Leica M Monochrom: best pics

Thanks Dave. It really fits the way I see but I've seen some killer images made with 50 by many here. A 35 just seems to fit the way I see. Gibson and Bresson both preferred 50 as do you right?
 
Since music is my other big passion, together with photography, I like to shoot music gigs, mostly in small venues. It can be a bit challenging in low light, but also very rewarding when it all comes together.

This was my first gig with the MM; I was thrilled by the feeling of shooting the Monochrom in one of the situation where it truly excels, and by some of the results:



The People Band @ Cafe Oto, London, 6th March 2013 by fabiolug, on Flickr



The People Band @ Cafe Oto, London, 6th March 2013 by fabiolug, on Flickr



The People Band @ Cafe Oto, London, 6th March 2013 by fabiolug, on Flickr



The People Band @ Cafe Oto, London, 6th March 2013 by fabiolug, on Flickr



The People Band @ Cafe Oto, London, 6th March 2013 by fabiolug, on Flickr



The People Band @ Cafe Oto, London, 6th March 2013 by fabiolug, on Flickr



Full set: http://www.flickr.com/photos/fabiolug/sets/72157632955667712/with/8540900837/
 
Fabio, really nice set. Good to see another live music/small venue enthusiast here. My MM is arriving next week after saving over a year. Major use will be club shooting. Here's a few taken with my M9, sorry, hope to improve the look and printability in a significant way with the MM.

Ben Reeves (brother of Martha Reeves of Vandellas' fame) guesting with the RJ Spangler Trio at Bert's Marketplace in the Eastern Market:

20130222-049-Edit-Web by Mike Tuomey, on Flickr

Gabriel Brass Brand, 5e gallery, Detroit:

20130223-012-Edit-Web by Mike Tuomey, on Flickr

Motor City Kings at Nancy Whiskey:

20130216-021-Edit-Web by Mike Tuomey, on Flickr

Nicky Boy Street Band at Cliff Bell's:

20120811-001-Web by Mike Tuomey, on Flickr

Really am looking forward to the MM for this kind of shooting.
 
A friends band
L1005522_zpsf61c084b.jpg


L1005508_zps3a00bf40.jpg
 
Yes agree Dave good work everyone and you to Dave.

I haven't shot anything lately for myself. Busy shooting for work. Been busy mounting, matting and framing and I'm so sick of it.....

Had lunch with a good bud today and I took this.
I think this illustrates the range of the MM . Very fast edit.

L1006059_zps26771a41.jpg
 
If I have any criticism of images from the MM it's to do with lack of texture but tonality wise they sing IMO.

Although I'll probably never own the camera I certainly enjoy this thread. :)
 
Keith, the Mono sensor indeed is the cleanest thing, I have ever seen, easily shooting above ISO 3200.
Even at ISO 6400 or …*gasp … ISO 10000, it never produces the large, blotchy noise, colour sensor divi cams tend to produce, when the digital guts go over the edge.
Film grain never is as small even in 120 film, pushing as much as this.

Hence, the Mono files just look plain clean and structure free - especially at such tiny sizes at such downrezzed files, as shown here in the thread.

Another phenomenon is, that most people around this thread have shown photographs with lenses not stopped down a lot.
So if one would combine stopping down the lenses further than ƒ5.6, shooting the Mono at ISO 3200 and beyond and showing A3 prints, rather than puny web JPGs, structure is way more visible ;-)

The strange thing about the Mono files though is, that the grain never get's obtrusive - it is very fine and doesn't rule a shot, as say pushed TriX does @ ISO 3200.
In that respect, the Mono never "copies" the look of pushed B&W film, but has it's very own look.

I love, that one can really shoot much more free than before.
The shot with the old man on bike above has been done @ ISO 1600 or 3200 in a very dark alleyway around dusk, while passing him in a car with the lens stopped down to ƒ2 at a high shutter speed.

With TriX, there surely would be more structure. With a M9 there would be no shadow detail anymore and certainly I couldn't enlarge the shot and the man's jacket would show the textile fibres …

I always loved pushed TriX for how nicer it can be used in the night than any film RF digital.
The Mono is the only camera, that pushed this even further for me and I can shoot now at shutter speeds at night, I could only dream of before and even can use ƒ2 lenses or shoot really slow glass at night!

I love this camera ;-)

Apart from my pictures sucking, compared to so many great photographers around I can only state for everybody in this thread (and I am sure, people who run those Mono files through their computers and printers approve):
All these shots in this thread, as wonderful, they might look at 800px don't do the Mono sensor justice. It's a pity the internet and computer screens still didn't catch up with prints on paper (even an A5 print will blow away these JPGs).
 
menos said:
Keith, the Mono sensor indeed is the cleanest thing, I have ever seen, easily shooting above ISO 3200.
Even at ISO 6400 or …*gasp … ISO 10000, it never produces the large, blotchy noise, colour sensor divi cams tend to produce, when the digital guts go over the edge.
Film grain never is as small even in 120 film, pushing as much as this.

Hence, the Mono files just look plain clean and structure free - especially at such tiny sizes at such downrezzed files, as shown here in the thread.

Another phenomenon is, that most people around this thread have shown photographs with lenses not stopped down a lot.
So if one would combine stopping down the lenses further than ƒ5.6, shooting the Mono at ISO 3200 and beyond and showing A3 prints, rather than puny web JPGs, structure is way more visible ;-)

The strange thing about the Mono files though is, that the grain never get's obtrusive - it is very fine and doesn't rule a shot, as say pushed TriX does @ ISO 3200.
In that respect, the Mono never "copies" the look of pushed B&W film, but has it's very own look.

I love, that one can really shoot much more free than before.
The shot with the old man on bike above has been done @ ISO 1600 or 3200 in a very dark alleyway around dusk, while passing him in a car with the lens stopped down to ƒ2 at a high shutter speed.

With TriX, there surely would be more structure. With a M9 there would be no shadow detail anymore and certainly I couldn't enlarge the shot and the man's jacket would show the textile fibres …

I always loved pushed TriX for how nicer it can be used in the night than any film RF digital.
The Mono is the only camera, that pushed this even further for me and I can shoot now at shutter speeds at night, I could only dream of before and even can use ƒ2 lenses or shoot really slow glass at night!

I love this camera ;-)

Apart from my pictures sucking, compared to so many great photographers around I can only state for everybody in this thread (and I am sure, people who run those Mono files through their computers and printers approve):
All these shots in this thread, as wonderful, they might look at 800px don't do the Mono sensor justice. It's a pity the internet and computer screens still didn't catch up with prints on paper (even an A5 print will blow away these JPGs).
Click to expand...

Agree and to further expand on this for me and the way I shoot the high ISO gives me the freedom to shoot at shutter speeds of 1/500 of a second and still be able to stop down to f/11 so if I'm shooting on the street I can freeze action if I so desire and still keep what I need to be in focus fairly sharp. The images are sharper out of camera (MM) than my 5DII files are and 6400 is more pleasing to me anyway.
 
I think Keith is coming from the space of shooting Mf and large format, and I know exactly what he means. The Monochrom has the resolution of a larger format, and can emulate the tonality of perhaps 120, but the texture is the key element that remains elusive.

A few days ago I took three shots with my MM: one was without a filter; another was with a 2x yellow filter; and a third was with an orange filter. All three shots were from the same vantage point, of the same subject, and under the same lighting.

Although it was a bit overcast, the shot without the filter displayed very mild clipping. The shot with the yellow filter removed about 2/3rds of the clipping in the high lights and dampened the clipping in the blacks by about 1/3rd. With the orange filter the clipping was eliminated, but the histgram indicated contrast compression.

From my observations the midrange became more vast through the use of filters, and it seems that more information is recorded, as clipping is lost information. Anyways like how I shoot B&W film, always with filters, the MM looks to respond in the same manner. I tend to make my contrast adjustment with filters on my negatives and not later in the darkroom. I'm using this same approach in digital and will continue to avoid contrast adjustments in post processing. I'm not so clever, but know I'm really at heart a lazy slacker.

I think using filters to compress the contrast range to control, minimize, or avoid clipping is a way to add detail. Also know I took an indoor shot at night with the yellow filter and I was stunned by the added detail. To me the high ISO capabilities makes using filters no handicap, and I think the contrast has an organic smoothness to it that more closely resembles medium format.

Cal
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom