Leica M Edition 60

[semilog]

yesterday I had my first look into a Fuji X-E1 EVF. Compared to a good optical finder, it is lightyears behind (in my opinion).

So you looked at an EVF that's two generations old, at a time when they are very rapidly improving.

FWIW I use an X-E1 next to an M6 (with MP finder optics) and (when shooting 21mm) a Zeiss accessory finder.

The Zeiss finder is vastly better than the Leica. The Leica is in some ways better than the X-E1 (lag), and in many, many ways worse.

And as others have pointed out, the EVFs on currently shipping cameras are a whole lot better than the X-E1.

 

[Calzone]

Yes, but perfect exposure with low-speed trees is not the same ball game as sometimes high-speed street photography where lighting and opportunities are measures in seconds or fractions thereof. This is why with the MM you have a choice of either significantly underexposing most frames so as not to clip highlights in those few where there is no time to introduce accurate negative compensation. In scenic application, of course one can expose perfectly for each frame with any camera, including multiple exposures and blending in post, if required (as it often is with Canon cams).

When shooting film, my entire technique revolved around never losing shadows as highlights rolled off nicely and could be dealt with in development to some extent. Increasing overexposure was not really an issue, but I agree that with digital once you are blown you are blown. However, if there is not enough time to get each shot right, one can introduce negative compensation and adjust exposure in post. Sure, you lose some quality, but usually very little and is more than made up for by being slick and quick and thus having more interesting frames committed on your card. The more DR your camera has, the more readily one can strategically place exposure with little penalty during adjustments in post.

Perfect exposure is nice in theory, but is rarely the whole solution when doing demanding 'fast' work. Smart metering is now more important than ever before as some cameras are far better at ensuring they never clip than others. This is the MM's main failing: the metering is a far bigger issue than the lack of highlight recovery, because if the cam adjusted exposure down enough, you could just lift exposure and hold highlights in post!

Turtle,

There is a third way, and here is my big secret: I use Heliopan "Digital" 2X and 3X yellow filters to compress the contrast range to help avoid clipping in both the shadows and highlights. I find that I get wonderful broad histograms that require the most minimal amount of post processing. Not hard to get 9 zones of tone plus the white of the paper consistently if there is a lot of light. Very much almost like HDR but with only one shot. Different lenses respond differently so the best filter depends on the lens.

The key words here are "Digital" and "Heliopan" because B&W filters respond stronger than Heliopan(too strong), and the word "Digital" on a Heliopan filter means that an UV filter is also combined and built into the filters marked "Digital." In testing I found that a B&W 2X yellow was actually stronger than a Heliopan 3X.

Also the difference of half a zone broader histogram I can see when A-B testing using my Monochrom in a controled tests between the same grade Heliopan yellow filters with the only difference being the word "Digital" (meaning added UV filter built in).

I like broad histograms and clipping is either greatly reduced or eliminated with using specifically Heliopan Digital 2Xor 3X yellow filters. It seems that the Monochrome sensor has more of a Panochromatic response if a light yellow filter is utilized and cutting out some of that UV also cuts the IR. The noted yellow sensitivity of the Monochrom sensor and the un-needed UV only boosts and adds to clipping and overwelming the sensor. Filters make it easy to hit the sweet spot of the sensor and avoid clipping, by contolling the light that otherwise would overwelm the Monochrom sensor.

With proper exposure the Monochrom really rewards. BTW Ansel Adams almost always used a yellow filter. I borrow from the large format shooters and try to optimize image capture so I can almost straight print.

Cal

 

[Godfrey]

... There is a third way, and here is my big secret: I use Heliopan "Digital" 2X and 3X yellow filters to compress the contrast range to help avoid clipping in both the shadows and highlights.
...
It seems that the Monochrome sensor has more of a Panochromatic response if a light yellow filter is utilized and cutting out some of that UV also cuts the IR. The noted yellow sensitivity of the Monochrom sensor ...

I find it a little curious how using a yellow filter of any strength can compensate for an overly yellow sensitive bias on the part of the sensor and decrease contrast. Also, how can a UV filter also cut IR? The frequencies are at the opposite ends of the visible light spectrum. What works to absorb one is very unlikely to also absorb the other.

The only way a yellow filter can even out the panchromatic response of sensor is if the sensor's response curve is deficient, or less sensitive, to yellow light. A yellow filter allows yellow to pass and suppresses other colors of the spectrum. With most B&W film, a yellow filter tends to increase contrast in scenes which include blues (eg: landscapes) by absorbing some of the blue to UV spectrum that even panchromatic B&W film can be overly sensitive to.

As long as it works for you, life is good, but the explanation you gave isn't very forthcoming as to what's going on.

G

 

[Scrambler]

I find it a little curious how using a yellow filter of any strength can compensate for an overly yellow sensitive bias on the part of the sensor and decrease contrast. Also, how can a UV filter also cut IR? The frequencies are at the opposite ends of the visible light spectrum. What works to absorb one is very unlikely to also absorb the other.

The only way a yellow filter can even out the panchromatic response of sensor is if the sensor's response curve is deficient, or less sensitive, to yellow light. A yellow filter allows yellow to pass and suppresses other colors of the spectrum. With most B&W film, a yellow filter tends to increase contrast in scenes which include blues (eg: landscapes) by absorbing some of the blue to UV spectrum that even panchromatic B&W film can be overly sensitive to.

As long as it works for you, life is good, but the explanation you gave isn't very forthcoming as to what's going on.

G

Many filters do have interesting spectral absorption curves, not just the
'obvious' colour. UV/IR is not uncommon, and presumably the "Digital" element of the filter is the IR cut.

Agree re the rest, including the "as long as it works for you."

 

[Eric T]

Why can't you just buy an M240 and not look at the screen? Can save a lot of money over the M60. The M60 concept is silly to me.

 

[Godfrey]

Why can't you just buy an M240 and not look at the screen? Can save a lot of money over the M60. The M60 concept is silly to me.

Of course you can do that. It's just not the point of the special edition camera. If you don't get the point, don't bother thinking about the camera...

G

 

[Godfrey]

Many filters do have interesting spectral absorption curves, not just the
'obvious' colour. UV/IR is not uncommon, and presumably the "Digital" element of the filter is the IR cut. ...

I know it's possible, it's just curious. I'm trying to find a spectral map of Heliopan Digital UV/IR filters because I'm wondering just how much absorption they're talking about.

The Leica M Monochrom sensor is such a specialist camera as well ... I'd also love to see a good spectral map of its sensitivities. I don't know how a UV/IR cut filter, even a "clear" one, behaves on a sensor with no RGB filter mosaic.

G

 

[semilog]

Of course you can do that. It's just not the point of the special edition camera. If you don't get the point, don't bother thinking about the camera...

G

Yes. The point is to make a camera for people who won't use it in demanding conditions, who don't want or need to know whether they are getting the goods for their clients.

In other words, it is a mark that one can afford a digital M, and either does not shoot in demanding field conditions, or is financially secure enough that it doesn't matter if the highlights are blown, the RF is out of calibration, or there is crud on the sensor.

That is the point, right?

 

[michaelwj]

In other words, it is a mark that one can afford a digital M, and either does not shoot in demanding field conditions, or is financially secure enough that it doesn't matter if the highlights are blown, the RF is out of calibration, or there is crud on the sensor.

That is the point, right?

So somehow different from a $5000 film M that's still sold and been used for 60 years?

Michael

 

[michaelwj]

A few hints of a regular production model https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S6i9DXnTieo#t=803

"if it would be a serial model, we would have strap lugs" he goes on to say there is demand, but obviously doesn't reveal anything...

I have to qualify that I love the idea, the temptation of chimping every shot was the main reason I left digital for film - I'm not a film is better kind of person, I just like to take photos without menus and settings and looking at the back of the goddam camera all the time (I know I could turn it off, but I can't help myself - and everyone wants to see the photos too).

Michael

 

[Godfrey]

Yes. The point is to make a camera for people who won't use it in demanding conditions, who don't want or need to know whether they are getting the goods for their clients.

In other words, it is a mark that one can afford a digital M, and either does not shoot in demanding field conditions, or is financially secure enough that it doesn't matter if the highlights are blown, the RF is out of calibration, or there is crud on the sensor.

That is the point, right?

This kind of specious argument-for-the-sake-of-argument horsepucky is really getting tiresome.

G

 

[jschrader]

Yes. The point is to make a camera for people who won't use it in demanding conditions, who don't want or need to know whether they are getting the goods for their clients.

In other words, it is a mark that one can afford a digital M, and either does not shoot in demanding field conditions, or is financially secure enough that it doesn't matter if the highlights are blown, the RF is out of calibration, or there is crud on the sensor.

That is the point, right?

Sorry but I do not agree. Anyone who uses his camera to satisfy customers is free to ignore this camera model. A most reasonable decision.

But in my case it is financially irrelevant if I blow highlights because I work just for myself.

I have recently moved from a fully equipped DSLR to b&w film and found my photos improved a lot (my opinion; but since I do not work for customers it is the relevant opinion). My explanation is that having less options at hand may allow you to concentrate on what you really need.

It is only a theory, and maybe only for me. But for me, the M 60 idea makes sense.

I would like a MM without LCD. The best would be a lower price, since leaving the Bayer filter and the LCD out makes it simpler.

I know I am dreaming.....

 

[Godfrey]

A few hints of a regular production model https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S6i9DXnTieo#t=803

"if it would be a serial model, we would have strap lugs" he goes on to say there is demand, but obviously doesn't reveal anything...

I have to qualify that I love the idea, the temptation of chimping every shot was the main reason I left digital for film - I'm not a film is better kind of person, I just like to take photos without menus and settings and looking at the back of the goddam camera all the time (I know I could turn it off, but I can't help myself - and everyone wants to see the photos too).

Thanks for the link, Michael. I'll be interested to watch the whole interview, perhaps tomorrow.

I think the idea is great too.

G

 

[Calzone]

Godfrey,

Check out M.R.'s Lumious Landscape. He has an early Monochrom review where he states that Leica Engineers suggest using a light yellow filter to get a Panochromatic response out of the Monochrom sensor.

Heliopan states that their filters marked "Digital" have a built in UV filter.

The IR component is perhaps a jump in thinking on my part because I see a half zone wider histgram difference with the yellow Heliopan filters marked "Digital" over their generic yellow filters. I don't think just UV alone is enough to make such a big difference in the histograms.

Cal

 

[Godfrey]

Godfrey,

Check out M.R.'s Lumious Landscape. He has an early Monochrom review where he states that Leica Engineers suggest using a light yellow filter to get a Panochromatic response out of the Monochrom sensor.

Heliopan states that their filters marked "Digital" have a built in UV filter.

The IR component is perhaps a jump in thinking on my part because I see a half zone wider histgram difference with the yellow Heliopan filters marked "Digital" over their generic yellow filters. I don't think just UV alone is enough to make such a big difference in the histograms.

Cal

I'll try to look at Michael's discussion soon. But I think the reason to use a yellow filter is not to overcome a spectral response which is too sensitive to yellow, likely just the opposite. If the sensor is deficient in yellow response, a yellow filter suppresses other portions of the spectrum and evens out the response curve.

The UV/IR filtering is claimed by Heliopan to be a benefit and a feature of their Digital line of filters. I'm just curious that they don't provide a spectral transmission graph demonstrating how much of what wavelengths they're absorbing.

G

 

[jaapv]

Yes. The point is to make a camera for people who won't use it in demanding conditions, who don't want or need to know whether they are getting the goods for their clients.

In other words, it is a mark that one can afford a digital M, and either does not shoot in demanding field conditions, or is financially secure enough that it doesn't matter if the highlights are blown, the RF is out of calibration, or there is crud on the sensor.

That is the point, right?

Or the point is that these photographers are capable enough to either overcome these hurdles, or recognize the arguments for the specious ones they are.
One can assume that even a photographer of modest accomplishment is able to:
1. keep his sensor reasonably clean
2. get his camera (assuming it is maladjusted in the first place, which normally not) properly calibrated beforehand
3. has a working knowledge of exposure.
4. recognizes demanding field conditions for what they are, i.e. a photographer attempting to work beyond his capabilities...

 

[Calzone]

I'll try to look at Michael's discussion soon. But I think the reason to use a yellow filter is not to overcome a spectral response which is too sensitive to yellow, likely just the opposite. If the sensor is deficient in yellow response, a yellow filter suppresses other portions of the spectrum and evens out the response curve.

The UV/IR filtering is claimed by Heliopan to be a benefit and a feature of their Digital line of filters. I'm just curious that they don't provide a spectral transmission graph demonstrating how much of what wavelengths they're absorbing.

G

Godfrey,

Your point above is well taken. I inadvertantly passed the notion of sensitivity that I read in M.R.'s early review. He mentions this sensitivity.

All I know is that the histogram shows less clipping or the elimination totally of clipping in a dramatic way, and the "Digital" marked Heliopans display the broadest histograms.

Looking forward to your thoughts and insights.

Cal

 

[urban_alchemist]

Of course. This is the one design choice that I don't understand about this camera. Every other change vs. the Leica M is a good/bad design decision based on one's criteria and viewpoint, but having AE and no exposure compensation just makes very little sense.

Perhaps they were simply lazy or someone forgot to order proper shutter speed dials in time.

I just wish they'd return to the small shutter speed dial, positioned the CORRECT way round! I shoot all my digital Ms in A, just because my brain is too used to the old film way...

 

[airfrogusmc]

Of course. This is the one design choice that I don't understand about this camera. Every other change vs. the Leica M is a good/bad design decision based on one's criteria and viewpoint, but having AE and no exposure compensation just makes very little sense.

Perhaps they were simply lazy or someone forgot to order proper shutter speed dials in time.

I would love an all manual camera. Exposure comp? Open up, close down. Faster or slower shutter speed. I think it makes perfect sense. If you want those auto things you already have those choices.

 

[Duane Pandorf]

I think everyone has missed something else that the M60 brings to the market that no one has mentioned here other than the lack of an LCD.

I for one would like to try using such a camera without the LCD but what Leica has done with the M60 is they now have the hardware and firmware to make a M240 with or without the LCD that does not include video and the EVF option.

Call it the M-E version of the current model and be able to sell it at a lower price for those of us with no interest in video and using adapters and liveview.