135format
Established
How about everyone tries to see what they can make of one of the leica examples and post their result here with details of how much post processing time it took you. If its only a few seconds then the camera is no worse than any other at how much work it requires to get to a finished print. I'd suggest the fisherman image from the downloads section at leica: This one Fisherman
this took a couple of minutes...
this took a couple of minutes...
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
What sense does this make? This is a preprocessed JPG. We need a DNG file.
135format
Established
I'm thinking of getting to what is a tonally pleasing rather than technically excellent. It is the tonal representation which is at question more than anything else I think. No amount of processing is going to show technical excellence at 600x400 pixels online.
p.s. I don't think the downloads at leica have been processed except to jpg as they are supposed to be performance proofs (not sure what that actually means but I assume un-manipulated). DNG should be even better.
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
Well, yes, I see where you are coming from . But that is more of an artistic choice. It does not tell us much about the capabilities of the camera, I should think.
135format
Established
Not the camera directly but rather is the workflow time comparable to an M9 image converted and processed to B+W image for printing. Because if it is I rekon that an improvement in image tonality from the camera won't make a lot of difference to those striving to make a tonally pleasing print. There is always some manipulation to be done. Some correction for exposure not being spot on. Some burning, some dodging, some vignetting etc to arrive at a quality finished print. Only if you want out of the camera instant to print does it really matter.
I still think it should be better from the camera but for serious work / exhibition prints / prints for sale, I rekon there would be little if any time advantage from improved out of camera tonality.
