airfrogusmc
Mentor
Well the 246 MM has no color so it actually compares more to a 48 MP color sensor when talking IQ.
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
John,
I think a noticable difference, but perhaps that only gets distinguished via mucho enlargment (croping in) or printing big. Maybe not noticable on a 13x19, but evident on a 20x30 for sure. In comparing a M-246 file against a SL file the size difference is 48 MB: not a small amount (16% more data). How visible and to whom is a very good question. I think I could see a 16% difference, but it might go un-noticed by many.
I think with the SL maybe/perhaps 20x30 could be the normal print size if one has the big enough printer, and the money to print consistently big.
I think it is more than math. Know that I'm gauging all this against my Monochrom which I have done extensive printing large. I am also utilizing inputs from people I respect on this forum that suggest in they see little difference between 13x19 prints when comparing MM, M-246, and SL B&W prints.
Cal
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
Thanks for mentioning an important fact, but some would gauge the effective comparision to about a third more resolution, not double. Perhaps a 36MP color sensor, which is a lot.
I just want to make clear that the M-246 is a remarkable camera, and it is mucho more advanced in many ways over my MM. I have no intent to bash someone else's camera. In fact I wouldn't mind owning one, but there are limits...
What is good for me, likely is not good for others...
Cal
user237428934
User deletion pending
I would not want to mail the camera somewhere four times a year. Of course I wet clean the M9 like any other sensor and if it has to be replaced, camera will go to Wetzlar.
willie_901
Mentor
Corrosion will only get worse over time. The changes may be slow, but once moisture reaches the IR filter layer, the filter film reacts wth water. Game over.
Eventually all first generation IR filter layers will corrode. Again, this will occur at different rates (so anecdotal reports can be confusing). But even in dry climates moisture will eventually reach the IR filter layer.
A 2015 sensor replacement probably used the original, water labile IR filter layer.
So, either return it and find an example with the improved IR filter layer or keep it and wait in the queue.
Eventually all first generation IR filter layers will corrode. Again, this will occur at different rates (so anecdotal reports can be confusing). But even in dry climates moisture will eventually reach the IR filter layer.
A 2015 sensor replacement probably used the original, water labile IR filter layer.
So, either return it and find an example with the improved IR filter layer or keep it and wait in the queue.
MIkhail
Well-known
Not to derail the conversation even further from main topic... I can see the difference in resolution and sharpness, yes. I just fail to see the need for super ultra sharpness that people sometimes willing to sell a family farm for... I have seen original prints of André Kertész, for example, that were not sharp at 8 by 10, let alone larger size. Yet they are remarkable pieces of art...
On the other hand, who looks at 20 by 30 print with the magnifying glass? I have several prints of this size that look wonderful on a wall as one stands couple feet away. Taken with Canon 10D and L-lens, as well as 35mm something.... And that's how people stand when they look at them...
In fact, maybe to my twisted brain only, something in size 20x30 looking bitingly sharp on a wall would be un-natural.
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
Allen,
I skewed the math. 36MP is 50% more not a third. Pardon my math/proportions.
Cal
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
M,
We live in a world where we can transcend formats. What I am saying is that one can reveal the detail and extended tonality of medium format and at times large format from a small format camera.
A point I was trying to get across is one can print crazy big if one wants to, not that one has to.
Some people would say that Fuji Acros looks digital, but I guess some people say that they don't understand large format photography.
As far as exhibitions go Sabastion Salgado printed really big wet prints that used a lot of large format aesthetic and utilized 4x5 digital negatives to print a stunning exhibition that was truely remarkable.
Not that it is inexpensive, but now that technology is within grasp of regular people.
Cal
MIkhail
Well-known
I confess, Fuji Acros to me does look digital, so does Kodak Ektar (I dont know why bother and in the end get results smooth as digital).
But I see your point- you don't have to but you can, that's why you want it. That's fine.
BTW, I saw the huge prints by Sabastion Salgado while in Florida last year... I did like his old work and did not his latest (Genesis) at all. For example this looks bad to me.
Chuck Albertson
Well-known
If you got the camera for a decent price, bite the bullet and schedule the sensor replacement. The corrosion doesn't look too bad now, but it will get worse. My MM was in the shop for six months for sensor replacement, but it was worth the wait.
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
I confess, Fuji Acros to me does look digital, so does Kodak Ektar (I dont know why bother and in the end get results smooth as digital).
But I see your point- you don't have to but you can, that's why you want it. That's fine.
BTW, I saw the huge prints by Sabastion Salgado while in Florida last year... I did like his old work and did not his latest (Genesis) at all. For example this looks bad to me.
M,
I do prefer his earlier work also. I think it is his best and his true legacy. I did see how in some of the vistas how the resolution worked very well like the shot of the mountain valley or the iceburg.
Your points are well taken. At times it all gets HDR like, and I do sometimes see that in my work where it likely crosses that line.
Back on topic: out of all the digital cameras the original Monochrom presents itself as being the most film like. In addressing your question I think this is why it kinda has the cult following. Also it seems that the files, especially when used with a light yellow filter, seems to need the least amount of post processing. It seems the best shots are as taken at time of image capture, and with these images the amount of post is the least.
Another charm is the original Monochromes lack of complexity. It very much shoots like a film camera and by my SL's standards is rather minimalist and primitive. Now especially fun to use because of its lack of complexity.
Cal
user237428934
User deletion pending
Well.... the original topic is sensor corrosion. Just saying.
MIkhail
Well-known
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
pechelman
resu deretsiger
To the OP, if you wait for it, I think it would be in your best interest to get the sensor replaced. At this point, it should only cost you time. Afterwards, you can likely then sell the camera for a little more (maybe?) than what you paid, since your investment in time is now no longer required for the next owner.
Or just keep it and use it. Definitely still takes amazing pictures.
While there probably is some special juju one sees when printing big, for me, I preferred the new 246 for ease of use and having the same ecosystem (batteries, baseplate, etc) as my m240. If that's of interest, Leica may offer you an option to upgrade the M9 to M246.
What Cal has written above already should hopefully be helpful if you need to make that decision.
Either way, keep the camera if you got it for a good price and send it in for replacement. The rest is up to you.
Or just keep it and use it. Definitely still takes amazing pictures.
While there probably is some special juju one sees when printing big, for me, I preferred the new 246 for ease of use and having the same ecosystem (batteries, baseplate, etc) as my m240. If that's of interest, Leica may offer you an option to upgrade the M9 to M246.
What Cal has written above already should hopefully be helpful if you need to make that decision.
Either way, keep the camera if you got it for a good price and send it in for replacement. The rest is up to you.
Roger Hicks
Mentor
Dear Mikhail,
Where can you get a farm for the price of a Leica? Or are you exaggerating ever so slightly?
Cheers,
R.
Chemophilic
Established
Re: pepeguitarra - The camera was from Hawaii, but the seller said that the camera was stored in a climate controlled storage... so no idea if the weather makes a difference.
Re: Cal - No offense taken so no apology needed. I always enjoy your take on things in other threads too.
Thank you for all the responses. Even after using the camera for a few days, despite very much a beginner to B&W, I like what I see. I decided to keep the camera and send it in for sensor check and possible replacement. I am going to try to clean the sensor once, and if that doesn't improve, I will be sending it in.
Re: MIkhail - I think it's worth it to wait. Not a very logical decision, but buying a B&W only camera hardly seems logical either (to most people it seems!)
I don't know how to describe it, but there's something different about the images. I in fact read through all 120 pages on the Monochrom images thread (!) before deciding to try a MM myself. I am still learning how to control the tonality, and here are just two pictures:
With a Summicron 35/2
With a Nikon 105/2.5
Speaking of which, how does one learn tonality?
Re: Cal - No offense taken so no apology needed. I always enjoy your take on things in other threads too.
Thank you for all the responses. Even after using the camera for a few days, despite very much a beginner to B&W, I like what I see. I decided to keep the camera and send it in for sensor check and possible replacement. I am going to try to clean the sensor once, and if that doesn't improve, I will be sending it in.
Re: MIkhail - I think it's worth it to wait. Not a very logical decision, but buying a B&W only camera hardly seems logical either (to most people it seems!)
I don't know how to describe it, but there's something different about the images. I in fact read through all 120 pages on the Monochrom images thread (!) before deciding to try a MM myself. I am still learning how to control the tonality, and here are just two pictures:
With a Summicron 35/2
With a Nikon 105/2.5
Speaking of which, how does one learn tonality?
MIkhail
Well-known
Whatever floats your boat.
icebear
Mentor
....
With a Nikon 105/2.5
Speaking of which, how does one learn tonality?
I really like the sky and seascape shot. Well done under pretty difficult lighting conditions. The surface reflection is delightful.
You will need to learn to optimize the histogram. I.e. shoot to the right w/o blowing the highlights. A light yellow filter (e.g. helipoan) will help with the MM. This is the capture part which of course is most important. If you screw up here, it's gone. Second part post production ... get a good monitor with a non glaring screen, have a calibration tool (and use it regularly
). I only use LR general adjustments and I don't fool around with SFX film look settings or stuff like that but that's a personal preference. The beauty of the MM files is that they can be tweaked into whatever your preference is because they are so rich in mid tones to begin with. It's a learning curve but once you get there, you will love it. Congrats.Calzone
Gear Whore #1
Set up the clipping indicators at 1% and chimp the histogram to learn perfect exposure and to gain consistentcy. The histogram does not lie and it also quantifies the exposure, tonal range, and IQ at a glance. It should not take long to get consistent because you get immediate feedback by chimping.
Basically try to make a histogram as far to the right as possible without clipping. Also try to make ten-zone histograms for the broadest tonal range. Try to make histograms with mucho midrange to create medium and large format like results. Look to make/create histograms that resemble a profile of a Sperm Whale (Moby Dick) if you want to resemble large format tonality.
Use Heliopan 2X yellow filters marked "Digital" that have additional IR and UV filtering for lower noise, higher signal to noise ratio, and less clipping. Basically speciffically with the Heliopan filter it seems to hit the sweet spot of the sensor.
For me I shoot as if I am a large format shooter and try to make the best at image capture. Rescuing images with post processing is not the way to go, and the best images really only need tweaking in Lightroom. I never add sharpness. Think of how large format shooters make negatives for contact printing.
Cal