M Monochrom: is "significantly higher resolution" junk science?

I've worked with the files some. I shoot 100% film right now and am NOT a pro. The files look great to me. Very easy to work with. I'm not sure if the camera offers something that I want until I get a better sense of the dynamic range. I think the I'll be able to do that is to shoot it myself and see if it meshes with my shooting habits.

It's certainly not a camera for everybody, or even a significant percentage of people.
 
Moriturii said:
I think you all should calm down, and let us wait and see some proper RAW (or processed) images from working pro photographers who have deep experience in both digital and film workflow.
Click to expand...

Plenty of those in the forums by now (LUF, GetDPIforums, etc...)
 
Wouldn't say no, though I don't think it's absolutely necessary. Dust hasn't bee a huge problem for me.

My only concern is given the small size of a Leica M body, whether adding a dust reduction feature would require an increase in the size and/or configuration of the camera.

This has been my concern, as I've said before, with all those suggestions as to how to make the Leica M "better"; i.e. focus confirmation, program mode, etc. Keep adding things to the M and what you'll get is a DSLR.
 
Since when is SNR not a part of "image quality" assessment?

And, do you find M9's images better than M9M's in low ISO (320) shots?
 
brbo said:
Since when is SNR not a part of "image quality" assessment?

And, do you find M9's images better than M9M's in low ISO (320) shots?
Click to expand...

Like you say it's PART of it.
Yes: resolution and lack of iso noise is "better" than with the M9.

The whole testing on resolution and high iso performance is very unimportant to me however when it comes to the added value of a specialised Digital B&W only camera.
 
After looking at the pictures from the M9M and the M9 it seems to me that the new m9 has better high iso performance and lacks depth compared to the old m9. Until 640 Asa I preferred the old camera's images in the high Iso range the M9m wins by a wide margin. But both cameras seem to be able to produce good images.

Dominik
 
J. Borger said:
Like you say it's PART of it.
Yes: resolution and lack of iso noise is "better" than with the M9.

The whole testing on resolution and high iso performance is very unimportant to me however when it comes to the added value of a specialised Digital B&W only camera.
Click to expand...

I guess I'm missing something obvious. What is the biggest gain by going BW only with M9M for you (and you don't care about resolution, DR, ISO...)?

Color accuracy? :D (sorry couldn't resist)
One step less in you PP workflow?
Better on-camera histogram?
...?
 
brbo said:
I guess I'm missing something obvious. What is the biggest gain by going BW only with M9M for you (and you don't care about resolution, DR, ISO...)?

Color accuracy? :D (sorry couldn't resist)
One step less in you PP workflow?
Better on-camera histogram?
...?
Click to expand...
Yes you are clearly missing the most important point: B&W tonality :rolleyes:
If this is not significant better compared to converted M9 files and about as good as B&W film the camera makes no sense. So that is where the discussion of a dedicated B&W digital camera should be about and not about the same bull **** all digital camera's are compared on.
 
brbo said:
But better tonality will come from that same improved properties that you don't give a damn about... :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

So if we get a M10 at Photokina with 36MP and even cleaner high iso than the MM it wil be a better camera for B&W :confused:

And the Nikon D800E gives better B&W tonality than a Leica M8 :confused:

Clearly missing something here.
 
"After looking at the pictures from the M9M and the M9 it seems to me that the new m9 has better high iso performance and lacks depth compared to the old m9. Until 640 Asa I preferred the old camera's images in the high Iso range the M9m wins by a wide margin. But both cameras seem to be able to produce good images."

To quote myself I prefer the tonality of the non monochrome M9. The M9m files look like digital B/W and why shouldn't they that's what they are after all. The M9 files look more film like than the monochrome's.

Dominik
 
To clarify the facts.

To clarify the facts.

DominikDUK said:
To quote myself I prefer the tonality of the non monochrome M9.
Click to expand...

Just to clarify something - there is no "monochrome M9" or "new M9".

There are the M9, and M9-P if you want to be absolutely comprehensive - and the newest camera which shoots B&W only is the M Monochrom, or MM for short.

Don't thank me, I'm just glad to help with the rampant confusion that seems to be spreading. :)
 
The point about black and white with the MM is that it is obligatory. That is a very important component of what it offers, independent of the black and white it actually produces. Your mindset carrying the camera is completely and unambiguously located in the monochrome view of the world, like with a pocket full of Tri-X. You don't wonder whether these colours are too muddy or the blue awning is too dominant, or whether that looks like a great shot, in colour. it's simply black and white. That limitation is the more important offering of the MM. Whether a Nikon D800 produces nicer high ISO black and white files is not the point at all. With the MM you can shoot your favourite Leica and Zeiss lenses with manual exposure, coincidence RF focus in a bright frame line viewfinder in a compact package similar to what one has used for decades.
 
mugget said:
Just to clarify something - there is no "monochrome M9" or "new M9".

There are the M9, and M9-P if you want to be absolutely comprehensive - and the newest camera which shoots B&W only is the M Monochrom, or MM for short.

Don't thank me, I'm just glad to help with the rampant confusion that seems to be spreading. :)
Click to expand...

Wrong.

There is an M9, M9-P and now M9-M.

It's just called M Monochrome for PR purposes. This camera is an Leica M9 with bayer layer removed (or whatever it's called) and a few software tricks. (And added price tag, novelty!) therefore, "monochrome M9" or whatever people want to call it. It's not a different, specially built from the ground up, new camera, it's a new version of an M9.

I think you are the person who should stop spreading miss-information.

Thank you.
 
Moriturii said:
mugget said:
Just to clarify something - there is no "monochrome M9" or "new M9".

There are the M9, and M9-P if you want to be absolutely comprehensive - and the newest camera which shoots B&W only is the M Monochrom, or MM for short.

Don't thank me, I'm just glad to help with the rampant confusion that seems to be spreading. :)
Click to expand...

Wrong.

There is an M9, M9-P and now M9-M.

It's just called M Monochrome for PR purposes. This camera is an Leica M9 with bayer layer removed (or whatever it's called) and a few software tricks. (And added price tag, novelty!) therefore, "monochrome M9" or whatever people want to call it. It's not a different, specially built from the ground up, new camera, it's a new version of an M9.

I think you are the person who should stop spreading miss-information.

Thank you.
Click to expand...

The argument you two are having boils down to "let's call things by what's printed on them" vs. "let's call them by what's inside". Seems pretty hard to be right or wrong about that, and I'm not sure that's how I'd like to spend my time, but I hope you guys are enjoying yourselves.
 
rxmd said:
The argument you two are having boils down to "let's call things by what's printed on them" vs. "let's call them by what's inside". Seems pretty hard to be right or wrong about that, and I'm not sure that's how I'd like to spend my time, but I hope you guys are enjoying yourselves.
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone is spending more then 30 seconds on this mate, and then moving along to other business in front of the computer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom