M11 or M11 Monochrome ?

[Ne314satel]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

51 minutes ago, gotium said:

Worse? I wouldn't say worse, just lower contrast - and by design. What this shows me is how much nicer the noise is from the M11M despite significantly higher ISO.

Worse, less - no difference. The gray transition tonality of the M11 and M11M is the same. The M11M is better in noise and sharpness, but the possibilities for editing a color file in b/w are higher due to the color curves in m11. The result - you can make an absolutely identical file with the M11 and M11M when shooting in the daytime. Of all the Leica monochromes, only the M9M has a really different b/w - it is closest to film. All the others are completely digital cameras with a digital look.

[hdmesa]

4 hours ago, Ne314satel said:

...The gray transition tonality of the M11 and M11M is the same...

You can certainly alter the DNGs to give similar results, but natively they each have a unique sensitivity to different color frequencies.

[pgh]

On 5/8/2025 at 8:18 AM, Ne314satel said:

This shows how much worse the contrast is on the m11m. Even at 2.8 the contrast is worse than at 1.4. Sharpness is better on the m11m.

However, you can make your own comparison.

One person’s “worse” contrast is most people’s higher level of overall acuity in the file - sort of a big reason you spend money on the mono sensor. So yea, you’re seeing the difference - even at a file this small. 

I don’t know about most people but I save sorting out desired contrast for the last step, right before printing, and prefer the camera hold as many tones in between black and white as possible. In other words, give me a lower contrast file to work with. 

[Ne314satel]

On 5/10/2025 at 12:56 AM, pgh said:

One person’s “worse” contrast is most people’s higher level of overall acuity in the file - sort of a big reason you spend money on the mono sensor. So yea, you’re seeing the difference - even at a file this small. 

I don’t know about most people but I save sorting out desired contrast for the last step, right before printing, and prefer the camera hold as many tones in between black and white as possible. In other words, give me a lower contrast file to work with. 

M11M - shoots worse than M10M, that's my opinion. "Worse" - in rendering, in tone transfer. But better in resolution and digital purity of the picture. Someone needs digital purity, I'm used to shooting on film in black and white and look for digital pictures that look like film. Everyone has their own outlook on life.
But M11M pictures without processing are gray and flat. Even in comparison with M11. It's just a fact. They can be improved, of course.
We all forget a little how film transfers contrast and shadows. Just watch this video comparing M10M with film.

https://youtu.be/TlcWjeV_zO8?feature=shared
And I reshot this picture with base ISO from M11 and M11M (the same lens - Noctilux 50mm F/0.95). And increased the fragment to 300%. Without processing. M11 -left, M11M - right.

 

 

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 June 18 by Ne314satel

[pgh]

1 hour ago, Ne314satel said:

M11M - shoots worse than M10M, that's my opinion. "Worse" - in rendering, in tone transfer. But better in resolution and digital purity of the picture. Someone needs digital purity, I'm used to shooting on film in black and white and look for digital pictures that look like film. Everyone has their own outlook on life.
But M11M pictures without processing are gray and flat. Even in comparison with M11. It's just a fact. They can be improved, of course.
We all forget a little how film transfers contrast and shadows. Just watch this video comparing M10M with film.

https://youtu.be/TlcWjeV_zO8?feature=shared
And I reshot this picture with base ISO from M11 and M11M (the same lens - Noctilux 50mm F/0.95). And increased the fragment to 300%. Without processing. M11 -left, M11M - right.

 

 

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!

You had originally mentioned the original M mono as the only mono M with a distinctive (filmic) look. I wouldn’t know about the m11 versus m10m, which is what you mention now, since I use the M10M and am more than happy with it and have not shot a mono M11 and have absolutely zero interest in any M11 series cameras (after trying out the regular M11 some time ago I was quite happy to stick with my M10 stable).

At any rate, if I really wanted my pictures to look like film I would shoot film. I understand that film often has a pleasing look to many (myself included), but I don’t understand the fixation with making digital files look like film. For me it’s just the missing the forest for the trees - you have to appreciate it on its own terms. I’m not going to watch a YouTuber blather on about file comparisons when I take my M10M files for what they are, which is something I value on its own, and work with that. I’ve no need to think about what they are versus film - they’re not, and they’re not supposed to be. 

Edited June 18 by pgh

[Ne314satel]

1 hour ago, pgh said:

You had originally mentioned the original M mono as the only mono M with a distinctive (filmic) look. I wouldn’t know about the m11 versus m10m, which is what you mention now, since I use the M10M and am more than happy with it and have not shot a mono M11 and have absolutely zero interest in any M11 series cameras (after trying out the regular M11 some time ago I was quite happy to stick with my M10 stable).

At any rate, if I really wanted my pictures to look like film I would shoot film. I understand that film often has a pleasing look to many (myself included), but I don’t understand the fixation with making digital files look like film. For me it’s just the missing the forest for the trees - you have to appreciate it on its own terms. I’m not going to watch a YouTuber blather on about file comparisons when I take my M10M files for what they are, which is something I value on its own, and work with that. I’ve no need to think about what they are versus film - they’re not, and they’re not supposed to be. 

Then I don't really understand why you are answering in this topic if you don't have m11m and m11

[Guest]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

14 minutes ago, Ne314satel said:

Then I don't really understand why you are answering in this topic if you don't have m11m and m11

So, why did you start talking about the m10? 

If you bring it up, people are entitled to reply.

[Ne314satel]

1 hour ago, Corius said:

So, why did you start talking about the m10? 

If you bring it up, people are entitled to reply.

Do you have anything to say on the topic or are you his lawyer? And I need to call my lawyer?😀

[pgh]

2 hours ago, Ne314satel said:

Then I don't really understand why you are answering in this topic if you don't have m11m and m11

Because in your earlier comment you essentially equated all monochromes aside from the M9 as having the same “digital” problem. So if all of them have the same problem then my m10 is a good proxy for the m11. Even given that, having used regular m11 I have opinions about them (obviously). 

[Jeff S]

12 hours ago, Ne314satel said:

But M11M pictures without processing are gray and flat. Even in comparison with M11. It's just a fact. They can be improved, of course.
 

 

 

 

Of course, merely a function of files with high dynamic range, and default import tone curve.  Adobe/Leica, after similar complaints about M10M files, implemented a default “S” curve.  The contrast curve (and other parameters) can be changed in seconds by the user, for any camera, either by picture or by changing the default import setting (or by preset). 

I own the M9M and M10M, and can make imported/edited files indistinguishable by my print viewers.  I don’t own the M11M, but I’m confident that any skilled user could shoot and edit files to taste. 

[Ne314satel]

47 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

Of course, merely a function of files with high dynamic range, and default import tone curve.  Adobe/Leica, after similar complaints about M10M files, implemented a default “S” curve.  The contrast curve (and other parameters) can be changed in seconds by the user, for any camera, either by picture or by changing the default import setting (or by preset). 

I own the M9M and M10M, and can make imported/edited files indistinguishable by my print viewers.  I don’t own the M11M, but I’m confident that any skilled user could shoot and edit files to taste. 

I can discuss both the m9m and m10m for a long time with great pleasure, because I had them. But I would suggest that everyone return to the topic of the m11 and m11m. Otherwise, it will be an endless discussion. Some people like film, some like CCD, and everyone else likes (or not) Sony sensors. And some like color photos in general.

Any photo can be edited and almost always none of us will guess what was taken with. I was talking only about how a camera shoots, not how someone knows Photoshop.

[Jeff S]

12 minutes ago, Ne314satel said:

I was talking only about how a camera shoots, not how someone knows Photoshop.

Did the M10M “shoot” differently when Leica/Adobe changed the default import tone curve from linear to S shaped, and initial files went from flat to contrasty? Someone has to make default settings, in camera and after.  Flat grey files, which YOU cited, are inherent with high DR cameras. 

[Tseg]

I was debating whether to spring for a Monochrome at some point.   By coincidence, a few minutes ago I was playing around with an M11-D to see how the "Preview" SOOC JPG downloads come out... I think my camera is set to HC B&W JPG (but being an M11-D and only putting DNG files on my SD card I've rarely seen a JPG from this camera.

F2 at ISO 800 (Auto ISO) shot of my desk, primarily illuminated by my monitor.  471kb file.   I'm now thinking the only reason for me to get a Monochrome is so I can claim I have a Monochrome.  Maybe that will be my M12 upgrade? 

 

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!

[Ne314satel]

8 hours ago, Tseg said:

I was debating whether to spring for a Monochrome at some point.   By coincidence, a few minutes ago I was playing around with an M11-D to see how the "Preview" SOOC JPG downloads come out... I think my camera is set to HC B&W JPG (but being an M11-D and only putting DNG files on my SD card I've rarely seen a JPG from this camera.

F2 at ISO 800 (Auto ISO) shot of my desk, primarily illuminated by my monitor.  471kb file.   I'm now thinking the only reason for me to get a Monochrome is so I can claim I have a Monochrome.  Maybe that will be my M12 upgrade? 

