M10-R colors, APO 35mm and some thoughts

[knopfler1976]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Just now, charlesphoto99 said:

On a separate note, is that Taranto in your pics? I had an exhibition there a few years back - lovely city. 

 

Close! It was Monopoli. My favorite city in Puglia. That said I prefer to stay in a masseria rather than in any city. Why did you choose Taranto to do an exhibition? Just curious. (Other than great food great weather, etc, lol)

[charlesphoto99]

Just now, knopfler1976 said:

Close! It was Monopoli. My favorite city in Puglia. That said I prefer to stay in a masseria rather than in any city. Why did you choose Taranto to do an exhibition? Just curious. (Other than great food great weather, etc, lol)

I was working with a gallery based in Bologna, and they organized the exhibit to take place during a big music festival taking place in Taranto. The show was with another photographer (the subject being the band Nirvana) and was in the basement floor of the museum there. Later that evening Kraftwerk played near the sea - it was amazing. 

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!

[knopfler1976]

2 minutes ago, charlesphoto99 said:

I was working with a gallery based in Bologna, and they organized the exhibit to take place during a big music festival taking place in Taranto. The show was with another photographer (the subject being the band Nirvana) and was in the basement floor of the museum there. Later that evening Kraftwerk played near the sea - it was amazing. 

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!

Wow, that must be an awesome experience! Italians are definitely very good at blending sea, beaches, old towns, arts and music, more so than French! I envy you. Were those photos taken with medium format? 

[charlesphoto99]

6 minutes ago, knopfler1976 said:

Wow, that must be an awesome experience! Italians are definitely very good at blending sea, beaches, old towns, arts and music, more so than French! I envy you. Were those photos taken with medium format? 

Mine are on the far wall which are 35mm; my friend Michael's in the foreground were all shot on 120. I did shoot some medium format though back then. 

It was crazy crush of press at the opening as well. I'll try and dig up one of those pics. 

[knopfler1976]

On 11/4/2022 at 2:45 AM, M Street Photographer said:

I read your article on the homepage very carefully and I really appreciate your attitude.
What I don't quite understand is that they prefer the 0.95 on the M9 to the M10R where it's not supposed to perform as well.
I would imagine that the M10 R is too sharp for your liking. However, I would believe that the transitions and gradient are smoother, more organic and analogous than the M9.
Since I would like to understand them exactly, I have a request, if it is not too much trouble for you:
Would you be willing to show us 2 shots of the same subject with the 0.95, one with the M9, one with the M10 R.

Perhaps what you feel is clearer in a direct comparison.
Thanks

@M Street Photographer

Today is cloudy in Paris so perfect chance to do the testing (as no ND filter is needed). 

I put up a small tripod and set both M9 and M10-R to 2-second timer. M9 was focused via rangefinder while M10-R was focused via LiveView, so the framing is somewhat different. 

(1) f/0.95 -  ( left: M10-R @ ISO 100, 1/1500s )   ( right: M9 @ ISO 160, 1/4000s)

 

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!

 

To be faire with tripod and timer, Noctilux did a fair job on 40MP sensor (left). Still you can see why I felt that no need to keep 40MP files by Noctilux. 18MP is the right sweet spot for me.

Here's another comparison on the same 2 files. I changed the zoom of M10-R (left) to roughly 66% to compare better 1:1 with M9. Granted that zoom is not the same as resize/resample but it gives an idea much quickly.

 

As you can see the M10-R file need a bit more work to get to the in-camera B&W of M9 at the same resolution. It could be done but I prefer the out-of-camera M9 file for sure. 

 

(2) M10-R ISO 100 @ Noctilux at f/0.95 (left) and f/2.0 (right)

 

Finally, just to see if Noctilux could do a good job at f/2.0, the aperture of APO Summicron. It actually is pretty impressive as can seen above. Probably on par of APO Summicron 35mm. I guess APO Summicron 50mm would give similar or slightly sharper results. 

 

===

 

Conclusion:

I think I would stick to my initial conclusion to leave Noctilux on my M9. For me Noctilux is 99% street photography and 1% portrait. With M9 it proved to be outstanding for me for more than 11 years. With M10-R I don't really gain anything. (I do not need the smooth gradient nor the high ISO for my street works) Also to be able to pick up a combo and just go out and shoot, without worrying about changing lenses or bringing a camera bag, suits my style in Paris better.

Let me know what you think!

 

Jerry

 

Edited November 5, 2022 by knopfler1976

[M Street Photographer]

First, a big thank you for taking the trouble to make the comparison. Now I see and understand their decision to use the Noctilux on the M9.
I would never have thought that the difference would be so noticeable and I would do it the same way. The contrasts and sharpness of the M9 are to be preferred. I never thought that the M10 R would not come close to the M9 even at f2.

Your thoughts on the adjustment of the M10 R and Noctilux and the associated fear that it will affect the performance of other lenses, or that they will no longer perform to the usual extent after the adjustment on the M9, is obvious.

I still remember when I had the M9 new, I immediately sent it to Wetzlar with my 3 lenses (Elmarit 28 2.8, Summilux 50 1.4 and Elmarit 90 2.8) for adjustment. The existing guarantee and the proximity to Berlin made it easy for me. I commissioned Leica to adjust the M9 to reference 0 and adjust the lenses on this basis. After I got everything back after a week, I thought it was a different camera and new lenses, the qualitative difference was so big at the time before the adjustment. However, unlike you, it was easy for me, because I didn't have any other camera and thought, until the sensor was corroded, that I would take pictures with the equipment for many years to come.

When I found "my" lenses early next year, I wanted to do it exactly like I did with the M9 equipment. It would then be easier for me than for you, since I only have a Leica camera. Only with today's repair times, it can take several months, I would not be willing to do without the M10 R for so long. It remains to be seen to what extent Leica will then accept goodwill if the guarantee has been exceeded. But I have a little hope that this will be reduced to a bearable time again. However, I also have a few opportunities here in the Leica Store or with other Leica friends to test camera / lens combinations to see whether an adjustment is necessary at all.

With this in mind, I thank you again and always wish you good light.

[Jeff S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

2 hours ago, knopfler1976 said:

@M Street Photographer

Today is cloudy in Paris so perfect chance to do the testing (as no ND filter is needed). 

I put up a small tripod and set both M9 and M10-R to 2-second timer. M9 was focused via rangefinder while M10-R was focused via LiveView, so the framing is somewhat different. 

(1) f/0.95 -  ( left: M10-R @ ISO 100, 1/1500s )   ( right: M9 @ ISO 160, 1/4000s)

 

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!

 

To be faire with tripod and timer, Noctilux did a fair job on 40MP sensor (left). Still you can see why I felt that no need to keep 40MP files by Noctilux. 18MP is the right sweet spot for me.

Here's another comparison on the same 2 files. I changed the zoom of M10-R (left) to roughly 66% to compare better 1:1 with M9. Granted that zoom is not the same as resize/resample but it gives an idea much quickly.

 

As you can see the M10-R file need a bit more work to get to the in-camera B&W of M9 at the same resolution. It could be done but I prefer the out-of-camera M9 file for sure. 

 

(2) M10-R ISO 100 @ Noctilux at f/0.95 (left) and f/2.0 (right)

 

Finally, just to see if Noctilux could do a good job at f/2.0, the aperture of APO Summicron. It actually is pretty impressive as can seen above. Probably on par of APO Summicron 35mm. I guess APO Summicron 50mm would give similar or slightly sharper results. 

 

===

 

Conclusion:

I think I would stick to my initial conclusion to leave Noctilux on my M9. For me Noctilux is 99% street photography and 1% portrait. With M9 it proved to be outstanding for me for more than 11 years. With M10-R I don't really gain anything. (I do not need the smooth gradient nor the high ISO for my street works) Also to be able to pick up a combo and just go out and shoot, without worrying about changing lenses or bringing a camera bag, suits my style in Paris better.

Let me know what you think!

 

Jerry

 

Very simple to alter tone curve and apply as default import setting or as preset. Takes little effort or time; not like darkroom days.  But each to his/her own. 

Jeff

[M Street Photographer]

vor 2 Stunden schrieb Jeff S:

Very simple to alter tone curve and apply as default import setting or as preset. Takes little effort or time; not like darkroom days.  But each to his/her own. 

Jeff

It may be that it is not very complicated in this case. But it also depends on the point of view, what is not expensive for one person can be too much for the other. In the end it is a question of setting goals and your own satisfaction.
I know that everything is possible with Photoshop. 😁

[knopfler1976]

5 hours ago, M Street Photographer said:

First, a big thank you for taking the trouble to make the comparison. Now I see and understand their decision to use the Noctilux on the M9.
I would never have thought that the difference would be so noticeable and I would do it the same way. The contrasts and sharpness of the M9 are to be preferred. I never thought that the M10 R would not come close to the M9 even at f2.

Your thoughts on the adjustment of the M10 R and Noctilux and the associated fear that it will affect the performance of other lenses, or that they will no longer perform to the usual extent after the adjustment on the M9, is obvious.

I still remember when I had the M9 new, I immediately sent it to Wetzlar with my 3 lenses (Elmarit 28 2.8, Summilux 50 1.4 and Elmarit 90 2.8) for adjustment. The existing guarantee and the proximity to Berlin made it easy for me. I commissioned Leica to adjust the M9 to reference 0 and adjust the lenses on this basis. After I got everything back after a week, I thought it was a different camera and new lenses, the qualitative difference was so big at the time before the adjustment. However, unlike you, it was easy for me, because I didn't have any other camera and thought, until the sensor was corroded, that I would take pictures with the equipment for many years to come.

When I found "my" lenses early next year, I wanted to do it exactly like I did with the M9 equipment. It would then be easier for me than for you, since I only have a Leica camera. Only with today's repair times, it can take several months, I would not be willing to do without the M10 R for so long. It remains to be seen to what extent Leica will then accept goodwill if the guarantee has been exceeded. But I have a little hope that this will be reduced to a bearable time again. However, I also have a few opportunities here in the Leica Store or with other Leica friends to test camera / lens combinations to see whether an adjustment is necessary at all.

With this in mind, I thank you again and always wish you good light.

Maybe Weltzar was more professional? I was living in California back then so I sent to the US office (M9 plus Noctilux & Summicron 35mm ASPH). The results were really inconsistent. After my feedback they asked me to send again. I did. But what came back was perceived by me as somewhat even worse. I moved to Paris subsequently and had Leica Beaumarchais calibrate just M9+Noctilux for me. It worked okay but drifted over the years. Then someone recommended the paid service of Photo Suffren, which gave me almost perfect calibration. I also learned to separate Noctilux and M9 if I'm traveling and have them in the check-in luggage (with all the throwing and thumping). I have not needed calibration since then.

In any case thanks for sharing your experiences. Good to learn that someone else has gone through the process like me. We have to give Leica credit though, for they do stick with us till the end. (I can't imagine sending in a Nikon camera from 2009 for repair now, for example).

Enjoy shooting!

Jerry

Edited November 5, 2022 by knopfler1976

[Jeff S]

41 minutes ago, M Street Photographer said:

It may be that it is not very complicated in this case. But it also depends on the point of view, what is not expensive for one person can be too much for the other. In the end it is a question of setting goals and your own satisfaction.
I know that everything is possible with Photoshop. 😁

Of course, preferences and goals vary. No right or wrong. In this specific case, I was merely pointing out that his “out of camera” M9 preference could be mimicked for the M10-R by adjusting one basic contrast setting and saving it as a permanent action. Set once and forget. No complicated Photoshop needed; I do this in LR.  Same approach and philosophy setting a custom color profile for each camera.
 

For me, a worthy pic and fine print remain my goals, regardless of the gear used. Having spent decades with tedious darkroom workflow, this is simple stuff, and I’m anything but a computer geek. And after investing significant time shooting, and spending tens of thousands on quality gear, the last thing I worry about is taking a few minutes…or much longer if needed… to achieve my goals.  Others’ mileage may vary.

Edit… and ensuring one’s gear is properly calibrated is as basic as it gets.  Why spend enormous sums on quality gear and not take the time to make sure it’s operating as expected and required?

Jeff

Edited November 5, 2022 by Jeff S

[M Street Photographer]

vor einer Stunde schrieb knopfler1976:

Maybe Weltzar was more professional?....Enjoy shooting!

Jerry

I think I was lucky with Wetzlar and the adjustment result. I've also heard from others that they had to send in some lenses 5 times and because it didn't work satisfactorily, they even returned the lens.
Back then, it was not uncommon for cameras and lenses to be sent to Wetzlar once a year for adjustment and cleaning, especially after extensive travel and very intensive use. Unfortunately, the support has also dropped. The processing times are far too long, and a fee-based, accelerated service has been abolished. Apparently a lot here, as almost everywhere, was sacrificed to cut costs.
But let's continue to enjoy our M's and be somewhat grateful that Leica, contrary to the general trend, continues to offer rangefinder cameras, right up to the new analogue M6.

 

@Jeff S, 

I'm happy to share some of your ideas, but I prefer to take photos and keep my turnaround time as short as possible. Of course, if something needs to be done, I will do it.
On the other hand, I adapt various old lenses, starting with a Leitz Elmarit 3.5 3.5 from 1932 up to the early 60s. In order to be authentic and get a certain "look", this is the only viable way for me.

It would never occur to me to use software to simulate any camera or lens look that I prefer. That would also affect the look of the M9. If I want this, I would work with the M9. Because I had and loved it, before I got my M10 R I toyed with the idea of buying an M9 again, but then after careful consideration decided on the M10 R. And so I hope that I'll be happy with it for many years and not suffer the same fate as with the M9 (I wrote about it).

There is an exception when it comes to simulating a specific film (for example: Kodak ISO 32 Panatomic X). I'm tired of analogue photography and standing in the darkroom for a long time. Now I have to say that I only simulate very few films. Most of the time it's about B&W, where I like to use the Silver Efex Pro 2 simulation.

[Jeff S]

8 minutes ago, M Street Photographer said:

 

 

@Jeff S

It would never occur to me to use software to simulate any camera or lens look that I prefer. That would also affect the look of the M9. If I want this, I would work with the M9. Because I had and loved it, before I got my M10 R I toyed with the idea of buying an M9 again, but then after careful consideration decided on the M10 R. And so I hope that I'll be happy with it for many years and not suffer the same fate as with the M9 (I wrote about it).

 

I don’t use software to imitate other camera output; I do it to achieve picture-specific rendering that I desire.  There is no such thing as out-of-camera files without human input.  If one chooses to make no adjustments, then they are relying on the decisions and judgments already made by others… by Leica, by Adobe, etc.  As an example, files from high dynamic range cameras are often flat for maximum user flexibility.  That doesn’t mean resulting pic/prints should remain flat, at least not for me.  The tone curve for the M10 Monochrom was tweaked by Adobe to introduce more contrast, likely reflecting user input.  If I don’t like it as is, I merely tweak it to my liking.  Not to match another camera.  Each of my pics/prints stand in their own based on my visual goals.  Same as in my darkroom days; only the tools have changed. YMMV.

Jeff

[Adam Bonn]

It's nigh on impossible to make camera A render the same as camera B, I mean sure you can shoot the same thing with each, at the same time, then in PP work on the files side by side and match them up pretty good - but making camera A always* produce a file like camera B is a colossal ask**

As Jeff says, the software works to help us make the final image, we can save presets of frequent adjustments or profile our cameras to be more accurate or less accurate but more pleasing, but really if one loves the output of 'camera B' then the best way to get this look is too shoot with camera B

 

*away from a controlled eg studio environment, where one could produce a studio profile for each camera under the lighting used

**the size of this task would vary on the cameras used... I'd guess (never tried) that making a Fuji XT2 render colours and tones like a Fuji X-Pro2 might be more doable than making (say) a X2D render colours and tones like an M8

[M Street Photographer]

Then I misunderstood Jeff a bit about his comment on tonal values. I didn't want to create the wrong impression.
Basically we agree and want the same thing!