Leica M type 240 full resolution samples

Thanks!
It's amazing how hard it seems to be to get any pictures from the new camera online. Full dngs are even harder to find.
 
porktaco said:
i'm kinda underwhelmed by the photos in that article. i don't see a lot of magic.
Click to expand...



I have to agree...I was looking at the picture of the flowers and it's hard to fin a sharp point in it...the colors are okay...
It's the same with the bike...when enlarged it's not all that sharp...
 
I'm still not sure I understand all the negativity towards this camera. I'm giving some serious consideration to purchasing it, and I've been trolling the web pretty thoroughly for the last week or two in hopes of finding some pictures. The biggest problem I've seen with what's out there has nothing to do with the camera and everything to do with the photographer. The fact that the pictures are underwhelming is simply because they are crappy pictures. For example, my guess as to why the bike is "not sharp" is because of hand shake and thin depth of field. The focus point looks to be possibly the front tire or upper handlebar/brake, but the overall depth of field is shallow, and I recognize some of the overall softness from looking at my own pictures where my hands were unsteady.

I see the same problem with the Monochrom. It's pretty clear that it's resolution capabilities are incredible, but the bulk of the images I've seen from it are bland to bad, which is not the camera's fault. Yet people still rave about how awesome it is. If you would really like a fair comparison as far as things like sharpness and noise are concerned, then it's well worth ponying up the money to subscribe to Sean Reid's reviews. His field pictures are also somewhat lackluster, but he's nothing if not thorough when it comes to testing out the technical side of his gear. There's a comparison between the Monochrom and the new M, and the Monochrom JUST eeks out a little more resolution and a little less noise than the new M. The M9 lags behind quite a bit.

I'm still waiting for the flood of quality images to hit the web, which I am fully confident will happen once the camera finally gets out there.
 
porktaco said:
i'm kinda underwhelmed by the photos in that article. i don't see a lot of magic.
Click to expand...

Wow. You can't judge a camera by the photographer. I think these are perfect examples. Just seeing an actual ISO 6400 shot and the noise levels it produces is totally reassuring that this is going to be a worthwhile camera and really alleviates the one major issue I had with the M9, which was the limitation of ISO 2500 and the hit or miss noise it produced.

Also it seems like these snaps were taken in the rain. There isn't a lot of color to finesse out of the scenery when the sky is grey. Also keep in mind that editing plays a large part in the final look of a photo and these snaps seem to be fresh out of the camera.
 
swoop said:
Wow. You can't judge a camera by the photographer.
Click to expand...

that's very true. i do like the high ISO photo for what it shows about the camera, but there's not an apparent signature to the images. they just looked flat. maybe this guy is a really poor photographer, and i expect the camera to be a pretty big success (fwiw, sean reid has images on his site that might help more in judging the camera's technical merits, and his initial t take is very positive). i just didn't see any zing in these.
 
I'd want a camera without a "signature" to them. all the better for me to apply my own signature to my work.

I'm saving for an M9. but I'm thinking that I might as well save a bit more for the M240.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom