Monochrom 246 and Leica SL in New Mexico

Vince Lupo

Vince Lupo

Nobody's Mentor
Local time
9:28 PM
Joined
Oct 17, 2007
Messages
7,485
Wasn't quite sure where to put this thread, so we'll start here....

I've been visiting New Mexico from the past several years, and more recently have been making what has become an annual 'wander' during the month of February (I'm presently on my third such trip). It's a place in which I've found a 'cleansing' of sorts, a personal renewal, some good food, silver and turquoise jewelry (don't get me started!), and of course a few photos along the way.

This time around, I've been afforded the opportunity to do a side-by-side comparison of the Leica Monochrom 246 and the new Leica SL. The Leica SL peaked my interest when it was introduced, but simply reading all the online chatter about it didn't really give me a sense of what it was like to actually use. To make a long story short, I've been loaned an SL for two weeks as I wander throughout New Mexico (which is where I am now). I'm using both it and my Monochrom 246, along with my M-mount lenses (the 35/1.7 Voigtlander Ultron, 50/0.95 Noctilux, 50/2 Summicron and 75/2.5 Summarit). I've been considering making the switch from the 246 to the SL, and hopefully this road test will help me decide one way or another.

So far the SL is making it VERY difficult to decide!

First, I love the feel of the thing - big, chunky, solid piece of aluminum, great viewfinder, easy to focus, easy to use (once you've read through the 130 page manual a few times!), images that are tack-sharp (particularly with the 0.95) , low ISO option (ISO 50), dual SD slots, plus a host of other features that make this a tempting combination for me. Things that make me hesitate a bit -- actually only one thing: It only has an EVF. It's a great EVF, mind you, but I found out that if I'm wearing my polarized sunglasses (prescription) out here in the New Mexico sun, I cannot see a darned thing through the EVF (of course the same holds true for the Olympus VF-2 that I have on my Monochrom). At least with the Monochrom I have the optical viewfinder I can use, and my sunglasses don't make any difference in the view. So if i'm shooting on a bright sunny day with the SL, I either have to wear my regular glasses, or I have to take off my sunglasses, adjust the diopter on the camera to suit my nearsighted eyes, and then shoot. That is a bit of a hassle, but not necessarily a total deal-breaker. But that 'limitation' is offset by the image quality the camera delivers, and that's what has me in a quandary.

Anyways, down to some images. The first is just a straight side-by-side comparison of the same scene, and the rest will be just images shot with the SL and Monochom 246 on this New Mexico 'wander'. As I wanted to compare this camera to the Monochrom, I've been mainly shooting the SL with black and white as the intended end result (I have it set up as DNG+JPEG Monochrome), so I've been converting the colour DNG of the SL to black and white.

This first shot was taken using the same lens (35/1.7 Voigtlander) at f/2. ISO on the Monochrom was 320, 400 on the SL.

Monochrom 246:

Chimayo 246-1 by Vince Lupo, on Flickr

Leica SL:

Chimayo SL-1 by Vince Lupo, on Flickr

Detail crops of each photo from roughly the same section:

Monochrom 246:

Chimayo 246-1 Crop by Vince Lupo, on Flickr

SL:

Chimayo SL-1 Crop by Vince Lupo, on Flickr

To me, the difference is sharpness is amazing, and is one of the big things that's tempting me towards the SL. But, not ready to give up on the Monochrom so easily.

Anyhow, here's what I've gotten so far in my 'wander' (5 days). Please note that I've been working on my small laptop in a variety of conditions (cafes, hotel rooms etc), so the shots may need a bit of tweaking when I get home.

Five of the shots in this installment are from the SL -- can you pick them out?


The Shanti Bus by Vince Lupo, on Flickr


Espanola1 by Vince Lupo, on Flickr


Las Vegas1 by Vince Lupo, on Flickr


Las Trampas2 by Vince Lupo, on Flickr


Robert, Postmaster, Conchas Dam, NM by Vince Lupo, on Flickr


Casey, Postmaster, Tremontina NM by Vince Lupo, on Flickr


Rita, Postmaster, Garita NM by Vince Lupo, on Flickr


Mora1 by Vince Lupo, on Flickr


Chimayo3 by Vince Lupo, on Flickr


Chimayo4 by Vince Lupo, on Flickr


Chimayo2 by Vince Lupo, on Flickr
 
Very nice shots!

Polarized lenses are nicer, of course.
But can't you just buy not polarized prescriptional sunglasses for shooting? ;)
 
Hi Vince,
thanks for sharing your photos. Great work, as usual ... honestly unless the potential buyer is into huge (3 by 5 ft) fine art prints, for me it doesn't make a difference in the shots themselves if they are shot with the M246 or SL. Do you think you are limited by what the M246 can deliver? The SL might give even more performance ... is it really relevant for what you shoot?

Being comfortable with camera is important for you in the first place but also for the subject (if human) being in front of the camera.
That being said Robert, postmaster ; Casey, postmaster and Pastor Joe are my favorites. The image quality in the last one might already be distracting because I am drawn to all the detail in the shirts pattern.

As for polarized glasses and electronic displays, I guess this is just the way it is. I also have difficulties with my phone display or car GPS when wearing my sunglasses.
 
icebear said:
Hi Vince,
thanks for sharing your photos. Great work, as usual ... honestly unless the potential buyer is into huge (3 by 5 ft) fine art prints, for me it doesn't make a difference in the shots themselves if they are shot with the M246 or SL. Do you think you are limited by what the M246 can deliver? The SL might give even more performance ... is it really relevant for what you shoot?

Being comfortable with camera is important for you in the first place but also for the subject (if human) being in front of the camera.
That being said Robert, postmaster ; Casey, postmaster and Pastor Joe are my favorites. The image quality in the last one might already be distracting because I am drawn to all the detail in the shirts pattern.
Click to expand...

For me it's the way I am able to work with the Noctilux with the SL - with the Monochrom, if I'm shooting at the wider apertures (which is usually the case!), I have trouble making sure that my point of focus is tack sharp (even with the Olympus EVF). If I focus on something (and with the Monochrom your point of focus is in the center), and then reframe to put that point of focus compositionally off to one side, that in itself can throw it out of focus. With the SL I don't have that, as your point of focus can really be anywhere in the frame without having to recompose. So that's a really big thing for me, as I rely on that lens quite a bit. With that lens on the SL it's a dream. Even with that side-by-side example above with the 35 Ultron, the difference is obvious. Now, how it's going to look in a print, I can't say at this point, though I will find out when I get home.

As far as subjects being more comfortable in front of the Monochrom vs in front of the SL (if that's what you were suggesting), I don't think it honestly makes a difference, unless we can somehow hook up electrodes to people's brains and measure their comfort level in front of one camera vs the other (hmmm, that might actually make for an interesting scientific study!). I think we like to think that an M rangefinder is a more 'friendly' camera, but I can't definitively say one way or the other. At least when I've been shooting with both cameras these past few days, it didn't seem to show (one of the three Postmasters BTW was photographed with the SL - does one look more uncomfortable than the other two?).

So that's where I'm at right now -- I'm going to try to shoot exclusively with the SL today and see what happens. Hopefully I'll find some meaningful photos today!

I might go back this morning to reshoot this scene -- although I don't think the crow will still be there!


Paradise by Vince Lupo, on Flickr
 
jaapv said:
A more rigorous test here:

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/257178-monochrome-conversions-mm-v-m246-v-m240-v-sl/

With this conclusion: Sorry, SL folk, you cannot throw away your M246's ...... it still reigns supreme .... and by a fair margin, particularly with a lens like the 50/2 apo .......
Click to expand...

It's an interesting test and a nice quote, but it might not necessarily apply to me personally, as I am using, carrying and enjoying both for the next two weeks. It's a tossup for me, personally. What a given camera does at ISO 25000 really doesn't apply to me. I stress again, this is how it applies to what I am doing, and how whichever camera fits into the way I like to work. Plus for me where the rubber hits the road is in the prints - which I'll find out when I'm back home.

Not sure if 'more rigorous' is the right term to use here, particularly compared to what I'm doing here in New Mexico. Our 'tests' are different, that's all.
 
Hey Vince, I'm not familiar with either of those cameras (I use M3 & X Pro1) but the photos are outstanding!! I would be so pleased with all of these that I don't think the machine matters that much. For me, that is.

Gerry
 
Vince Lupo said:
It's an interesting test and a nice quote, but it might not necessarily apply to me personally, as I am using, carrying and enjoying both for the next two weeks. It's a tossup for me, personally. What a given camera does at ISO 25000 really doesn't apply to me. I stress again, this is how it applies to what I am doing, and how whichever camera fits into the way I like to work. Plus for me where the rubber hits the road is in the prints - which I'll find out when I'm back home.

Not sure if 'more rigorous' is the right term to use here, particularly compared to what I'm doing here in New Mexico. Our 'tests' are different, that's all.
Click to expand...
Well, I don't think that anybody will dispute that both cameras produce superior results. Personally I have no horse in this race, as I own neither. I "make do" with my Monochrom 1, which produces a more subtle tonal range IMHO.
 
I've owned both the CCD Monochrom and now the Monochrom 246, and honestly I actually found more shadow and highlight detail with the 246. Files at base ISO are 'cleaner' with the 246 (which some people may or may not regard as a good thing). And here again, I'm seeing this in 11"x16" prints (my normal printing size), not just on a computer screen.
 
subscribing to this thread to see what you decide

honestly though, I'd just straight forget about side by side comparisons here. They'll both produce great images. Pick the one that you enjoy using more and gives you the creative flexibility you like. Right now that sounds like the SL, if you can get over not having an OVF.

Good luck and wonderful photos!

my only guess on picture ID is that LasVegas1 is from the 246.
 
Vince Lupo said:
I've owned both the CCD Monochrom and now the Monochrom 246, and honestly I actually found more shadow and highlight detail with the 246. Files at base ISO are 'cleaner' with the 246 (which some people may or may not regard as a good thing). And here again, I'm seeing this in 11"x16" prints (my normal printing size), not just on a computer screen.
Click to expand...

Vince,

I don't own a M-246, but I agree with your assessment that the M-246 has more shadow detail and smoother rolloff in the highlights. Overall I think the M-246 has a broader dynamic range than my Monochrom, but I do think the rendering of the MM is special and that it creates a thick midrange that resembles large format film.

I remain reluctant to ever part with my MM because paired with a 28 Cron it is a match made in heaven for me and my style of shooting.

No doubt we are currently spoiled by such selection. I follow this thread because the SL and M-246 are interesting cameras, but know that there is no replacement for my MM, and a SL or M-246 would only be an addition.

Ideally Leica would make a monochrom version of the SL. As crazy as it sounds I would take the SL for the 14 bit over the 12 bit used on the M-246. Know the old MM warts and all is still a great camera for me. How spoiled is that?

Cal
 
pechelman said:
subscribing to this thread to see what you decide

honestly though, I'd just straight forget about side by side comparisons here. They'll both produce great images. Pick the one that you enjoy using more and gives you the creative flexibility you like. Right now that sounds like the SL, if you can get over not having an OVF.

Good luck and wonderful photos!

my only guess on picture ID is that LasVegas1 is from the 246.
Click to expand...

Actually that's from the SL - the first 5 photos are from the SL :)

For me it's the ease with which I can focus with the Noctilux, plus that sharpness is a nice temptation. I like them both, and if I could afford to have both I would. But my wife has stated that some not nice things would happen if I did. So best not to go down that road :)
 
Vince Lupo said:
....It's a tossup for me, personally....
Click to expand...

In a tossup I'd always stand pat. Given the SL cost, I'd need something I can't live without to make that switch.

And to live long-term with EVF-only, no matter how good, would concern me. On a P&S or second camera it's fine. But there something magical about a bright OVF with framelines.

Really enjoying your photos and this discussion.

John
 
Vince Lupo said:
For me it's the way I am able to work with the Noctilux with the SL - with the Monochrom, if I'm shooting at the wider apertures (which is usually the case!), I have trouble making sure that my point of focus is tack sharp (even with the Olympus EVF). If I focus on something (and with the Monochrom your point of focus is in the center), and then reframe to put that point of focus compositionally off to one side, that in itself can throw it out of focus. With the SL I don't have that, as your point of focus can really be anywhere in the frame without having to recompose. So that's a really big thing for me, as I rely on that lens quite a bit. With that lens on the SL it's a dream. Even with that side-by-side example above with the 35 Ultron, the difference is obvious. Now, how it's going to look in a print, I can't say at this point, though I will find out when I get home.

As far as subjects being more comfortable in front of the Monochrom vs in front of the SL (if that's what you were suggesting), I don't think it honestly makes a difference, unless we can somehow hook up electrodes to people's brains and measure their comfort level in front of one camera vs the other (hmmm, that might actually make for an interesting scientific study!). I think we like to think that an M rangefinder is a more 'friendly' camera, but I can't definitively say one way or the other. At least when I've been shooting with both cameras these past few days, it didn't seem to show (one of the three Postmasters BTW was photographed with the SL - does one look more uncomfortable than the other two?).

So that's where I'm at right now -- I'm going to try to shoot exclusively with the SL today and see what happens. Hopefully I'll find some meaningful photos today!

I might go back this morning to reshoot this scene -- although I don't think the crow will still be there!


Paradise by Vince Lupo, on Flickr
Click to expand...
Don't worry Vince, crow knows where you are. Nice shots from Chimayo too. Hope you got to try the tamales at Leona's.

s-a
 
Last edited:
Casey Postmaster is one if the nicer environmental portraits posted On our board. Thanks for that Vince.

The SL seems like the choice here if one had to make a choice.
Given the IQ and your description of using the Noctilux by compose and then focus instead of the reverse.
I know I lose keepers focus and re-composing at larger aperture quite often.
 
Wonderful and inspiring work Vince. Glad you started a thread for it. It deserves it's own thread. For the type of work you do I think the SL would be a good fit.

Kinda hard to tell anything on a site with 80kb jpg. Your prints will tell you the real story. Everything looks really good here. Maybe a bit of artifact-ing at the roof line and sky on some of the conversions but that to can be because of low res jpg.
 
I miss NM. Unique place -- the entire state. We try to discourage folks from staying too long though. Get too many people and it starts looking like southern California. Great if you're into that kind of thing -- New Mexicans aren't! [with possible exception of ABQ area, yikes]

I lose shots to the focus-and-recompose problem all the time. My only complaint about using RF's.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top