Leica M Monochrom - Steve Huff's review

W

wosim

Member
Local time
4:34 AM
Joined
Feb 27, 2012
Messages
46
Steve Huff today published Part 1 of his review:

Steve Huff, The Leica Monochrom Review Part 1. Understanding the Camera and vs FILM -
TS560x560



More M Monochrom reviews you can find here:
https://sites.google.com/site/wosims...richte-reviews

Regards
WOSIMs Photography
Collection of Links to Leica M & Leica Lens Reviews
https://sites.google.com/site/wosimsphotography/
 
Hello Wolfgang,

thanks a lot for posting
#1 the Huff review of the Monochrom and
#2 a link to your website which definately is an amazing collection of useful links.

E.g. I have to admit, I'd never heard of Adam Marelli before
http://www.adammarelliphoto.com/2012/05/leica-m-monochrom/
I think his comments and reviews are very valueable, as they do not focus much on the technical aspects but mainly what use to a photographer a certain lens or camera is and he shows incredible examples.
 
Thanks Icebear,
I started my Link-Collection, when I got "pregnant" with the idea to go digital - definitely more than 9 months with respect of the large investment.

I am always building an opinon of my own, looking at the product, touching and trying it - but the opinion of reviewers and others is useful, because you get an broad overview of possible pros and cons and you will know better where to look at, when getting your hands on the product.

On the other hand finding relevant information in the net is very time consuming, so I thought a collection of links might be helpful for others in my former situation.

For now I'am happy with the M9 and some fine lenses.

Best regards
 
I was able to get past the use of 'real world', twice, but I couldn't go on after this: "I feel is that this is a definitive B&W camera for those who are passionate about the “art” of photography, the “emotion” of photography and the “beauty” of black & white photography."

Good stuff!
 
MikeL said:
I was able to get past the use of 'real world', twice, but I couldn't go on after this: "I feel is that this is a definitive B&W camera for those who are passionate about the “art” of photography, the “emotion” of photography and the “beauty” of black & white photography."
Click to expand...

I read this and just tuned out. Relatively unimpressed with Mr. Ruff.
 
I do not want to sound like a retrograde old idiot, but I continue seeing the same thing all over: very high resolution and relatively high contrast images, that have a medium format feel, but suddenly break down into white hole oblivion as soon as you look at any stronger highlight. To me, this output is not anywhere near replacing film rendition. The images from S2 converted to B&W look a whole world better. They look a bit like old school high contrast and high key B&W fashion photos, which you had to print that way, to avoid showing the blemishes on the faces of the models in the era when PS did not yet exist. I think, the problem as always lies in the insufficient bit depth.
 
mfogiel said:
I do not want to sound like a retrograde old idiot, but I continue seeing the same thing all over: very high resolution and relatively high contrast images, that have a medium format feel, but suddenly break down into white hole oblivion as soon as you look at any stronger highlight. To me, this output is not anywhere near replacing film rendition. The images from S2 converted to B&W look a whole world better. I think, the problem as always lies in the insufficient bit depth.
Click to expand...

and people complain that the Monochrom price is crazy. How much is the S2 again? :rolleyes:
 
leicashot said:
and people complain that the Monochrom price is crazy. How much is the S2 again? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I also have issues on what Im seeing to date from the MM but also not sure how much and for how long I would want to carry that S2 machine around... Its huge

F82903692.jpg
 
craygc said:
not sure how much and for how long I would want to carry that S2 machine around... Its huge
Click to expand...

No it's not huge. I've used one - it's about the same size as a D700 and smaller than the professional Nikons, but built even better than they are. The lenses are, of course, larger than Nikon primes though.
 
I wish he would take better pictures to showcase the camera vs. pics of himself in a mirror with a shirt hanging in the background. Heck, I could do that.
 
bbrovold said:
I wish he would take better pictures to showcase the camera vs. pics of himself in a mirror with a shirt hanging in the background. Heck, I could do that.
Click to expand...

I don't know why you'd expect to see something you can't do in a camera review.
 
mfogiel said:
I do not want to sound like a retrograde old idiot, but I continue seeing the same thing all over: very high resolution and relatively high contrast images, that have a medium format feel, but suddenly break down into white hole oblivion as soon as you look at any stronger highlight. ....
Click to expand...

Hello Marek,
all comments on the MM mention relatively flat images straight out of the camera. So whatever gets showcased on the web are processed small sized jpgs (here max 200kb) vs original file size of about 30MB. Most of these got a good helping of the "contrast slider". This seems to be a general preference but is not the fault of the camera - just my guess.
I assume most of the blown highlights can be attributed to that. Everyone had a different preference for developing their film and printing at a certain contrast.
The MM files supposedly give you the same freedom as long as you have exposed for the highlights and not blown these initially. The recovery of highlights is less than from a color sensor with three channels to work with.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom