology and pretend that is what sensors are and what raw files are - they are welcome to do so.