Thanks for the feedback on the topic)) My opinion is that psychology is important - it's nice to know that you have a monochrome😀. In practice, the real advantages of the M11M monochrome are when shooting at night (high ISO) and slightly better resolution (relevant for architecture and landscape in black and white). Shooting during the day at "normal" ISO - there is no difference. I don't see it even at 400-500%. The rendering is the same, but the M11M has less contrast and too much gray. But everything can be fixed in the editor.

I plan to compare the X2D and M11M in black and white when photographing a landscape and architecture, but this will be more of a lens comparison. If someone has done this, write a few words here.

Edited June 19 by Ne314satel

[Smudgerer]

On 1/19/2024 at 11:38 AM, Derbyshire Man said:

For me I think it's a bit more finely balanced. I have always liked seeing the monochrome image through the viewfinder in monochrome. I also don't mind the red peaking focus in the EVF vs RF (for monochrome only - colour I prefer the RF I think). It gives with one hand and takes away with the other.

Of course I could always find a spot for a M11M in addition, don't get me wrong!

 I find myself agreeing with you on your points regarding the Q2M, it's a very useful piece of kit. A keeper for now for sure.

I do have the M11M, ( with the M11-D )............Regarding the M11-D, if the jpeg output is set to B&W and one uses a Visoflex II, is the EVF image in B&W? I don't have a Visoflex, but this would make one a tad more an attractive proposition for use with the M11-D.

The B&W EVF in the Q2M is terrific, again I agree as that seems to be something you like about the camera too, though I never use peaking as I hate the mess it can make visually in the VF, the EVF I've always found clear enough to focus well and the zoom-in function when in manual focusing is good enough too. I am also a fan of the 28mm lens FL, but if there was anything I would like regarding the camera it would be to make the 28mm lens not so much of a "lump" on the Q and make the thing more pocketable, Not doable I guess or Leica would have done so.

Strangely though, with both the Q2M and the M11-M in the arsenal, I am finding that I am veering back to B&W film imaging and the M7/M6/M2's are getting more of an airing nowadays, haven't yet figured out why that is. De-digitization / DA ( digital anonymous ), meetings kicking in maybe?

 

 

[Tseg]

3 hours ago, Smudgerer said:

I do have the M11M, ( with the M11-D )............Regarding the M11-D, if the jpeg output is set to B&W and one uses a Visoflex II, is the EVF image in B&W? I don't have a Visoflex, but this would make one a tad more an attractive proposition for use with the M11-D.

 

Correct, B&W view with red focus peaking in Visoflex 2 EVF when set to B&W JPG with M11-D… which I primarily use for my close focus lenses.  It is an attractive proposition as it adds a “modern” capability to retro functionality… when desired.

[Smudgerer]

1 hour ago, Tseg said:

Correct, B&W view with red focus peaking in Visoflex 2 EVF when set to B&W JPG with M11-D… which I primarily use for my close focus lenses.  It is an attractive proposition as it adds a “modern” capability to retro functionality… when desired.

Thank you Tseg!........I've a credit with a Leica Store that just about matches the cost of a Visoflex II, most likely the cheapest new thing in the store! ), with this news I might actually pull the trigger on getting one.

I hate focus peaking and I guess wouldn't use that but to be able to see in B&W would be a useful bonus.

Cheers!

Edited June 19 by Smudgerer

[Tseg]

2 hours ago, Smudgerer said:

I hate focus peaking and I guess wouldn't use that...

I've always assumed I could not disable focus peaking with the Visoflex 2 on the M11-D as the option to disable is not in the Fotos app.   But your comment had me experiment and now I realized pressing the Function Button allows me to scroll threw various EVF views, with one of them disabling all graphics on the screen and no focus peaking... but focus zoom is still activated when turning the focus ring and un-zoomed with 1/2 press of the shutter button.  Nice.   The M11-D continues to be more functional than I ever imagined... but I know this thread title relates to Profiles and I am not aware that profiles can be created in the M11-D.

[PavelS]

I find the variety of opinions in this thread interesting, as they reflect different tastes, experiences, and expectations among users.

As someone new to Monochrome, I purchased the M11M in January of this year. Being an avid black-and-white photographer for many years, I’ve used various camera systems and developed a love for the Silver Efex plugin for Lightroom as my go-to method for achieving consistently pleasing monochrome images, regardless of the digital camera I’ve used. I mainly shoot portraits and cityscapes, and in both cases, I prefer contrasty “recipes” inspired by Kodak Tri-X 400, sometimes diluted with a bit of Dynamic Brightness if needed. For less contrasty scenes, I favor an Agfa APX 400-based recipe. Last year, I also began experimenting with monochrome conversions in Lightroom using color channel mixing, creating my own presets with Silver Efex as a reference point.

Initially, my first images from the M11M were quite a shock—they appeared very flat compared to what I was used to. Even comparing the "Hi Contrast" JPEGs from the M11M to those from the SL2-S or SL, I found the Leica M11M images lacking in contrast and depth. I loved the images taken with the SL or SL2 much more, as they looked "processed" and required little to no adjustments.

My theory is that Leica deliberately tuned the M11M files to be flat, resembling a “film negative” with extreme latitude, offering photographers the creative freedom to develop the image according to their taste and experience—similar to working with film, where the way you develop the negative and turn it into a positive is entirely up to you.

However, using the "plain" M11M files feels unfinished, pale, and unappealing—simply not right. Considering their potential when properly processed, it seems like they could yield much better results with some effort and skill, using the right tools (like Lightroom or Capture One). For example, just applying an Adaptive BW profile in Lightroom makes a significant difference; I recommend adjusting the slider below the default 100% to see the effect and find the most natural result for each image.

I’m still in the process of learning how to tweak these files to achieve the best results because I see the potential and enjoy the creative process. It’s somewhat frustrating, though, that Leica hasn’t provided a dedicated guide or even included the M11 and M11M in the Leica Fotos film looks. Wouldn’t it be great if Leica offered proprietary software specifically for developing these images? I mean, for exposure adjustments, color handling (not for Monochrom, of course), contrast, sharpness, etc.—not for image manipulation, which I believe should be left to third-party editors. Similar to how Hasselblad Focus functions.

Currently, I’m experimenting with slider adjustments and masks (to control the exposure of sky) in Lightroom to unlock the full potential of the M11M’s monochrome files, as well as using Silver Efex for more stylized black-and-white images. So far, I feel the results are not as “organic” as I’d like, but I understand that’s more about refining my post-processing skills rather than a fault of the camera itself.

What are your thoughts?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Jeff S]

48 minutes ago, PavelS said:

 

I find the variety of opinions in this thread interesting, as they reflect different tastes, experiences, and expectations among users.

As someone new to Monochrome, I purchased the M11M in January of this year. Being an avid black-and-white photographer for many years, I’ve used various camera systems and developed a love for the Silver Efex plugin for Lightroom as my go-to method for achieving consistently pleasing monochrome images, regardless of the digital camera I’ve used. I mainly shoot portraits and cityscapes, and in both cases, I prefer contrasty “recipes” inspired by Kodak Tri-X 400, sometimes diluted with a bit of Dynamic Brightness if needed. For less contrasty scenes, I favor an Agfa APX 400-based recipe. Last year, I also began experimenting with monochrome conversions in Lightroom using color channel mixing, creating my own presets with Silver Efex as a reference point.

Initially, my first images from the M11M were quite a shock—they appeared very flat compared to what I was used to. Even comparing the "Hi Contrast" JPEGs from the M11M to those from the SL2-S or SL, I found the Leica M11M images lacking in contrast and depth. I loved the images taken with the SL or SL2 much more, as they looked "processed" and required little to no adjustments.

My theory is that Leica deliberately tuned the M11M files to be flat, resembling a “film negative” with extreme latitude, offering photographers the creative freedom to develop the image according to their taste and experience—similar to working with film, where the way you develop the negative and turn it into a positive is entirely up to you.

However, using the "plain" M11M files feels unfinished, pale, and unappealing—simply not right. Considering their potential when properly processed, it seems like they could yield much better results with some effort and skill, using the right tools (like Lightroom or Capture One). For example, just applying an Adaptive BW profile in Lightroom makes a significant difference; I recommend adjusting the slider below the default 100% to see the effect and find the most natural result for each image.

I’m still in the process of learning how to tweak these files to achieve the best results because I see the potential and enjoy the creative process. It’s somewhat frustrating, though, that Leica hasn’t provided a dedicated guide or even included the M11 and M11M in the Leica Fotos film looks. Wouldn’t it be great if Leica offered proprietary software specifically for developing these images? I mean, for exposure adjustments, color handling (not for Monochrom, of course), contrast, sharpness, etc.—not for image manipulation, which I believe should be left to third-party editors. Similar to how Hasselblad Focus functions.

Currently, I’m experimenting with slider adjustments and masks (to control the exposure of sky) in Lightroom to unlock the full potential of the M11M’s monochrome files, as well as using Silver Efex for more stylized black-and-white images. So far, I feel the results are not as “organic” as I’d like, but I understand that’s more about refining my post-processing skills rather than a fault of the camera itself.

What are your thoughts?

Look at the default import contrast curves in LR. Matter of seconds to adjust, or to create a different default tone curve as a better starting point.