Leica M11 -purplish tint ???

[Smogg]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, username said:

I realize this post is a week old already but I think you summed the whole issue up nicely (once again : )

"Just profile it"

 

That being said -

 

I do hope Leica will return to a more neutral OOC offering (color wise) with the M12.

Everybody saying the strong magenta tint is fine - please do take a look at the unedited raws shown in the video below, and tell me honestly whether you really didn't rather have a color output like this as your starting point when editing your files.
You can still be the "photographer that takes the photograph" etc. - but start off with something neutral not with something flawed (which, let's face it, it is)
Or how about not really having to edit at all, because it looks just awesome as is? 
For me, for my "retirement camera", that would be just splendid - because I spent so many years of my life in front of Adobe tools I'm just tired of it.

 

 

 

If all manufacturers could easily make colours like Hasselblad, they would do so. However, it is probably not a simple task. It is possible that solving this problem requires significant investments, which Leica, unfortunately, does not consider worthwhile.

[Advertisement]

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

[Stevejack]

2 hours ago, username said:

I do hope Leica will return to a more neutral OOC offering (color wise) with the M12.

Everybody saying the strong magenta tint is fine - please do take a look at the unedited raws shown in the video below, and tell me honestly whether you really didn't rather have a color output like this as your starting point when editing your files.
You can still be the "photographer that takes the photograph" etc. - but start off with something neutral not with something flawed (which, let's face it, it is)
 

 

 

I think Fuji nailed the jpeg experience with their film simulation options, even my wife appreciates those.  I do think Leica needs to double down on colour for future releases- it's something they were known for with earlier cameras (rightly or wrongly) so it's strange that they didn't put more focus on it as the years progressed and both Hasselblad and Fuji have taken over in that department. Even my wife loves the jpeg film simulation options on her Fuji and she seems to be the type of photographer Leica is actively courting these days... I can guarantee you she doesn't know what a raw file is and doesn't care, but she likes a pretty looking camera and a pretty looking jpeg straight out of camera.

I'm not sure how much the sensor manufacturer affects the output colour? With the M12 maybe they'll go back to CMOSIS for their sensor manufacturing rather than Sony, but I guess it will depend on which features they prioritise most for the M12. 

 

[username]

Yea - although personally I'm not a huge fan of the Fuji film simulations I do appreciate it works very well, for a lot of people.

I didn't really have tweaked jpg's in mind when I said "OOC" though, more like what kind of raw files the sensor gives you.

In an ideal world (for me) there'd be a Leica M-series camera, which takes the lovely M-lenses - but uses a sensor / color science / LUT / whatever like Hasselblad 🥰

A while back somebody on here said that for him the digital M's (with their different sensors and thus different colors / characters) are like various cameras with different films in them - and I can follow that logic, and actually it's a nice approach, in a way. 
I love the colors / character a friend of mine gets with his M9, I've enjoyed the colours of a lot of M10 / M10-R shots I've seen, actually I repeatedly like a lot of pics and then find out they're shot with a 240, and yes, also have seen a lot of stunning things from the M11.

But the reality is I could never afford five different cameras that I could have on rotation, like I would with film; Portra this week, Superia the Next, Cinestill in the holidays etc. -
so (for me) having a digital camera that offers a neutral palette to begin with really would be ideal.

[M11 for me]

vor 15 Stunden schrieb Knorp:

Crikey - what has happened to the sky ?

Sorry, but this has to do with export from Lightroom and the forum software. That is NOT in the image . . .

[pedaes]

8 minutes ago, M11 for me said:

Sorry, but this has to do with export from Lightroom and the forum software. That is NOT in the image . . .

Which tends to make this whole thread redundant 🤓

[jaapv]

1 hour ago, M11 for me said:

Sorry, but this has to do with export from Lightroom and the forum software. That is NOT in the image . . .

There is not much wrong with the forum software. Did you convert to sRGB? 

[M11 for me]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Sorry again. The Forum Software is certainly perfect. I just exported from Lightroom in a predefined size that is allowed here. Thats is . . .

On the other hand I actually wanted to show the magenta cast just out of cam . . . 😇

[don daniel]

vor 5 Stunden schrieb M11 for me:

On the other hand I actually wanted to show the magenta cast just out of cam . . . 😇

And indeed: You managed to do it. There's a slight magenta tint, at least in the first image. Maybe try nudging the tint slider just a few points to the left, stopping before it becomes greenish. Or does it immediately turn greenish for you when you make slight adjustments? However, I'm surprised that you're getting values below +20 in LR. When I import my photos taken in daylight into LR, I always get values above +20.

[M11 for me]

vor 30 Minuten schrieb don daniel:

However, I'm surprised that you're getting values below +20 in LR. When I import my photos taken in daylight into LR, I always get values above +20

Hi Daniel, first of all I wish you all the best in the new year and many great pictures. Maybe we can meet at a Fasnacht event in Basel in 2025. As @Sandokan unfortunately is not able to organise our standard event, other folks here might like to meet anyway (see respective thread).

Thank you for your comment. I actually thought of the "dog in the snow" image (see above) and then I looked at my own snow images again. If there is a magenta cast then I think its minimal and very acceptable for such a sceene.

I several times brought up the theory that there might be sensors that show more magenta and others with less. To me this point is still unclear as my own images "normally" have no or very little magenta cast straight ooc. That is the reason why I posted these snow images (see as well more images on my web-page). As I do not experience strong magenta cast with my M11 anyway I thought that I should post my images that contrast what we see here.

Then I have checked all my tint settings in Lightroom: I never have values above 18 in Lightroom Classic ooc.  That might be the reason why there are these 2 camps: One group that has no problem and the other group suffering from magenta cast. There was even the discussion why the former Beta tester did not bring up that magenta issue. But at the time no one was aware of a problem.

I must say that I have an M11 that has "no" magenta cast and it does not freeze either 😅

[CDodkin]

2 hours ago, M11 for me said:

Hi Daniel, first of all I wish you all the best in the new year and many great pictures. Maybe we can meet at a Fasnacht event in Basel in 2025. As @Sandokan unfortunately is not able to organise our standard event, other folks here might like to meet anyway (see respective thread).

Thank you for your comment. I actually thought of the "dog in the snow" image (see above) and then I looked at my own snow images again. If there is a magenta cast then I think its minimal and very acceptable for such a sceene.

I several times brought up the theory that there might be sensors that show more magenta and others with less. To me this point is still unclear as my own images "normally" have no or very little magenta cast straight ooc. That is the reason why I posted these snow images (see as well more images on my web-page). As I do not experience strong magenta cast with my M11 anyway I thought that I should post my images that contrast what we see here.

Then I have checked all my tint settings in Lightroom: I never have values above 18 in Lightroom Classic ooc.  That might be the reason why there are these 2 camps: One group that has no problem and the other group suffering from magenta cast. There was even the discussion why the former Beta tester did not bring up that magenta issue. But at the time no one was aware of a problem.

I must say that I have an M11 that has "no" magenta cast and it does not freeze either 😅

Magneta cast is dependent on the latitude of the shooter as well as all of the other variables of time of day, sun position, cloud cover, etc etc - so one person's snow shot can/will/may have more magenta WB shift than someone else's. It's an environmental influence more than a sensor variation issue. 

And yes, your images both show a Magenta tint cast which requires -10 Tint adjustment in PS. Top Magenta, bottom corrected. 

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 January 1 by CDodkin

[M11 for me]

I see very little difference and greenish (!!!) snow in the second one (on a calibrated Apple Studio display). Sorry about this. I think that the DNG ooc image is an excellent base to start with in Lightroom Classic or C1 or whatever. When we start to see magenta behind each stove (hinter jedem Ofen) then of course there is magenta everywhere . . . 

Magenta is not bad per se 😆

Edited January 2 by M11 for me

[LocalHero1953]

I agree - the second one has got green snow! (on an uncalibrated MacBook Pro screen).

Edited January 2 by LocalHero1953

[don daniel]

vor 2 Stunden schrieb M11 for me:

I see very little difference and greenish (!!!) snow in the second one (on a calibrated Apple Studio display). Sorry about this. I think that the DNG ooc image is an excellent base to start with in Lightroom Classic or C1 or whatever. When we start to see magenta behind each stove (hinter jedem Ofen) then of course there is magenta everywhere . . . 

Magenta is not bad per se 😆

Wishing everyone here a Happy New Year! I hope it brings me, first and foremost, my M11 back from service, free of the magenta cast.

Regarding the snow image: CDodkin's edit seems slightly overcorrected to me. However, there is little snow in the scene, and the green of the conifer and the grass is also visible.

But: To properly adjust the white balance, you really need the DNG file. If I try to do it on a screenshot or a camera JPG, I inevitably create color shifts that I don't want. That’s why it’s important for the white balance to be as neutral as possible.

In this specific case: If I get a value of +18 under beautiful daylight, I don’t correct it back by 10 points, because that would guarantee a greenish cast. Instead, I might just shift it five points to the left and then assess. That’s why I asked Alex whether, in his opinion, there’s still room for improvement if he adjusts slightly toward green or when it starts to feel like too much for him.

[M11 for me]

vor einer Stunde schrieb don daniel:

That’s why I asked Alex whether, in his opinion, there’s still room for improvement if he adjusts slightly toward green or when it starts to feel like too much for him.

Hi Daniel, all the best in the new year to you too.

With my snow image I wanted actually to show an image just ooc that has no magenta cast taken with my specific M11. I agree that you might want to correct a bit toward green. That is fully ok to me. But imagine that the image was just left (AWB ooc) as it is then I pretend that nobody would jump up to say "oh, what an ugly magenta cast". As a consequence I concluded, that my M11 is absolutely able to set the AWB "correct". I wrote above that I had a whole series of such images published that were taken within the same hour.

Of course I might adapt the WB in post (which I do). WB is no holy grail to me. The images that I have published are NOT ooc any more. But again the point: AWB is no issue with my M11. With my M11 I never had an ugly cast as the image dog in snow. 

Edited January 2 by M11 for me

[lct]

1 hour ago, don daniel said:

To properly adjust the white balance, you really need the DNG file.

Don't count me in please. I find it as easy to use the eye dropper on jpeg than raw files. Always did it for 20+ years, i'm not sure why it would be less appropriate on jpegs or more complicated. Now i convert my jpegs to tif in the first place but i guess everyone setting WB in post do the same as me.

[jaapv]

4 hours ago, LocalHero1953 said:

I agree - the second one has got green snow! (on an uncalibrated MacBook Pro screen).

It might have been wise in this case to leave the colour balance as is and correct just the magenta further on in the colour adjustment tools. ACR (like C1)does not provide elaborate colour correction sections for nothing. Global and simplified adjustments are not always a good idea in postprocessing. 

[jaapv]

1 hour ago, lct said:

Don't count me in please. I find it as easy to use the eye dropper on jpeg than raw files. Always did it for 20+ years, i'm not sure why it would be less appropriate on jpegs or more complicated. Now i convert my jpegs to tif in the first place but i guess everyone setting WB in post do the same as me.

Converting JPG files to TIFF does not add data. The limitations of JPG will still be present. 

[lct]

10 minutes ago, jaapv said:

Converting JPG files to TIFF does not add data. The limitations of JPG will still be present. 

Same on photo as audio for me. Never worked on compressed files since i do digital. Reminds me of my good old Digilux 1. We had no raw or dng files then, only jpegs and tif. Those were the days... Young photogs cannnot understand now. They expect bots to do the job for them 😄

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[jaapv]

Yes, but if you first compress and then decompress the data lost in compression will remain lost. Your theory only holds if the original compression was lossless which JPG emphatically is not. The Digilux1 had raw (TIFF ) and compressed (JPG -lossy). It does no harm to expand a JPG to TIFF but it gains nothing. 

[lct]

5 minutes ago, jaapv said:

Yes, but if you first compress and then decompress the data lost in compression will remain lost. Your theory only holds if the original compression was lossless which JPG emphatically is not. 

This is no theory. Just long practice. I have never worked on compressed file and will never do. YMMV