Jump to content

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


Bibowj
 Share

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

7 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?

  

From my experience the choice of camera definitely affects post processing results (in one way or another). I was very happy with SL 601 + C1, M9 + C1 and now M10 + LR. Due to aquisition of M10 I was "forced" to go back to LR. Rendering of its raw files in C1 was just not OK to my eyes. Q was not my cup of tea (similar rendering to Huawei smartphone).

I check photos posted within LUF sections and to my eyes, M9 and M10R are the kings of rendering. No matter of who posted the pohotos, which software was used, which profile applied... to my eyes M10R and M9 are still the best regarding rendering. Speaking of M11 photos: I'm really not impressed at all. On contrary many M11 photos seems to me not "Leica" crisp, colors are also not to my liking.

But of course as others already commented: at the end it is all a matter of tastes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't quite understand why sometimes an aggressive undertone and personal evaluation is introduced here.
Nobody has to answer if they don't like the question.

On the topic: In my opinion, there are the following components that are responsible for the coloring and image effect, among others:


Sensor, camera firmware, lens, recording parameters, the interpretation of the RAW by the RAW converter, the subsequent processing and of course the photographer.
When I view the same unprocessed RAW in LR and C1 with no import settings, side by side on screen, I see a clear difference on my calibrated monitor which I like better in C1.

And that's how it is with my vision, including color vision. If I like a RAW result, unedited, from a certain camera better than that from other cameras, why shouldn't I prefer them?
Of course I can turn everything around in PS with whatever effort, but why should I do that when it can be done with little effort and waste my time?
I use these more for photography.

If I now also have the same raw recordings, e.g. comparing an M9 to those of other cameras and/or manufacturers in C1, I had seen a noticeable difference in color scheme that spoke in favor of the M9. After replacing the M9 sensor and the associated new firmware, the look was gone, which Leica Service also confirmed to me.
If someone, due to their color sensitivity, has the impression that there are visible differences when comparing the M10R RAW with another M and therefore prefers the M10 R, that's completely ok.

To each his own, there is no absolute statement, we are different people. Personal color impressions, emotions, haptics, own understanding and ability distinguishes us and enriches a discussion. However, then putting a derogatory rating and doubts about the abilities of others only poisons the mood and doesn't get us anywhere.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For me, I've looked back through all the shots I've made in the past few years, comparing shots taken on the M10R and M11. I realised that almost all my shots taken on M10R were converted to black and white while over 95% of my M11 shots has colours. Thats what convinced me that I liked the M11 colours more. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor 7 Minuten schrieb Ktsa5239:

For me, I've looked back through all the shots I've made in the past few years, comparing shots taken on the M10R and M11. I realised that almost all my shots taken on M10R were converted to black and white while over 95% of my M11 shots has colours. Thats what convinced me that I liked the M11 colours more. 

That's okay too, if you have this color sensitivity. However, the question remains why 95% were converted to B&W? Was the coloring of the M10 R that bad in your eyes? Or was it just a phase that you preferred B&W.
Interestingly, I also had a pronounced B&W phase.
A personal conversation with Joel Meirowitz, who has always preferred color, brought me back to color photography.
Today it is so that I convert a maximum of 25% to B&W.

Link to post
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Photoworks said:

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...

 

 

 

The OOC JPGS from the M11 are impressive. I always shoot RAW too and an archive fle and for post-processing.

 

Regards,
Bud James

Please check out my fine art and travel photography at www.budjames.photography.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Or to tell you a metaphor, OP:

Once at a beach in beautiful Mexico we're among friends, someone the other day bought a cheap guitar for the fun of it.

Around the fire, he started playing, but wasn't really able to play. It sounded horrible. He had good reason: it was a cheap guitar from a local store.

Then some young guy no one knew showed up. He asked if he could have and play the guitar. My friend said: sure, but it's a piece of turd.

The young guy grabbed the guitar and oh wow, he made that instrument perform, unbelievable.

The moral of the story: not everyone masters the same instrument the same.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Where possible, I always shoot RAW with an M10-P. Sometimes the RAW output can be used as-is with no editing. More often, some post processing is needed.

The good news is that there are many extremely good post software available - Lightroom, Capture One, ON1 etc. That's probably why Leica always gave a PP software license with every new camera purchase.

In all honesty, after post-processing edits, and without sharing EXIF information, few will be able to correctly identify the camera used to take the photo.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I recognise the question.  I have some perceptions of my own to share.  I don’t know how much sense I’m making however.

I’ve tried some tweaks to profiles, but never quite managed to make real and consistent improvements to the images I got out of cameras that I do not like.  Usually however, I changed too many aspects at once to truly understand what made the difference.  I liked my Nikon 70d underwater shots more than my later Sony Nex 5.  However, I also went from using a single Ikelite strobe with perfect color temperature and a circular flash tube to dual Inon strobes.  Now using a Z7 and Retra strobes it’s all wonderful.

I liked my M(240), but far prefer the M11.  However, I also learned not to use automatic white balance.

It seems that the quality of the light and the right white balance have played at least as big a role in what I like as the camera or the editing program (Capture One, for sure!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting thread indeed. I thought there were two kinds of photographers, raw shooters and jpeg shooters. Now i realize that there is a third category, raw shooters behaving like jpeg shooters :D. Just kidding but folks complaining about the color rendition of their camera may wish to consider that raw files are interpreted by raw converters and that they may try other raw converters or other color profiles if they don't like the one they're using at present. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, M Street Photographer said:

That's okay too, if you have this color sensitivity. However, the question remains why 95% were converted to B&W? Was the coloring of the M10 R that bad in your eyes? Or was it just a phase that you preferred B&W.
Interestingly, I also had a pronounced B&W phase.
A personal conversation with Joel Meirowitz, who has always preferred color, brought me back to color photography.
Today it is so that I convert a maximum of 25% to B&W.

Its impossible to tell, perhaps my B&W phase just happened to coincide with the period I was using the M10R. But I do find the colours on the M10R not as pleasing to my eyes. It just comes down to personal preference. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 8/17/2022 at 7:07 PM, 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?

  

I've seen the M11 can lean toward magenta is some situations, but from what I've read from others and confirmed with my own editing, the magenta can be corrected in LR adjusting Tint to about -8 or as needed or not. 

In the meantime you can try something like Cobalt color profiles and digital emulations for any of your cameras. This company seems to produce color profiles that many who complain about various camera color responses seem to like. For instance:

https://www.cobalt-image.com/product/leicam/

"Fully replicate a Leica M10R

This set is the emulation of the colour the output coming from the Leica M10R camera; both .jpg and .dngs have been emulated!
The modern colour palette is now available on all your other cameras with many options; all the M10 lovers will be able to find the excellent colour feeling of their favourite camera on every other raw file!

Included

from Camera jpg:
M10R Standard
M10R BW

From .DNGs
M10R Embedded
M10R Adobe Std."

Link to post
Share on other sites

vor 4 Stunden schrieb lct:

Interesting thread indeed. I thought there were two kinds of photographers, raw shooters and jpeg shooters. Now i realize that there is a third category, raw shooters behaving like jpeg shooters :D. Just kidding but folks complaining about the color rendition of their camera may wish to consider that raw files are interpreted by raw converters and that they may try other raw converters or other color profiles if they don't like the one they're using at present.

But if I import 2 RAWs, the same motif and the same exposure conditions, the same lens, from different cameras into C1 without presettings and then notice a difference in the coloring, then the two manufacturers are different. And if I then, with my personal taste, feel attracted to a camera, that's ok.
That was the case with the M9 and is now the same with the M 10R.

I experienced that too with different lenses. E.g. In my opinion, the VC Apo Lanthar series has a particularly attractive color scheme, which even differs visibly from other VC lenses.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would say that you can go wrong with M11 when talking about the color rendition. 

I am also a picky person on the color rendition on each camera bodies, considering the every aspect that may have effect on the final result. No regret here in M11. I see lovely SOOC Jpegs and fantastic Raw file to play with. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 8/18/2022 at 7:07 AM, 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?

  

most cameras you mentioned do use sensors from sony.

considering the cameras you love and which you dislike are mostly lower res sensors, except the M10R(though, is 40 alot these days?)

i have a friend who owns an Phase One IQ4, and he kinda regrets buying it, saying the images look too clean, hygenic even.

so i ask you, maybe its not really the colors?

i do own an M10R and M10M, and a contax 645, with P65+ and achromatic+ back(both ccd)

when i watch the images on the screen of the M10s, images look always better, much better, because the LCD is simply so much better than what the P series of P1 could deliver.

but when watching the images on the screen usually i prefer the Phase One images.

What i also dont understand, that you like the colors of the M10R, daylight whitebalance looks quite greenish, i think i read about this also here on the forum a few times.

But back to my point, maybe its not the colors that please you, but the overall image style of lower res images.
Think about it  the color stuff again i would say

 

Ps.

i also downgraded from a GFX100 back to a Phase one P65+, what started as a sentiment acquisition, lead to, me using the C645 and P1 nearly exclusively again.

I never was a huge fan of sony sensors, and especially their cameras, especially after the A7RII i will never get one again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have owned and used cameras from each generation of the Digital M with the exception of the M8 and M10R.

I have found that each generation has a slightly different take on color rendition, which if one chooses, can be further explored in post.

Here is my take - I have only used Adobe Lightroom for processing my M DNG's:

I loved the M9P colors, so rich and strong. When I switched to M240P I was initially disheartened. Gone was the punchy, in your face color and replaced with a gentler more Kodak Portra like palette. Over time I grew to like it with the exception of how it rendered reds which always felt not quite right and difficult to print on my Epson. The M10P restored my faith in reds and the overall colors saturation level and look was closer to the M9. The M11 color output is on a whole other level. I can only describe it as transparent.

Working with each M sensor has been a joy and I do love the fact that the folks at Leica enjoy color as much as I do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, lct said:

Interesting thread indeed. I thought there were two kinds of photographers, raw shooters and jpeg shooters. Now i realize that there is a third category, raw shooters behaving like jpeg shooters :D. Just kidding but folks complaining about the color rendition of their camera may wish to consider that raw files are interpreted by raw converters and that they may try other raw converters or other color profiles if they don't like the one they're using at present. 

Lol! For me, I have zero to complain about with regard to M11 color, but I know the SLS-2 consistently gave me better color with the same lenses when processed in C1 using their respective profiles. I shot them together, and while close, the SL2-S profile in C1 was just better. One of the tests I do is to crank up saturation on the DNGs and see which one turns into baby poop first. SL2-S color stays true, while the M11 gives me the side-eye much sooner 🤨 Same with the Q versus Q2.

I tried the M11 Cobalt profiles, but still the SL2-S was still better to my eye. A minor difference, but an important one to me. And unless something is horribly wrong with a profile in C1 or L1, we have the profiles we will have from now until eternity. 

To illustrate how powerful the role of the post-processor is, when I shot the Canon R5, I was very happy with its rendering in C1 — until I tried processing the RAWs in Canon’s own DPP program. I couldn’t believe the difference, the files were incredible. But DPP is so slow and terrible to use, it wasn’t worth it to process all my R5 shots with it.

Anyway, everyone can do what they want. But I decide on my cameras of choice based on more than just the camera. I also take into consideration how well they work with C1 and how easy it is for me to get the results I want. Forget color checkers, custom profiles, and all that bullshit. This is my hobby for crying out loud, not my job.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...