tightsqueez
Well-known
Exactly!! It calls for a different technique that is not inherent to Leica shooting. It's as if everyone is trying to magnify out of a bad image with higher megapixels.
Film has been out resolved years ago by the digital dinosaurs of the past.
Tim Gray
Well-known
Counterpoint: I shoot my A7rII without regard to the fact that it’s 42 MP. Nobody has been hurt in that process. If the next Monochrom is decent, it will be my first Leica digital. I don’t need or want more than 24 MP in it, but as long as it’s got good high ISO, and the shape and shutter of the M10P, I think I will be happy.
Emile de Leon
Well-known
I dont want all those 41MP per shot..clogging up my computer...
Would rather have a super speed 12MP or 24MP cam..
Would rather have a super speed 12MP or 24MP cam..
tightsqueez
Well-known
I will be happy... said the person who never owned a digital Leica. Ha ha.
Tim, we all want a good Monochrom. I want one too. But as I said, these cameras are liabilities. How many A7rII's can you buy for a new Monochrom? Five? Six? I loved my Sony A7s, it just worked and worked.
A 42mp file isn’t that much bigger than a 24mp file. It takes a little more storage, a tiny bit more processing power, but not the amount people tend to think. Also, at 300 dpi, the print size for 24mp vs. 42mp is about 13” x 20” vs. 17” x 26”. Some people will say that we don’t look at images up close in a gallery or a museum, that you stand back and look. However, it really depends on the photo and what type of detail it has. For me, nothing wrong with a lot of detail and being able to print large if needed.
Huss
Veteran
I just use my Nikon Z7 to scan my film. In such use the high mp is great as it gives me scans that are 7K wide on the long side. I print for customers.
But for photography? I like film much more for many reasons including that I just care about the composition and scene, not worry about if my IBIS is working, or will it look perfectly sharp pixel peeping, or how is my dynamic range, or or or..
And.. my customers want film images. They want that perfect imperfection. If they want digital they just whip out their iphone and have at it.
Tim Gray
Well-known
Point taken. It will have been reliable otherwise I will be very unhappy
. I can’t say that I’ve heard of a ton of problems with the later digital Ms but I probably haven’t been paying attention. My Sony is okay. I can’t say I really enjoy it as much as a rangefinder.
tightsqueez
Well-known
Yes, I can definitely see that purpose of having extra mp. I'd use one for sure but I'm content with a Coolscan 9000 ED. Not the same as wet printing with the Focomat IIc though!
Michael Markey
Veteran
Have to say my A7R2 and the A7S before it never missed a beat .
Disappointing to hear that the digital M cameras are still not fully up to speed in some areas.
tightsqueez
Well-known
Point taken. It will have been reliable otherwise I will be very unhappy
My Sony is okay. I can’t say I really enjoy it as much as a rangefinder.
I had a M240 that was fine. My M10 had dead pixels across the entire frame that needed remapped. Overall, my favorite M digital.
They just feel "buggy." The responsiveness just isn't quite there yet.
Yeah, I feel you on the Sony. I sold mine, just wasn't the same as a rangefinder. They don't play well with most wides. I see the 28 Lux does well but... whatever. I had that lens for a year and went back to the 28 Cron. Couldn't be happier.
Fingers crossed for the next Mono!
Tim Gray
Well-known
I was super tempted by the 28 Summilux but I resisted.
The Loxia lenses for Sony are a bit goofy ergonomically but very nice. No 28mm, but 25 is close enough.
The Loxia lenses for Sony are a bit goofy ergonomically but very nice. No 28mm, but 25 is close enough.
tightsqueez
Well-known
If you plan on staying the A7 or even Leica SL route, the 28 Lux makes more sense. It doesn't balance well on the M (viewfinder blockage is awful and is front heavy). While probably the best 1.4 lens they offer in terms of optical measures, the additional baggage is too taxing, not to mention annoying. Also, I found the Lux rendering too busy and disturbing, even on film.
Hogarth Ferguson
Well-known
And we need this lens because .... ?
We "need" this lens like we need any other piece of modern equipment. That is to say, we don't.
I'm so confused by how much people rally against this nikon lens but will buy the new m10-p after just getting an m10. Wild to me how people will say one piece of gear is too expensive while gobbling up anything another company puts out.
sepiareverb
genius and moron
I'll disagree that a tripod makes any visible difference when shooting any Leica M at speeds over 1/250th. Unless one has the shakes - but even then I'd not be entirely sure. A very good friend of mine has a significant tremor, and his images are quite sharp even when pixel peeping. When we were out shooting two weeks ago I was thinking that He'd not get a single frame judging by how much the camera was moving, but not a problem. He keeps his shutter speed up and he's fine. Might a tripod make a difference? Of course it could under some conditions.But whatever one might shoot with a film Leica and Tri-X will be surpassed by the M10M no matter what technique one uses. And getting the "most" out of every exposure is something I suspect "most" of us are completely incapable of whether we are shooting FOMA Retropan, ADOX CMSIII or a DLUX2. And despite forty plus years of very careful attention to process and plenty of time spent honing such process I include myself in that most.
Getting the very best out of a system is rarely worth the effort, as one will never notice the difference. Choosing a camera for ergonomics, choice of lenses and the capacity to deliver prints at the largest size you would want to print with a minimum of fussing is much more important than worrying that one isn't getting everything the camera is capable of.
Erik van Straten
Veteran
This is what a film M-Leica does in 2019 with a 1959 50mm f/1.4 lens at full aperture.
Erik.
Erik.
Timmyjoe
Veteran
Yeah, that one kinda blew me away. Really don't grasp the concept of that lens. The beauty of the Z series cameras is their tiny form factor and light weight. Why would someone want to attach a bazooka to the front of one?
Best,
-Tim
Larry Cloetta
Veteran
Well.........the beauty of the Z cameras might be different things to different people. Nikon thinks that the beauty of the Z system is the new mount and the lens design benefits that brings. Individual users might like a small form factor, though the Sonys are smaller, but to Nikon it’s mainly the mount and what they can do with it.
The .095 lens is a showcase of what they can do with it, as the MTF charts show. Pretty incredible, seems like.
For many people the allure of the Z system is the benefit conferred by the mount on new Nikkor lens designs, plus the quality of the sensor, plus the ability (shared with every mirrorless camera) to use adapted lenses, with the body size being neither here nor there.
Not that I’m getting this $8k lens as I’d rather spend the money on the Nikkor 200mm F2 to stick on the Z7. Another lovely bazooka without any legitimate competition from any other manufacturer.
Tim Gray
Well-known
Using it on the A7 was part of the temptation. I do agree with you, too many of the pictures I’ve seen from it look a bit busy.
