Monochrom: First pics from Melbourne

So, what lenses in the M-series lineup can this camera not use? I mean from all the manufacturers... Zeiss, Voigtlander, etc..... Can I still use my Canon 50mm f/1.4 screwmount with an adapter on the MM?
 
Abilities aside this camera is still horrendously expensive IMO ... and as convincing as Kristian's pics are he's a pro and could probably have done the same job with my $850.00 RD-1 for web based images.

I think the camera will sell very well though ... in a strange way Leica have kicked another goal!
 
The quality of the photos posted here, especially the first seven or so, don't do anything for me. When I say this, I mean that I don't like the black and white treatment that this camera is producing as well as the post-processing.

Having said that, I do think the photgrapher has a great eye, but the rendering seems almost cartoonish in effect. Zip all shadow detail in a number of shots as well as blown highlights. Just wondering if that is the cameras doing/signature or the technique used by the photographer.

If I had the spare $7000 or so, would I buy this camera - hmm, no.

If I had a spre $7000 or so, would I buy a massive batch of film - hmm, yes.

This high contrast look is popular and perhaps the photographer was going for the Jacob Aue Sobol look. However, such contrast with a noticeable absence of grain just seems rather disconcerting to me.
 
Agree with Jaans.

To my eye there is a "fingernail scratching blackboard" characteristic to these images, unpleasant and irritating.
 
Strange that I'm hearing comments about poor dynamic range when most of the Tri-X pics I see usually have blown highlights. I suspect people are either trying to talk themselves out of liking this camera, or they're just too stuck in the film era. While people say that digital picture look 'digital', my belief is that they just look more 'real'. There is more information, more detail and more 3D. Film, on the other-hand, looks dated and traditional. Nothing wrong with that, but at some point people will have to accept digital as the superior quality, regardless of feel or nostalgia.

The Monochrom has given me more information than any black and white file or negative I've come across. This is not my way of justifying my purchase, but a fact of my experience, believe it or not.

I'm currently shooting fashion week in Melbourne and the results I'm getting are beyond my expectations. Will post next week.
 
fstops said:
Anyone who has dabbled in digital B&W for a long time will never even consider a sensor without RGB channels. You want as much info in the raw file as possible.

The resolution and sharpness of MM is in fact a drawback because in b&w a softer, less detailed look lends itself to smooth tonal transition and it has been the main characteristic of B&w film since it beginning... Most digital B&W is spoiled by too much sharpening which is like a compulsion among lots of photographers.
Click to expand...

I'm new to digital B&W.

Not sure I agree.

I don't think any of my medium format film cameras should be sold because they offer more resolution, tonality and information than 135.

For me the M9M offers some of the same resolution and detail of medium format in a M-body.

Getting the smoothness you mention is a matter of skill in post processing. Its not the camera in question here, but the skill of the photographer I think you mean?

Cal
 
leicashot said:
Strange that I'm hearing comments about poor dynamic range when most of the Tri-X pics I see usually have blown highlights. I suspect people are either trying to talk themselves out of liking this camera, or they're just too stuck in the film era. While people say that digital picture look 'digital', my belief is that they just look more 'real'. There is more information, more detail and more 3D. Film, on the other-hand, looks dated and traditional. Nothing wrong with that, but at some point people will have to accept digital as the superior quality, regardless of feel or nostalgia.

The Monochrom has given me more information than any black and white file or negative I've come across. This is not my way of justifying my purchase, but a fact of my experience, believe it or not.

I'm currently shooting fashion week in Melbourne and the results I'm getting are beyond my expectations. Will post next week.
Click to expand...

Some people say that Fuji Arcos looks digital because of the contrast, detail, and resolution. Some say, "If you like this film you might as well shoot digital."

I try to get the detail, contrast range and resolution of large format even if I'm shooting 135 and the best film for me is Arcos in Diafine with filters. Anyways a lot of people here bash Diafine and others expressed their hate for Arcos. The M9M isn't for everyone.

This Thursday is Fashion Night out. I'll be shooting a Pentax 67II with AE prism with TTL flash shooting Velvia 50 in 220.

Cal
 
Calzone said:
For me the M9M offers some of the same resolution and detail of medium format in a M-body.

Cal
Click to expand...

Here is a JPG file from $500 Nikon D3200 that I converted to b&w in photoshop. The image is available for free from Nikon website. http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/d3200/sample.htm

Could I have gotten away by posting this in forums and saying I shot this in 8x10 LF camera, or with Nikon D800, or Leica MM, or Fuji Xpro1?

Absolutely! Even though I did not add grain and really didn't have the RAW file to work with.

The point being that with digital resolution and sharpness is dirt cheap, not to mention dynamic range. Nikon D3200 has a 13.5 stops of DR at its base ISO.

addCNu8m.jpg
 
fstops said:
Here is a JPG file from $500 Nikon D3200 that I converted to b&w in photoshop. The image is available for free from Nikon website. http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/d3200/sample.htm

Could I have gotten away by posting this in forums and saying I shot this in 8x10 LF camera, or with Nikon D800, or Leica MM, or Fuji Xpro1?

Absolutely! Even though I did not add grain and really didn't have the RAW file to work with.

The point being that with digital resolution and sharpness is dirt cheap, not to mention dynamic range. Nikon D3200 has a 13.5 stops of DR at its base ISO.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the exclaimation point.

Then add two stop faster lenses than what I have in medium format (in my Pentax 67II I have the 75/2.8 AL and 105/2.4) and on most lenses a closer focus on a very famiar M-body..

In the right hands a digital camera is a very capable tool. Anyways as a die hard B&W only film guy it will be like going back to school. For this reason I like the M9M because it is more basic and has less frills than DSLR's. I don't need video and all those advanced features.

Not selling any medium format yet...but there might be a future cull down.

Cal
 
Calzone said:
Just sold a 35 Summaron with hood and vintage caps yesterday. Now all I need to sell is a German 75 Lux and a German 35 Cron V.4. 🙂

Not selling any guitars or amps.

Cal
Click to expand...

I'm like you "Not selling any guitars or amps"......maybe.

Joe
 
Joe AC said:
I'm like you "Not selling any guitars or amps"......maybe.

Joe
Click to expand...

I just ordered a monochrome.

My guitar and amp collection will remain intact. In fact perhaps next year I will likely have a new 18 inch arch-top made by Cristian Mirabella that will feature "trap doors." Two trap doors will be adjustable side soundholes and the f-holes also are adjustable.

Check out the 17 inch guitar known as "Carmela" on his website that was developed as proof of principle and was built as a prototype. I first ordered this guitar in 2004 BTW.

Cal
 
Kristian, 1 and 3 above are superb. Keep them coming. Not digital or film like to me, just great shots. Money well spent with your MM by the look of it.
 
Cal congrats on your order, you will absolutely love it. Here is a preview of what I'm doing at Fashion Week. I'm also pushing the camera to ISO 10,000 frequently and the files are magnificent. Summilux 50mm f/1.4 at f/5.6

Here's a super clean one that is billboard quality at ISO 320. The detail at 200% beats my old Hasselblad H4D-40.


L1000441 by Kristian Dowling, on Flickr
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom