BNLee
Established
Don't worry, the pictures are really nice. I particularly like the one of the bread, feels like you will be digging into it in a second!
One thing I learnt, you can really do macro with the M, those shots close up are amazing... Live view?
Keep the info coming for us RFF'ers, although I know I will not be able to afford one!
MIkhail
-
When you drive Porshe you kind of expect fast accelaration, sharp cornering... As well as envy looks and feel of 120K under you, of course.
When you drive Porshe you kind of expect fast accelaration, sharp cornering... As well as envy looks and feel of 120K under you, of course.
So, Leica is the Porsche of the camera world? We all know car analogies don't work for cameras though...
valdas
Veteran
and what makes it a "luxury good"?
valdas
Veteran
well, those in your link are "limited" editions, so they are "rare" and priced accordingly (premium over common/general market edition) because of rarity and because it is also a vanity good (and vanity is the most expensive thing on the planet Earth). but what makes a regular retail item a "luxury good". there must be some features, properties (both tangible and maybe non tangible) that creates that sense of "luxury". is it only name? the reputation of Leica was build during the years not because camera was expensive, but because it met some unique needs of the users and because it met highest quality standards. as a result it became a luxury good. but in order to keep that status it has to deliver, it has to prove that is worth at lease some premium - not because of the history (legacy), but because of what it is now.
I guess it comes down to price (in comparison to others in its category) and the way it is marketed (boutique stores). In all fairness, they make the only digital rangefinder camera and it is made of high quality materials. But $5,500 and up is certainly not common / general in the grand scheme of the world.
Are you saying Leica is not a luxury brand?
valdas
Veteran
well, to me personally it has lost quite a bit of the glamour. I paid recently 300 EUR for a mint Contax S2 and I don't regret a single cent. To me it is a luxury good although a very basic camera and I know I can get this basic operations from 50 EUR Konica T3, but I am still happy to pay 300 EUR for S2. I am not so sure I feel i can justify (to myself) current digital Leica price premium they are commanding... So yes, I can agree that it is still a luxury good in the view of general population, but to me personally... well I am still waiting for a perfect Leica digital product that would justify that luxury name...
I can understand that valdas. I feel the same way these days.
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
We'll see, after all these fight and debating about the Leica M's "disappointing" images, most will still have a go at that bad boy after it is released.
Speaking only for myself, I made two critical comments about technical aspects of the files, one about moiré and one about poor WB in a JPEG. Please note that I balanced these comments with very positive comments about high-ISO noise and low-ISO dynamic range.
To the extent that I found several images disappointing, that was because I was surprised that Leica would show pictures that are not particularly good (motion blur, poor WB, dirt on sensor etcl) as -- to use their word -- "proofs" of the camera's performance. There was one spectacular image, the snow landscape.
The camera is going to be -- by far -- the best digital M, in every important respect. That much is already clear. If I was willing to spend >$2k on a fast-depreciating digital body (I emphatically am not), the 240 is what I'd get, without hesitation.
That does not mean that the device's limitations should be ignored. Every camera has limitations and (part of) a good photographer's job is to understand and work with (or around) those limitations.
PeterG
Newbie
We'll see, after all these fight and debating about the Leica M's "disappointing" images, most will still have a go at that bad boy after it is released.
I think the back-pedaling has already started.
MCTuomey
Veteran
I think it's pretty wonderful that people with meaningful, sustained experience with digital Ms who also are skilled photographers, like Jono and others, are willing to share their M thoughts and files on various forums. That they do so despite the harshness and axe-grinding of some posters' responses is appreciated so much by this poster and I'm sure by many others.
Conversely, it's kind of a shame that many folks post negatively, sometimes very harshly so, on the basis of limited to non-existent experience actually working with Leica's digital Ms. Respectfully, at least for a user like myself, I'm far less interested in technical virtuosity than the simple practical observations from experienced users which to me means someone who's shot and processed thousands of digi M files, and hopefully printed more than a few as well. The subjective views of trusted experienced users whose perceptions aren't bent by preconceptions or undue bias and depend on longer term use are very meaningful.
If I were buying another expensive durable good (like that Porsche), I wouldn't talk to technicians. Nor would I talk to "enthusiasts" who've never owned one or lack real experience with the car. I'd talk to long-term owners, as many as I could reach. Same for the new M. Beers up to the users who brave these threads and share what they've learned from experience and actual practice. It's appreciated.
Conversely, it's kind of a shame that many folks post negatively, sometimes very harshly so, on the basis of limited to non-existent experience actually working with Leica's digital Ms. Respectfully, at least for a user like myself, I'm far less interested in technical virtuosity than the simple practical observations from experienced users which to me means someone who's shot and processed thousands of digi M files, and hopefully printed more than a few as well. The subjective views of trusted experienced users whose perceptions aren't bent by preconceptions or undue bias and depend on longer term use are very meaningful.
If I were buying another expensive durable good (like that Porsche), I wouldn't talk to technicians. Nor would I talk to "enthusiasts" who've never owned one or lack real experience with the car. I'd talk to long-term owners, as many as I could reach. Same for the new M. Beers up to the users who brave these threads and share what they've learned from experience and actual practice. It's appreciated.
mani
Well-known
This is a very patronising post - I'm not sure which of the posters 'with an axe to grind' (as you term it) does or doesn't have experience with Leica digital Ms. Last time I looked it wasn't necessary to write a CV listing one's experience with a range of cameras before giving an opinion on images that are published for general discussion.
As someone who's owned or used both an M8 and an M9, I'd say the image quality of the new M has actually been given a very soft ride (and note! I'm in no way referring to the photographic expertise of the photographers in question).
Push the files hard in any way and you'll see tartan striping not only in the shadow areas but sometimes even in some midtone areas. This is even true in images from the later firmware, such as the glasses on the map (shot at ISO 200 !) - it's feinter but it's still there. That sort of grid noise is going to cause havoc when images need to be manipulated hard, as they sometimes do, or when an image has been accidentally under-exposed and needs to be pulled up.
I'm also interested to know why we haven't seen a single example of caucasian skin in daylight yet. The mixed light images haven't convinced me about the color balance at all - and in very many ways (even in the pretty nice snow portrait of the hidden woman and dog) the general sensor response reminds me of Nikon files.
Anyway, to get back to the point - I really don't see the hardship in being a Leica beta-tester who then voluntarily posts some images to the net. I'm sure Jono Slack doesn't feel like a damsel in distress, and I fail to understand why so many knights in shining armour feel the need to ride to his rescue. Whether we like the apparent quality of the images or not like them is up to each and every one of us, and as far as I'm concerned a photography forum is about airing different opinions.
God forbid this place should get like the leica-camera-forum, where any dissenting voice is hounded down by a rabid pack of dogs.
ChrisC
Established
Indeed indeed! Who'd be a tester? Shame about being flailed Jono, but there are many who do understand that the point of the exercise is to look at the new camera's FILES. Although I'm not in the market for the camera; thanks for the published info.
............... Chris
Sounds like there are a few canines being bared here, rabid or not.
MCTuomey
Veteran
Well, my intent was to thank Jono and any other experienced digital M users for taking time to share their experiences and files. Jono Slack needs no rescuing, maybe we can agree there. Secondarily my intent was to comment on the value of inexperienced M users' posts. If it's a patronising post to distinguish between the value of comments from experienced users versus those who aren't, or to mention the tone of some responses, so be it. Just like in the less virtual world, a little more civility on the internet isn't a bad thing.
PatrickONeill
Well-known
I don't mind if the files have that "plastic canon" look to them. GOOD! that means I can push and work the file to my whims and I'm not limited to any kind of style, look or color pallet but my own.
I'm not big into pixel peeping and the files I'm looking at are pretty good. I guess people are expecting unicorns and rainbows to radiate from every pixel.
I'm going to be printing all next week on a large format printer. I may run a test strip from these samples. I like to look at pictures printed over 200% zoom on screen.
I'm not big into pixel peeping and the files I'm looking at are pretty good. I guess people are expecting unicorns and rainbows to radiate from every pixel.
I'm going to be printing all next week on a large format printer. I may run a test strip from these samples. I like to look at pictures printed over 200% zoom on screen.
mani
Well-known
Ah I see. Well, as an "experienced digital M user" I accept your thanks for sharing what I see are some of the shortcomings of the new M sensor.
MIkhail
-
Look,
We all know that, weather you take particular picture with Leica and super-duper summicron or with Minolta X-700 and modest 50mm, makes NO practical difference to the outcome- which is THE IMAGE.
Those who do not know that should learn it quickly, before waisitng productive years of life ;-)
So if it is not the practicality of it, then what? My guess- vanity. I CAN AFFORD IT THAT'S WHY!
And I don't mean to critisize, vanity is as good of a driver for mankind as any other (envy, grid...).
So I feel that my analogy is quite appropriate. Any decent car will get you from A to B. Good car will get you there quickly.
Porsche will not only do that, but will allow you to catch an attention of some attractive females, nothing wrong with that
pieter
Established
How about we get back to discussing the image quality of these newly released files? I appreciate everybody's viewpoints about these files as it's easy enough to open the same files and find out if you agree or not.
I was impressed at first glance, but have to admit to now seeing some of problems that others have pointed out. I wish I could put words to what I like about the files, but I'm not quite sure yet. Maybe some of you could pinpoint the strength of this new sensor, besides better iso noise than the m9 (which admittedly is not much of a feat)?
My first feeling is that the colour is more realistic and less romantic than the m9, which I think is a good thing if only because it would be silly to want another m9.
I was impressed at first glance, but have to admit to now seeing some of problems that others have pointed out. I wish I could put words to what I like about the files, but I'm not quite sure yet. Maybe some of you could pinpoint the strength of this new sensor, besides better iso noise than the m9 (which admittedly is not much of a feat)?
My first feeling is that the colour is more realistic and less romantic than the m9, which I think is a good thing if only because it would be silly to want another m9.