DRabbit
Registered
Nigel posted this is the thread about resolution, and I was going to reply there, but didn't want to interject and go off topic inside a very technical discussion.
I'm not interested in "bashing" the new M-Monochrom at all... but I do agree with Nigel's thoughts above, and it makes me wonder if there might have been some missed opportunities with this new B&W-Only Camera.
A couple of weeks prior to the announcement I was discussing the rumor of it with a few people, and actually making an argument in favor of it. However, what I envision Leica might do and what they did ended up being different things.
Instead of packaging Silver Efex Pro software inside the box, what if they had increased the processing power inside the camera and focused its energies on including similar type algorithms inside the actual firmware, along with the removing the color filter?
Along with that thought, what if they have truly optimized firmware/software film simulations to work exclusively with the monochrome sensor?
What if, similar to the X100 and it's ND filter, they had included color filters inside the camera itself via hardware, not software? (from a technical standpoint, I honestly don't know if this is possible or not?)
Instead of including Lightroom and SEP, what if Leica had designed it's own RAW processing software -- something completely new -- exclusively designed to optimize the benefits of a monochrome-only sensor, and simulating darkroom/developing choices. Olympus includes their own raw processor, so it's not out of the question to do...
All that said, stating the obvious, even with the choices above, you could still choose to have the flattest output possible if you want to do it yourself via RAW, Photoshop, Lightroom or SEP, etc.
What other innovations/unique ideas could Leica have presented with this new type of camera? (okay, I do realize it's been done before, but let's just assume here it's a first)
I just wonder what truly missed opportunities there might have been... or do you disagree and think it's perfect as is (how it's been presented so far)?
~and take all of this above knowing that I love Leica. I'll never sell my M8. I wish I could afford an M9. If I had unlimited money to blow, I'd probably buy the MM just to try. I'm typically a fan-girl. LOL
What do you think?
I'm not interested in "bashing" the new M-Monochrom at all... but I do agree with Nigel's thoughts above, and it makes me wonder if there might have been some missed opportunities with this new B&W-Only Camera.
A couple of weeks prior to the announcement I was discussing the rumor of it with a few people, and actually making an argument in favor of it. However, what I envision Leica might do and what they did ended up being different things.
Instead of packaging Silver Efex Pro software inside the box, what if they had increased the processing power inside the camera and focused its energies on including similar type algorithms inside the actual firmware, along with the removing the color filter?
Along with that thought, what if they have truly optimized firmware/software film simulations to work exclusively with the monochrome sensor?
What if, similar to the X100 and it's ND filter, they had included color filters inside the camera itself via hardware, not software? (from a technical standpoint, I honestly don't know if this is possible or not?)
Instead of including Lightroom and SEP, what if Leica had designed it's own RAW processing software -- something completely new -- exclusively designed to optimize the benefits of a monochrome-only sensor, and simulating darkroom/developing choices. Olympus includes their own raw processor, so it's not out of the question to do...
All that said, stating the obvious, even with the choices above, you could still choose to have the flattest output possible if you want to do it yourself via RAW, Photoshop, Lightroom or SEP, etc.
What other innovations/unique ideas could Leica have presented with this new type of camera? (okay, I do realize it's been done before, but let's just assume here it's a first)
I just wonder what truly missed opportunities there might have been... or do you disagree and think it's perfect as is (how it's been presented so far)?
~and take all of this above knowing that I love Leica. I'll never sell my M8. I wish I could afford an M9. If I had unlimited money to blow, I'd probably buy the MM just to try. I'm typically a fan-girl. LOL
What do you think?
segedi
RFicianado
I think Leica took a big risk in developing a B&W camera to begin with. And to diminish the risk, they used a lot of current (so as to not be confused, current means existing Leica) tech and hardware to make it happen. To place a bunch of software routines into the camera may result in a huge hit in write times and lower battery life. And since I see black and white enthusiasts being a target market, we already have plenty of filters to throw on our lenses. Although Leica's been derided in many a forum post for the flat looking files, I see that as a huge bonus. The included software won't please everyone, but based on other camera makers lackluster efforts and lack of support, I think it was a wise choice to include two widely used prices of software. And I think it helps keep the price down as well.
Remember, this is their first offering and after seeing how the risk pans out, I'll expect them to offer a better sensor at least, if the MM is a success.
Remember, this is their first offering and after seeing how the risk pans out, I'll expect them to offer a better sensor at least, if the MM is a success.
nemjo
Avatar Challenge
CK Dexter Haven
Well-known
Isn't a "flat and lifeless" image the objective, straight from the camera? Giving the photographer as much data to work with when deciding the final 'look' of the image? Wouldn't an unprocessed image with the most dynamic range naturally look 'flat?'
I'm not defending Leica nor this camera — but in any digital capture, i would think i would want the camera to give me a file that is best for manipulating, not one that already looks like someone else's idea of what my final picture should look like.
I do think the inclusion of the Nik software is odd and ironic. They're striving to derive the sharpest, most clinically 'pure' image, and they give you a package to degrade it. Everyone's talking about the monochrom M in terms of how HCB would have received it. When his work is the complete opposite of what this camera represents. Heck, the guy could barely focus. I'm not sure he would be worried about the Nth degree of pixel resolution. What-evs.
I'm not defending Leica nor this camera — but in any digital capture, i would think i would want the camera to give me a file that is best for manipulating, not one that already looks like someone else's idea of what my final picture should look like.
I do think the inclusion of the Nik software is odd and ironic. They're striving to derive the sharpest, most clinically 'pure' image, and they give you a package to degrade it. Everyone's talking about the monochrom M in terms of how HCB would have received it. When his work is the complete opposite of what this camera represents. Heck, the guy could barely focus. I'm not sure he would be worried about the Nth degree of pixel resolution. What-evs.
I'm going to allow some time for this camera to get into people's hands. We go through this every time. The first examples of most cameras "suck" and we get fooled every time.
DRabbit
Registered
I agree with you they took a risk, and I commend them for it. I'm not sure I agree they used a lot of "new tech and hardware" to make it happen though.
Other companies don't seem to have this issue, so why should Leica in today's day and age? Plus B&W enthusiasts (and pros, assumably) can have very different wants and desires. The guy shooting on Tri-X certainly wants a different out-of-cam result than the guy shooting on Neopan.
See above. If that were true everyone would shoot on the same exact B&W film. There'd be one popular brand.
Again, see above about film choices.
And while I actually don't disagree with you that a flat file can be a good starting point, it isn't necessarily what every photographer wants, and I think the different film options and choices out there bare this out to a certain degree.
Put another way... I like choosing the film I'm going to shoot with, and know the type of results I'll get with it. I may still end up doing some PP here and there, but that isn't because the file itself is super-flat. Contrast, tonal range, grain -- are all different with different films. And I bet someone way more versed in film could speak to this better than me... I mean even different developers have different results.
And isn't it interesting that on the Leica page about the camera itself, it seems the primary examples have been PP'd quite a lot... which is maybe part of my point?
What would have been bad about a little advanced software and hardware technology (in-camera) that made the absolute most out of the monochrome sensor, especially if you still had the option to shoot completely flat?
BobYIL
Well-known
To reply to your inquiries is easy; to figure out how much an M9M would contribute to your photography while having an M8 is difficult.
This is not to influence your decisions in any way however I would rather be trying to extend the limits of my capability to accomplish what I had in mind with the B&W digital, first with my M8 at hand. I believe the largest portion of any success in photography is not related to the equipment we employ before the way we employ them. (I wonder how many Magnum members are using Leicas these days.)
segedi
RFicianado
On included software keep price down, if Leica doesn't have to develop, maintain, support and provide upgrades and gets a a great deal on the software, it helps keep the price down. I know the price is already pretty steep, but I can't see Leica spending to develop software when the unit sales are so low. And the software being offered is so mature.
On best possible source files, If film photographers have a preferred stock they shoot film. And if they want that look in digital, they emulate in post processing. I, for one, don't want Leica dictating what my final image looks like. Imagine if they did put film stock emulation in camera and the Tri-X guys go nuts because it doesn't look good enough because it doesn't look like their developer was used. And even if they did offer in camera choice of film stock, I don't see it being applied to the Raw image file anyway. Would just affect jpegs. Some companies offer such features, but Leica, so far ain't one of 'em.
Oh, and I didn't mean they used new tech and hardware, I said current, meaning current Leica. They weren't out to reinvent the wheel with this camera and used their current (M9) camera as the base. And didn't want to try to outdo some of the best software on the market either. I don't have any problem with that and don't see it as a lack of effort.
On best possible source files, If film photographers have a preferred stock they shoot film. And if they want that look in digital, they emulate in post processing. I, for one, don't want Leica dictating what my final image looks like. Imagine if they did put film stock emulation in camera and the Tri-X guys go nuts because it doesn't look good enough because it doesn't look like their developer was used. And even if they did offer in camera choice of film stock, I don't see it being applied to the Raw image file anyway. Would just affect jpegs. Some companies offer such features, but Leica, so far ain't one of 'em.
Oh, and I didn't mean they used new tech and hardware, I said current, meaning current Leica. They weren't out to reinvent the wheel with this camera and used their current (M9) camera as the base. And didn't want to try to outdo some of the best software on the market either. I don't have any problem with that and don't see it as a lack of effort.
seakayaker1
Well-known
I have no problem with Leica working with a software company that has a goal to deliver a quality product to process raw files coming out of the camera.
Why not be disappointed in the M9 and future camera releases for not having Adobe Photoshop CS5 capabilities on board?
If Leica were to develop such software there would be a R&D burden that may further slow down there capabilities to bring product to market on a timely basis.
I believe Leica is making good business decisions with the relationships with Adobe LR and NIK EFEX Pro 2 products associated with their cameras.
JMHO.
Why not be disappointed in the M9 and future camera releases for not having Adobe Photoshop CS5 capabilities on board?
If Leica were to develop such software there would be a R&D burden that may further slow down there capabilities to bring product to market on a timely basis.
I believe Leica is making good business decisions with the relationships with Adobe LR and NIK EFEX Pro 2 products associated with their cameras.
JMHO.
Colin Corneau
Colin Corneau
Where, exactly, was the 'effort' to develop this camera?
It's an interesting addition and I agree we should let the initial bugs get worked out and see some examples before passing *too* much judgement...but this wasn't exactly a lot of heavy lifting on Leica's part...it's a gimped over M9, no?
And yet the pricing...oy vey, the pricing. This is more niche brand positioning than actual R&D or, heaven help us, actual photography. /rant
It's an interesting addition and I agree we should let the initial bugs get worked out and see some examples before passing *too* much judgement...but this wasn't exactly a lot of heavy lifting on Leica's part...it's a gimped over M9, no?
And yet the pricing...oy vey, the pricing. This is more niche brand positioning than actual R&D or, heaven help us, actual photography. /rant
Jeff S
Well-known
Well, the price is exactly the same as the M9-P. Many thought it would be more...a lot more. Doesn't change your point, perhaps, but the same point could be made about the M9-P.
Jeff
ChrisLivsey
Veteran
tele_player
Member
Here in US, B+H lists M9P at $7995, and M Monochrom at $7950. I think 6120 might be the price in Euros.
-robert
-robert
Nigel Meaby
Well-known
From BJP website:
"The Leica M Monochrom will be available from July at a retail price of £6120."
With the strength of the pound against the Euro, if that continues until July. It will work out cheaper to buy from a European seller rather than a UK one. Not that I will be contemplating buying one
"The Leica M Monochrom will be available from July at a retail price of £6120."
With the strength of the pound against the Euro, if that continues until July. It will work out cheaper to buy from a European seller rather than a UK one. Not that I will be contemplating buying one
segedi
RFicianado
Please read post #8.
reiki_
Well-known
I think it's a camera that continues the boring and predictable Leica path of late years (mostly selling third party products with ridiculous markup) and the only reason it is subject of this much debate is that none of us are willing to believe that Leica thinks of all of us as fools.
DRabbit
Registered
I'm not sure I agree it's boring... though I wonder if their execution of this camera is what makes it less interesting than it could have been.
Lots of mixed emotions out there about this camera... which is why I started this topic.
Here's some quotes from another thread on "would you buy the M9M"... they illustrate one of the points I was trying to make. Would this M9M/MM have been better with firmware/software in-camera optimized for the sensor itself, the ability to use different "film types" and advanced hardware that might have been able to eliminate the need to carry filters around...
Even with its supposed higher DR and sharper files, was there a better way to get a true B&W film-like experience without resorting to Silver Efex Pro?
I applaud Leica for introducing both the Monochrom and the 50/2 from a technical standpoint.
However make no mistake, the Monochrom is simply a way for Leica to put in a tiny bit of additional engineering into a product whose NRE has long since been amortized, and sell a few hundred or thousand cameras to people who already own the same thing that is capable of color.
This is simply about making money, folks, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.
Building anything else that would require *real* engineering would probably not be profitable...
However make no mistake, the Monochrom is simply a way for Leica to put in a tiny bit of additional engineering into a product whose NRE has long since been amortized, and sell a few hundred or thousand cameras to people who already own the same thing that is capable of color.
This is simply about making money, folks, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.
Building anything else that would require *real* engineering would probably not be profitable...
rbelyell
Well-known
i have read nothing that echoes more true than this statement. leica is a maserati company that has been producing lexus products and charging ferrari prices. if they came out with a camera that could only be used when wearing a cone shaped dunce hat inorder to achieve 'perfect balance', we would be having discussions like 'well, i wear a hat anyway when i shoot' and 'actually thats a good thing when it snows' etc
These comments always are interesting to read. Leica would not be issuing these kinds of products if people were not buying them.