Dante_Stella
Rex canum cattorumque
It seems that everyone and his brother is attempting to get an M Monochrom review up (and to reap any attendant click-throughs, subscriptions, etc.). The technical discussions (or attempts thereat) do not seem particularly interesting. We can take it at face value (and if not that, then Erwin Put's tests) that the M resolves 20% more than an M9 and we can take it on faith that the camera is most sensitive to yellow-green light.
But what I find more interesting is what is sometimes between the lines of these reviews and sometimes out in the open: the philosophical development of reviewers; their relative competence with understanding the effects of color on tonality, and their overall skill levels in photography.
My personal editorial comment is that after seeing these pieces, I am less interested in what these people have to write - whether about the M or anything else. What's your take?
But what I find more interesting is what is sometimes between the lines of these reviews and sometimes out in the open: the philosophical development of reviewers; their relative competence with understanding the effects of color on tonality, and their overall skill levels in photography.
My personal editorial comment is that after seeing these pieces, I am less interested in what these people have to write - whether about the M or anything else. What's your take?
Teuthida
Well-known
Agreed. opinions are like ascertain body orifice; everyone has then. Doesn't mean they are correct.
Anybody with a dial up connection can claim to be an expert. Most photo related sites seem to me based on herd thinking and consumerist illogic. I ignore 95% of it.
I do, however, like your site. It's been bookmarked for some time now. You seem go your own way, in a refreshing manner.
Very subtly written. Yes, there are incompetent reviewers. 
Luckily there are those like yourself who not only know the technical aspects but have photographic skill and most importantly, talent with the written word.
Luckily there are those like yourself who not only know the technical aspects but have photographic skill and most importantly, talent with the written word.
porktaco
Well-known
most of the online reviewers are tools. they're advertising and should be treated accordingly
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
Dante,
your views and assumptions on the reviewers sound correct and just to me but I cannot say I base that on actual knowledge, I've not yet made an effort to read any review on the Monochrom.
Ignorance is bliss, film is alive
your views and assumptions on the reviewers sound correct and just to me but I cannot say I base that on actual knowledge, I've not yet made an effort to read any review on the Monochrom.
Ignorance is bliss, film is alive
thegman
Veteran
I think that if a reviewer has disdain for the MM because it's very expensive and only takes greyscale photographs, then that's a valid point. I think that if a reviewer loves the MM because it only concentrates on greyscale photographs and ignores colour, that's a valid point.
The MM has no intrinsic merit in itself, only if someone likes it. Some will, some won't.
Personally, I'm not sure if you can read too much into the philosophical development of reviewers based on what they think about a digital camera.
If we do want read something into the philosophical development of reviewers, and also accept that photographers like HCB created great photographs with far less resolving power than an M9, then the 20% more resolving power is unimportant. Then presumably what is important is the fact that the MM shoots greyscale with improved tonality.
Personally, I like the MM, if I had to buy any digital Leica, that would be the one for me, but I don't make judgements upon anyone who thinks it's a joke because it does not do colour. In many ways, it is a joke, but so is a $5000 new Rolleiflex, but I'd get one of those too.
The MM has no intrinsic merit in itself, only if someone likes it. Some will, some won't.
Personally, I'm not sure if you can read too much into the philosophical development of reviewers based on what they think about a digital camera.
If we do want read something into the philosophical development of reviewers, and also accept that photographers like HCB created great photographs with far less resolving power than an M9, then the 20% more resolving power is unimportant. Then presumably what is important is the fact that the MM shoots greyscale with improved tonality.
Personally, I like the MM, if I had to buy any digital Leica, that would be the one for me, but I don't make judgements upon anyone who thinks it's a joke because it does not do colour. In many ways, it is a joke, but so is a $5000 new Rolleiflex, but I'd get one of those too.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
Most reviews are entertainment provided by reviewers. Few are actually critical discussions that reveal much beyond the manufacturers' data sheet.
Some are worth the time to read for information.
Most are entertaining if you're in the mood for such things.
From that point of view, I rarely read reviews other than for the description they offer on new equipment. The review opinions ... feh. I'll state my own opinions when I've experimented with the equipment.
Some are worth the time to read for information.
Most are entertaining if you're in the mood for such things.
From that point of view, I rarely read reviews other than for the description they offer on new equipment. The review opinions ... feh. I'll state my own opinions when I've experimented with the equipment.
redisburning
Well-known
Ive always found it hard to trust the reviews when the product has a full page spread in the same publication.
also, look at the pictures. any review without photographs = no idea if you really used it plus I can't tell if you know what you do well enough to understand whether or not your tool fits into that.
also, look at the pictures. any review without photographs = no idea if you really used it plus I can't tell if you know what you do well enough to understand whether or not your tool fits into that.
Richard G
Veteran
Kristian Dowling on RFF and those who've also posted to the two threads he started are the only useful and convincing reviewers of the Monochrom. On others' writings I am curious but bored. On this RFF evidence I am reaching for my cheque book.
xenohip
Established
For a somewhat "alternative" take on what the M monochrom should be capable of doing, one might want to look back at page 20 of the dpreview review of the original (discontinued) Sigma DP1, and associated discussion of images of color test charts.
Are we making color images of monochrome subjects (most Bayer camera test results), or monochrome images of color subjects (texture in a bridesmaid's red dress, for example)? A monochrome sensor should make a Bayer sensor look cross-eyed by comparison in the latter case. That is to say 20% surely must understate the resolution advantage.
This is just a guess-- I've never shot an M monochrom, nor even seen one. Though I did use 16MP 6cm x 6cm monochrome imagers in a technical application at work some long time ago....
Cheers!
Are we making color images of monochrome subjects (most Bayer camera test results), or monochrome images of color subjects (texture in a bridesmaid's red dress, for example)? A monochrome sensor should make a Bayer sensor look cross-eyed by comparison in the latter case. That is to say 20% surely must understate the resolution advantage.
This is just a guess-- I've never shot an M monochrom, nor even seen one. Though I did use 16MP 6cm x 6cm monochrome imagers in a technical application at work some long time ago....
Cheers!
leicashot
Well-known
In terms of the reviewers perspective, receiving such a unique and limited camera aims to bring them credibility, especially considering who difficult the camera can be to obtain. Also everyone's trying to get famous these days and it's all about popularity....take Eric Kim for example - known for being a professional street photographer, and began teaching it before ever achieving anything. He's also slammed by many serious professional street photographers, yet endorsed by Leica because he can pull the numbers. Creditable photography is a thing of the past.
People are at either end of the spectrum. There are the people who recognise the Monochrom for it's achievement as a versatile b&w M camera that can be used for the very first time in very low light.....then there are the people who just can't get one, either through lack of finance or lack of availability that need to convince themselves the camera is bad to feel better about not being able to acquire one.
I would never recommend this camera because it has better tonal range than my D800E. I bought it because:
a. I mainly shoot B&W for personal work
b. For the first time (including film days) we can utilise the M camera in the worst lighting conditions and still come away with at least 'usable' pictures.
This is generally what happens with Leica and other luxury products. The sad thing is that many will say it's expensive, but then go and spend almost as much on a Canon 1DX or Nikon D4. While they may seem better value, I see more value in a way with the 'limited' and less versatile M in the way it makes me work towards achieving better photography. That to me is worth the admission fee.
People are at either end of the spectrum. There are the people who recognise the Monochrom for it's achievement as a versatile b&w M camera that can be used for the very first time in very low light.....then there are the people who just can't get one, either through lack of finance or lack of availability that need to convince themselves the camera is bad to feel better about not being able to acquire one.
I would never recommend this camera because it has better tonal range than my D800E. I bought it because:
a. I mainly shoot B&W for personal work
b. For the first time (including film days) we can utilise the M camera in the worst lighting conditions and still come away with at least 'usable' pictures.
This is generally what happens with Leica and other luxury products. The sad thing is that many will say it's expensive, but then go and spend almost as much on a Canon 1DX or Nikon D4. While they may seem better value, I see more value in a way with the 'limited' and less versatile M in the way it makes me work towards achieving better photography. That to me is worth the admission fee.
Mr. Fizzlesticks
Member
Totally agree. I laugh when I look at his website and think that people are actually paying him to learn something. How far down on the food chain do you need to be to learn from him.... For the price of his workshops you could get a real street photographer to let you follow him around for the day. You would learn a hell of a lot more too. I have no doubt about that.
Couldn't disagree more. What you have stated is spoken from the viewpoint of having bought one. Some of us couldn't care less about the Leica Monochrome and think it is a novelty. In fact I would hazard a guess to say most of us couldn't care less.....
To the OP. Everyone is trying to achieve internet notoriety these days and in that I agree. They want to be the Kardashians of the photo world. No talent but in your face. I don't read reviews. Either borrow the camera and make up your own mind or ask someone who really has a clue and owns it. And by someone, I mean someone good and there aren't that many around. Those two sources may be difficult for an amateur to find unfortunately.
wafflecakee
Well-known
Everyone is so angry on the internet.
leicashot
Well-known
MRFizzlesticks wrote: Couldn't disagree more. What you have stated is spoken from the viewpoint of having bought one. Some of us couldn't care less about the Leica Monochrome and think it is a novelty. In fact I would hazard a guess to say most of us couldn't care less.....
I am talking about those that seem to have an opinion (always needing to speak out about the MM) being at either end of the spectrum. Those that have no opinion, yes, couldn't care less.
I am talking about those that seem to have an opinion (always needing to speak out about the MM) being at either end of the spectrum. Those that have no opinion, yes, couldn't care less.
leicashot
Well-known
willie_901
Veteran
Practically all of the reviews on line are done in a vacuum by people without traditional training or experience as journalists. Worse, these reviewers do not have the benefit of mentoring or feedback from peers. The result is more misinformation and naïve conclusions than there should be.
The clck-through revenue situation is a different and relevant concern. What's worse are reviewers who are handicapped by the fear of biting the hand that feeds them. They are too close to the vendor. The issue is not money but rather needing to stay on the best of terms with the manufacturers marketing department. The writer values being accepted and appreciated by the vendor over their responsibilities to their readers.
Then reviewers like DxO, who rigorously define their ratings system and methods, are attacked when their results upset or disappoint people.
I have confidence in the DPREVIEW staff, DxO, Michael Reichmann and Erwin Puts. In print media I respect what Roger and Francis write. Other testing web sites also publish useful lens evaluations. Certain amateurs reviewers are worth reading. And over time I have come to respect the writings of some of the posters here.
I think Dante brings up a valid point and I have quit reading most of the well-know online reviewers.
I do like to read unknown amateur bloggers, but I only finish about 25% of those reviews. Once and a while I stumble upon a really well done amateur blog report though.
The clck-through revenue situation is a different and relevant concern. What's worse are reviewers who are handicapped by the fear of biting the hand that feeds them. They are too close to the vendor. The issue is not money but rather needing to stay on the best of terms with the manufacturers marketing department. The writer values being accepted and appreciated by the vendor over their responsibilities to their readers.
Then reviewers like DxO, who rigorously define their ratings system and methods, are attacked when their results upset or disappoint people.
I have confidence in the DPREVIEW staff, DxO, Michael Reichmann and Erwin Puts. In print media I respect what Roger and Francis write. Other testing web sites also publish useful lens evaluations. Certain amateurs reviewers are worth reading. And over time I have come to respect the writings of some of the posters here.
I think Dante brings up a valid point and I have quit reading most of the well-know online reviewers.
I do like to read unknown amateur bloggers, but I only finish about 25% of those reviews. Once and a while I stumble upon a really well done amateur blog report though.
leicashot
Well-known
I think it's important to understand that reviewers aren't usually professional photojournalists because most are out working and aren't interested in reviewing, often because they care more about their work than letting the world know how their gear contributes to their work.
It's easy to sit back and criticise reviewers but they are doing what they love in order to earn a living. If people think they can do better, they're welcome to try.
Also, I was criticised for my editing of my Monochrom pictures, making them look more contrasty than what came out of the camera, yet professionals including Magnum's Jacob Aue Sobol have massively processed their Monochrom images to achieve results that even Leica praise.
So what do people want? They just want to criticise without good reason. I think more people can relate to reviewers like Steve Huff than a Magnum photographer, yet they criticise Steve cause they start believing they can do better as they begin to accumulate more information as time goes by.
Like I said earlier, photography and reviewing is a big popularity contest now, love it or hate it. But if you don't have anything positive to say, try keeping it to yourself and use that energy to create your own imagery that makes you happy. I'm getting tired of people complaining, comparing and competing. That wasn't what i signed up for when I decided to pick up a camera.
It's easy to sit back and criticise reviewers but they are doing what they love in order to earn a living. If people think they can do better, they're welcome to try.
Also, I was criticised for my editing of my Monochrom pictures, making them look more contrasty than what came out of the camera, yet professionals including Magnum's Jacob Aue Sobol have massively processed their Monochrom images to achieve results that even Leica praise.
So what do people want? They just want to criticise without good reason. I think more people can relate to reviewers like Steve Huff than a Magnum photographer, yet they criticise Steve cause they start believing they can do better as they begin to accumulate more information as time goes by.
Like I said earlier, photography and reviewing is a big popularity contest now, love it or hate it. But if you don't have anything positive to say, try keeping it to yourself and use that energy to create your own imagery that makes you happy. I'm getting tired of people complaining, comparing and competing. That wasn't what i signed up for when I decided to pick up a camera.
leicapixie
Well-known
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=124708
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=124708
A review should be a simple but effective usage of an article, with corresponding results. Sadly many "reviewers" are in the pay, by actual financial rewards or goods. The original test of the Leica M8 was cloudy.. Many reviewers sort of "forgot" the magenta problem. This was a dis-service to the readers and in some ways to Leica, who may have missed the problem, in haste to market. It's not only Leica doing that but every company incl. Canon and Nikon. The need to sell over-riding, any questions of quality. The consumers are also to blame, ordering cameras on announcement!
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=124708
A review should be a simple but effective usage of an article, with corresponding results. Sadly many "reviewers" are in the pay, by actual financial rewards or goods. The original test of the Leica M8 was cloudy.. Many reviewers sort of "forgot" the magenta problem. This was a dis-service to the readers and in some ways to Leica, who may have missed the problem, in haste to market. It's not only Leica doing that but every company incl. Canon and Nikon. The need to sell over-riding, any questions of quality. The consumers are also to blame, ordering cameras on announcement!
NazgulKing
Established
I have yet to see anyone online who uses the Monochrome with any B&W filters. It makes me wonder if most of them take the M as a toy or whatever.
redisburning
Well-known
would be worth testing out but I don't see shooting with filters is a sign of "seriousness".
I, like I assume most people who don't use them, have them and have used them at some point but simply preferred their chosen film's base response. So, that being the case, if you handed me an M Monochrome I would a. be ecstatic and b. not even consider using them.
not because I hate filters, but simply because they aren't part of my normal setup. we might be looking at the same thing here.
merely speculation on my part, however.