Leica M Monochrom: best pics

It would be neat if Leica ever released a M-D Monochrom, problem solved!

Two recent images.

40845897340_1b5d9120b3_c.jpg


42603661822_43f1809baa_c.jpg
 
I haven't used a digital camera w/o a monitor screen.
I use the histogram a lot to optimize the exposure with my MM. If you blow the highlights it's gone. But if you always underexpose and not max. out the exposure to the right just to the edge of getting in trouble, then you are not using the camera to it's fullest potential in terms of IQ (technical).

I don't see how you can potentially do that w/o the histogram.

I use a light yellow filter to additionally protect the highlights and boost contrast a little. When shooting wide open with high shutter speed e.g. 1/ 4xfocal length at least, then the IQ is devine. Printed that is 20x30 inches, not pixel peeping on the monitor.;)

If your image is worth it to max every step along the way and not just a brick wall, then this will give you a print that seems alive, eerily so.
 
icebear said:
I haven't used a digital camera w/o a monitor screen.
I use the histogram a lot to optimize the exposure with my MM. If you blow the highlights it's gone. But if you always underexpose and not max. out the exposure to the right just to the edge of getting in trouble, then you are not using the camera to it's fullest potential in terms of IQ (technical).

I don't see how you can potentially do that w/o the histogram.

I use a light yellow filter to additionally protect the highlights and boost contrast a little. When shooting wide open with high shutter speed e.g. 1/ 4xfocal length at least, then the IQ is devine. Printed that is 20x30 inches, not pixel peeping on the monitor.;)

If your image is worth it to max every step along the way and not just a brick wall, then this will give you a print that seems alive, eerily so.
Click to expand...

Interesting thoughts - reinforces my belief that we all work differently, and no particular method is necessarily the 'correct' way to go about things. I guess that's always been the beauty of photography!

I can safely say that I have personally never looked at a histogram on any digital camera I've ever used. I don't think I'd even know how to interpret it, if I'm being honest. Expose to the left? To the right? What is all that?! Dunno, guess it's just dumb luck on my part that's caused me to never have an issue one way or another. The blind squirrel gets an acorn every once in a while, I suppose!

When the first Monochrom came out, some were saying that the camera was easily susceptible to blown highlights. I never really had that problem, and pretty much shot as if I was using slide film. You know the old saying 'expose for the shadows, develop for the highlights'? I think in the case of the Monochrom it's a slight variation: Expose for the highlights, develop (post-production) for the shadows. As a result, I never had an issue with blown highlights or troubles with shadow detail (the 246 is more or less 'up the middle' in terms of exposure, though I normally have the exposure set to -0.3 of a stop). And the resulting 11"x16" prints were, at least to my eye, pretty good (they looked more or less as they looked on screen). This goes for both the first Monochrom and the 246 Monochrom (and I've never really noticed anything magical about the CCD sensor vs the CMOS sensor). Here again, just to my personal eye.

As far as the M-D goes, it's been pretty much the same thing. I don't have a histogram to look at -- heck, I don't have anything to look at -- and I've never had any issue with exposures being wildly off (and I normally have it set to Aperture Priority and -0.3 of a stop). No matter the lighting situation, the M-D has been rock-solid for proper exposure. And I've made some nice black and white prints from the M-D files that are virtually indistinguishable from prints from Monochrom files. Maybe that's why I've been using the M-D more than the 246 Monochrom recently. The camera is really great, and the ability to shoot in colour or black and white is a nice bonus (I have to sometimes remind myself that the M-D shoots colour!). If you're looking for the digital equivalent of the 'film camera experience', then the M-D is it. Except instead of waiting to finish an entire 36 exposure roll of film and going through that process, you can just pull out the SD card, plug it into a computer and away you go. The lack of a screen has truly changed the way I shoot and what I shoot.

I really hope they don't come out with an M10-based M-D. It would be too much of a temptation for me :). But seriously, I honestly don't think it's needed, and I don't even know if a black and white version would even be necessary. It feels great as it is, and I don't feel the need for it to be any thinner (despite some people's perception that the current version is 'fat' — have their hands shrunk or something???). If they did introduce a new M-D, I wonder what would become of the ISO dial? Would it be M10-style or M-D style? I'd hope they'd keep the dial on the back -- it retains that 'classic' Leica M setup, plus it's super-convenient to use. Not sure how the M10 ISO dial is for those of you who own and use one.

Anyhow, just my personal point of view.
 
Hi Vince,

thanks for sharing your point view. It all depends how you meter. There is not standard way of using -1/3 or whatever. What works for your images is right for you.

I only recently produced some images that I felt worth printing in a really high quality manner, when I realized what happens when you indeed "check all the boxes" to max. out the potential for IQ. I have to admit that my previous attemps didn't really reach any artistic value. I got lucky and I am very happy with the results.
 
I am like Vince that I really don't see the blown highlights that others see with the MM. I never use exposure compensation. I just use the MM and really all my Leica cameras as if I were shooting transparency film. The M 10 can also be camera where the highlights can be an issue if overexposed. I never use a histogram because I am usually shooting too fast for it.

I will read the light in say shadows and then read the light in direct sun, remember both setting and change the exposure depending or where I am. And experience is also in play.

But we all have our own way of working.

I also usually use a Heliopan digital light yellow filter recommended by Cal.
 
Greta exposé Vince about metering in the highlight and developing for the shadows - being the inverse of negative film.

If they did introduce a new M-D, I wonder what would become of the ISO dial? Would it be M10-style or M-D style? I'd hope they'd keep the dial on the back -- it retains that 'classic' Leica M setup, plus it's super-convenient to use. Not sure how the M10 ISO dial is for those of you who own and use one.
Click to expand...
As regards this: the dial takes up space, and if moved to the right then the camera can become another 1,5-2mm thinner - which gives a thinner body, an even shorter finder lenght and probably wider image all in one. The latter thing would interest me.
 
I never shot a lot of slide film and my HP5 or TMX always got a generous amount of light. So coming from opposite ends of personal meter preferences, it's no surprise that you don't blow the highlights in the first place. It obviously also depends on what scenes you shoot. If you have evenly lit subjects with a low contrast range, you will have a hard time trying to blow highlights that aren't even there;)


Back to images...
med_U6650I1528681549.SEQ.0.jpg



med_U6650I1528681552.SEQ.3.jpg
 
Vince Lupo said:
As a result, I never had an issue with blown highlights or troubles with shadow detail (the 246 is more or less 'up the middle' in terms of exposure, though I normally have the exposure set to -0.3 of a stop).
Click to expand...

I do the same thing with my X100S, Vince. It just suits me and my style of shooting.

 
airfrogusmc said:
I will read the light in say shadows and then read the light in direct sun, remember both setting and change the exposure depending or where I am.
Click to expand...
This is one of the reasons I loved my OM-4 series bodies. I used to carry a gray card and do a highlight and shadow reading before starting shooting. As long as the light remained constant I was ok. Otherwise I would meter again. It worked for me even when I was working for a small weekly newspaper. 'Course later I changed to Nikon for autofocus and sold my OM-4's. I keep thinking I will buy another one but I have been shooting with mirrorless and don't know if I would like hearing the mirror slap again!
 


[URL="


I recently packed the Monochrome along to the interior of British Columbia. These are from Lillooet, BC. Viewing moon rise from the deck where we were visiting was a treat. The light was soft but we had a beautiful view of the Fraser River below. The second image was made on the road out the next morning.
 
I've only ever shot one very short video with the Monochrom 246 a few years ago, so I thought I'd do a brief wander in our garden this morning. Shot with the 50/1.4 Nikkor-S.C at f/2 at ISO 320. Everything is pretty much straight out of the camera into iMovie. The sound is from the built-in microphone and is surprisingly pretty good.

Nothing exciting, but it was a nice diversion this morning along with a cup of coffee. I'll try to do something a bit more 'dynamic' with the next one!

Sorry I can't seem to figure out how to show the video directly in this post, so you'll have to click on the Flickr link here to see it: https://flic.kr/p/277wfPM
 
[URL="

The landscape evolved when my daughter emerged to claim her two-hour old cappuccino and cut into a scone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom