Monochrom 246 and Leica SL in New Mexico

I was ambivalent about the SL at first too. I've since had a chance to try it twice for very brief periods. IMO, it improves on all the Sony a7 handling/UI shortcomings and is the best mirrorless I've used to date, in respect to responsiveness, ease of use, feel, logical design, etc. I was very impressed with the EVF when I tried it with my range of M lenses. Anything 50mm and longer was super easy to focus and I was nailing wide open focus with those lenses without any peaking or magnification.

Where I have some reservations about the SL is WA M lens performance. The results with my 28 Cron (v1) and 21 SEM showed some edge sharpness degradation/smearing reminiscent of using WA lenses on the Sony cameras, though not quite as bad. But still not as good at wider apertures as on the M9 or M240. I suspect this is one reason for the recent 28mm and 35 Cron refresh.

If I did not currently need to maintain a comprehensive Canon DSLR system for action/sports work, as well as events where their wireless radio flash system is at times very useful, I'd seriously consider adding an SL to my M kit because I feel it nicely augments some M shortcomings. But as it stands now, an SL would sit somewhere between the M and DSLR in feature-set and capabilities, without replacing either. Rather, I will wait to see what the next M body offers in respect to enhanced live view and add-on EVF capability. It very well may be similarly specced to the SL, yet retain the RF characteristics I greatly value.

In any case, I really enjoyed your photos, irrelevant of the camera used. As with the Lensrentals comparison, it's 99.99999% of the time going to be irrelevant to the viewers of your photos. IMO, where it will most make a difference is in your enjoyment of the process of creating images. How the cameras feel, how transparent they become in the process by not interfering when you get into a flow with your shooting. This is why I'm a big fan of Leica gear even though I believe Leica will never win a spec-sheet shootout with any other popular brand. You just can't determine 'shooting experience' without trying the gear first. Unfortunately most never give Leica a fair chance due to the cost of entry.
 
My Take

My Take

I don't know how you post processed, but just comparing pixels mimicking 'grain' signature, the SL rules the day.

The SL almost has the old Monochrom look to it, something the new Mono lacks. The old Mono and the SL are looking like Tri X, the new Mono is Verichrome Pan at it's worst, or Panatomic X when ISO is in its favor and at its best.

Hey, I wish I had the money for an SL!

Vince, I'm jealous!
 
Dektol Dan said:
I don't know how you post processed, but just comparing pixels mimicking 'grain' signature, the SL rules the day.

The SL almost has the old Monochrom look to it, something the new Mono lacks. The old Mono and the SL are looking like Tri X, the new Mono is Verichrome Pan at it's worst, or Panatomic X when ISO is in its favor and at its best.

Hey, I wish I had the money for an SL!

Vince, I'm jealous!
Click to expand...

Thanks for your thoughts Dan. Really, I don't have a problem with the 'look' of the images from the Monochrom 246 at all. They are definitely 'cleaner' at base ISO than the 'old' Monochrom, but I actually prefer that, plus it gives me a higher 'ceiling', if that makes sense. And looking at 'old' vs 'new' Monochrom prints side-by-side, there isn't this jarring difference between the two.

As far as $$$$ goes for the SL, I definitely can't afford to buy it outright. I'll have to either 'trade up' through my dealer/pusher, or sell the 246 on the secondary market myself.

BTW I shot all day with the SL today, and I'll hopefully upload some photos soon. Stay tuned!
 
The SL is clearly a stellar performer, and Vince, you're a pretty good photographer as well :) I'm really enjoying your images here; and missing NM a little more with each. I think I can see the difference compared to the Monocrhom, but then again it might just be in my head. Computer monitor and all. Prints would be a treat, I can tell that much.

Clayton, eh. How about wandering due south from there. Most people seem to spend more time in the north half of the state. There's gems in the south half too. South from Clayton to Roswell and UFO's, Artesia and lots of oil drilling infrastructure (and a nice cafe), on down to Carlsbad. You don't have to go into the caves (although I would) but the bat emergence spectacle is one of Earth's great wonders. Probably not happening in late Feb, though. A wander over to Guadalupe National Monument (Park?) takes you through some nice scenery. Along the way, I've always found Sitting Bull Falls (state park I believe) a nice spot. The locals can be found there, local rock climbers.
The trip over the Sacramentos from Artesia to Alamogordo is nice. Cloudcroft seems out of place for southern NM. Highest golf course in the US is there, but I've never seen it. Not a golfer.
 
I have done Roswell a couple of times (nice town), Carlsbad Caverns, White Sands, Las Cruces/Mesilla, and all down in that area. This time around I did the high road to Taos (though did not go to Taos this time), Hwy 104 from Las Vegas to Tucumcari, and today from Tucumcari out on Hwy 54 to almost the Texas state line, then up Hwy 402 to Clayton. Friday morning I have to be in Santa Rosa to start an assignment for the Guadalupe County Communicator newspaper!

This is my sixth visit to New Mexico, and my third such trip in February (otherwise known as my 'wanders'). This part of NM is the only region I hadn't visited. Glad I've now done it, though Raton and the volcanoes will have to wait until another trip.
 
Keep debating a little longer so we can keep enjoying this trip of yours as well.

P.S. I never found comfortable wearing sunglasses and shooting with a camera so my vote goes to getting use to that diopter correction.. Also I find OVF and EVF both useful and complementary to each other, so hard to just pick one.
 
These are terrific Vince and yes in your hands the SL just sings as does the MM. Hopefully you will have a clear path at the end of the trip as to your camera direction. Keep'm coming. I am so enjoying this thread.
 
Many thanks -- I'm likely going to use the Monochrom today, and tomorrow I start an assignment for the Guadalupe County Communicator newspaper. Not completely sure what the publisher has in store, but I may end up using the SL for that (may involve some - gasp - colour photos!

A boring one from yesterday -- this is in Nara Visa (near the TX state line):


Nara Visa2 by Vince Lupo, on Flickr
 
airfrogusmc said:
These are terrific Vince and yes in your hands the SL just sings as does the MM. Hopefully you will have a clear path at the end of the trip as to your camera direction. Keep'm coming. I am so enjoying this thread.
Click to expand...

Vince,

A lot of nice shots. The MM, M-246 or SL does not really matter. Interesting your comments on how you like the clean files.

Anyways how spoiled are we today?

BTW I lived in New Mexico for a year and a half during the Cold War. Basically I worked at Los Alamos National Lab on a Star Wars project when Ronald Ray-Gun was President and we were building a Neutral Beam Partical Accelerator to shoot down intercontinental missles in their boost phase before they vaporize us.

I lived in a community of 80 mailboxes along State Highway 4 called La Cueva in the Santa Fe National Forest. The area was so remote that I got no TV reception and was 47 miles from civilization. that was equidistant from ABQ and Santa Fe.

Cal
 
johnwolf said:
I'm starting to wonder if these are just TOO clean for me. I'm feeling an urge to shoot Tri-X, something I have not done in a long time. :)

John
Click to expand...

John,

That is part of the charm of my original Monochrom: pretty clean files but not perfect.

The files from the SL and M-246 do really look kinda perfect.

I still shoot lots of film BTW.

Cal
 
Yes, Cal, I have an M-Monochrome and agree. Still really like Vince's contributions here and was (partly) kidding. But let's shut that door now.

John
 
When will we be able to look at digital images for what they are?
I love film and digital. They are different animals.
Like watercolors or oils.
Digital will never be film and vice-versa.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom