Leica Monochrom M246

Godfrey said:
B&W contrast filters would do little to nothing for a "trees in fog" situation. That's basically a monochromatic situation already; a green, yellow, or orange filter can't do much to separate or compress tonal translation values there. :)

G
Click to expand...

Exactly - that's potentially the deal breaking situation for the M.246
Guess need to wait and see how critical the filters are in more normal scenes.
 
FrozenInTime said:
Exactly - that's potentially the deal breaking situation for the M.246
Guess need to wait and see how critical the filters are in more normal scenes.
Click to expand...

I've seen no proof that there is any issue as yet, just a lot of words suggesting that there is. According to everything I've seen in reviews and sample photos so far, at base ISO the MM246 performs on par with the MM9 and at elevated ISO settings the MM246 performs better.

Have you seen anything specific that proves there is a serious problem with the MM246 performance? If so, please point to it so I can evaluate whether it affects my photography and whether to cancel my order.

Thanks, I appreciate your help. $7500 is not something I toss about lightly.

G
 
Godfrey said:
Have you seen anything specific that proves there is a serious problem with the MM246 performance?
Click to expand...

I've not seen any thing that proves or disproves there is a real life issue.
However the changes from MM to M.246 seem significant enough to merit both scientific and artistic scrutiny before committing to a purchase.
 
I just received certified pre-owned silver MM v1 (what do we call this one now?) in perfect condition, really indistinguishable from new. I had regular black MM v1 in the past and loved it. Just shot a few frames to make sure the sensor is in good shape, and that reminded me how clean the file was at pretty much any ISO compared to what I'm used to: Tri-X. I seriously doubt I need any higher ISO or better IQ per given ISO than this.

Only thing I wish MM (or all other digital cameras I've had) do better is more graceful highlight fallout compared to Tri-X. I'll be shooting the MM v1 like shooting a positive film, under exposing if in doubt rather than over exposing like I do with negative films.

If the MM246 can do the highlight a LOT better than the original MM, that will be very tempting to jump on once the used price comes down in 3-4 years, maybe after MM3 comes out. If that's not happening, I'll probably skip MM246 all together as I really don't need better ISO/IQ combo than what MM v1 can do already.

Eager to see more real life shots of MM246 once it hits the street.
 
FrozenInTime said:
...However the changes from MM to M.246 seem significant enough to merit both scientific and artistic scrutiny before committing to a purchase.
Click to expand...
Yes, that sums it up for me. I'm on a waiting list, but if I'm in doubt when my name comes up, I'll just step to the bottom of the list until we know more.

Kirk
 
FrozenInTime said:
I've not seen any thing that proves or disproves there is a real life issue.
However the changes from MM to M.246 seem significant enough to merit both scientific and artistic scrutiny before committing to a purchase.
Click to expand...

Thank you, that's what I expected to hear. I think the use of terms like "deal breaker" are a bit over the top, too much hyperbole based on conjecture and theoretical concerns without any ground truth. I do expect that Leica's engineers are not stupid or foolish too ... They certainly know a vast amount more about optics, imaging mechanics, and digital signal processing than I do.

So far, as I said, what I've seen in review and picture samples is performance on par with the MM9 at base ISO, and significantly better performance at higher ISO settings. That's really what inspired me to put money down ... I like to do pinhole and zone plate work and where the M-P does lovely B&W work (pretty close to on par again at near base ISO) having ISO 12500 and 25000 extends what you can do in pinhole by a lot.

It should be a no brainer to construct a simple test of base ISO mid level gray differentiation between the MM9 and MM246. So I expect any such debate to be resolved pretty darn fast once there are a few available to work with. I'm not sure what the reviewers who have had both cameras accessible have not done such a test—unless they felt it was a waste of time based on the quality they were seeing out of the camera.

G
 
I am sure it has already been pointed out by Sean Reid at ReidReview.com has done a commendable job of comparing the output of the MM9 and the MM246.
 
Pioneer said:
I am sure it has already been pointed out but Sean Reid at ReidReview.com has done a commendable job of comparing the output of the MM9 and the MM246.
Click to expand...

I've heard that. Every time I hear it, it bugs me once again.

Wonderful as Sean's reviews can be, I refuse to pay $30 for the crappiest reading experience on the web. I subscribed once and dropped it when it came to renewal time because I just cant deal with the stupidity of the reading experience, and didn't get a buck out of the $30 I spent.

Yes, it does irritate the heck out of me. I wish he'd find another way to distribute his work.

G
 
As I recall, Sean's review mentioned a very slight difference in tonality between the MM and M246, not enough to get fussed about one way or the other. Jaapv made an interesting comment in Post 166 about the glass cover that replaces the color filter array, that it was slightly tinted to aid tonality. Presumably tinted slightly differently than the MM's glass cover.
 
Bob said:
Can't open in "Safari" or "Chrome" Neither work.
Click to expand...

Both links work fine for me; I just checked them a second time from another computer using OS X v10.10.3 and Safari version 8.0.5 (10600.5.17). Click and download begins ...

They redirect through the GetDPI forum and retrieve from DropBox, so perhaps if you go there using the first link in the post, you can download directly from GetDPI.

G
 
In the end it boils down to a very simple equation - it is a beautiful camera producing beautiful images, and highly desirable, cheap at the price IMO. But so is the Monochrom 1, and it is questionable whether an upgrade is worth the price if one owns the older model. I decided that my photography does not merit the extra expenditure. If I did not already own a Monochrom, however, my Credit Card would have suffered a meltdown by now...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom