eric rose
ummmmm, filmmmm
Ok boys get your Kleenex ready! I sat with the boys at The Camera Store while they put this review video together. The images I saw from this camera were nothing less than stunning. If I had an extra $7k sitting around I would buy one as soon as it hit the shelves.
http://youtu.be/ysQl7SUEo4s
http://youtu.be/ysQl7SUEo4s
Dektol Dan
Well-known
Saw the You Tube Piece
Saw the You Tube Piece
I'm too old for their level of misunderstanding.
Saw the You Tube Piece
I'm too old for their level of misunderstanding.
BobYIL
Well-known
Cooool! Did you notice his right shoe too? (4:30)
Turtle
Mentor
To be honest, I don't rate the review because it emphasises nostalgia more than the real world benefits of this camera over a M9: better resolution, sharpness and high ISO.
As much as I love my film Ms I am only interested in the MM for what it can really do better than a M9. Feeling like I am shooting 'in the old days' doesn't apply because I still shoot film!
As much as I love my film Ms I am only interested in the MM for what it can really do better than a M9. Feeling like I am shooting 'in the old days' doesn't apply because I still shoot film!
tightsqueez
Well-known
As the video review suggests: it picks up the ladies AND scares them away.
I'm sold.
In all seriousness I do like the increased performance of the high ISOs, although I'm still on the fence about coming about as close as you'll get at shooting black and white slide film. The Monochrom dynamic range hurts my feelings… but I may or may not get over it. This of course depends if I feel like a child when my dealer calls me when one is available.
I'm sold.
In all seriousness I do like the increased performance of the high ISOs, although I'm still on the fence about coming about as close as you'll get at shooting black and white slide film. The Monochrom dynamic range hurts my feelings… but I may or may not get over it. This of course depends if I feel like a child when my dealer calls me when one is available.
Pro-sess?
Those days aren't gone, buddy.
Those days aren't gone, buddy.
DougFord
on the good foot
You still shoot film in the present day using fully functional film cameras.
The MM is apparently designed (in part) for people who want to feel nostalgic about the days when people used to use fully functional film cameras. It's a romantic notion that can be purchased or it could be used as a tool in the craft of photography, I'd imagine.
I thought the pre production monochrome was the M3 with B/W film.
Stephen
Stephen
gb hill
Mentor
Enjoyed the video. Especially like how Leica made the stealth shutter. That whine on an M9 is distracting. This will probably be a feature on the M10.
mervynyan
Mervyn Yan
I am sold on the idea that MM has better resolution and M9, love the large prints.
if the price of M10 is significant higher than MM, I might just shoot slides films and get a MM.
if the price of M10 is significant higher than MM, I might just shoot slides films and get a MM.
icebear
Mentor
M3, that is the post production monochrome ...
JMQ
Well-known
Ouch! the truth hurts.
Turtle
Mentor
One issue that is not covered well enough in reviews is how careful you have to be to prevent highlight clipping and what this means in real world terms to final exposure and how much work needs to be done in post to bring up the resultant heavy shadows. Most seem to mention the fact that you dont have three colour channels to recover highlight info, but they say little about the real world impact of this on capture and workflow. This is of epic importance!
matt335
Well-known
thanks for posting
BobYIL
Well-known
I do not want to rain on the parade of some members who are waiting for the MM to buy, but while this sensor was lacking more than two stops of DR compared to the top CMOS sensors what is the point of making too much fuss about it over the M9? After all it is the same sensor and DR can NOT be "created" or improved; i.e whatever highlight issue the M9 had, the MM is going to have the same.
OTOH, for better B&W results with longer tonality and gradations and over two stops of extension either toward the shadow or highlight region the new CMOS sensors offer wonders compared to the outdated features CCD sensors Truesense produces, and these while not needing to sacrifice the color capability too.
Instead of plonking down a ton of money for a phased out technology, I wait a little more and buy an M10, by knowing that it has a CMOS sensor, in all respects better than this CCD, higher ISO, higher resolution, better dynamic range compared to the former sensor and all these without needing to amputate the right leg: Color.
leicashot
Well-known
I'd love to see some proof of what you're saying, especially how CMOS sensors offer 2 stops advantage. I love my D800E sensor and I'm confident nothing even comes close, but I'm still intrigued by what Leica has done with the Monochrom. Until I see proof or more importantly, 'objectively compare myself', I won't be making such bold, negative assumptions.
BobYIL
Well-known
They are not "bold, negative" and above all "assumptions".. They are physics = technical realities.
Go to this site and check your own camera's DR against the M9 (also check some late APS-C cameras too..):
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Camera-Sensor-Ratings/(type)/usecase_landscape
and note that by eliminating the low-pass filter and CFA (color filter array) of a sensor (no matter whether CCD or CMOS) sensitivity can be improved however dynamic range CAN NOT, just the contrary, it may be affected adversely. It is not something Leica can do, neither the original manufacturer of the sensor, Truesense, nor the supplier of the electronics Jenoptik.
And, surely the MM too will be subjected to such DR and sensor-evaluation scrutiny by the DXO; the resolution and other specifications too will be compared by the Imaging Resource; so you can check..
(You may refer to my old posts for further explanations on "why"s, it's rather a long subject..)
Turtle
Mentor
... I won't be doing anything until I see what the M10 is all about, however, if the M10 is 'not all that' and inferior to the MM, the MM might still be the more sensible buy for someone who virtually shoots zero colour work.
If it is a 24 mp CMOS in the M10, why should be expect it to produce better B&Ws than, say, a D3X? The MM, however, does have potentially significant benefits. How real world visible they are remains to be seen and I, for one, will be making test prints before I'd part with cash for a MM.
As for the dynamic range, this is the part I am curious about. Does the MM really have an advantage over the M9. some say yes and some no. I don't know enough to know, but at normal day to day speeds the ability to recover vast amounts of shadow detail seems to be what users have reported and, if so, this effectively amounts to the same thing. One can expose conservatively for highlights and bring up shadows.
Clearly if the M10 were to have a 40 MP colour CMOS it might be a different matter, but pigs will fly first, most likely.
The Ming review of the MM suggests it can easily keep pace with the D800E for resolution and has, IMHO, decidedly better comparison photos on his site: less clinical and more organic.... and more like what I like. That matters, and it is half the size, and I own Leica lenses... and lots of reasons. I am certainly not completely averse to reappraising the leica digital M concept and may well abandon it altogether. I just need to know more before I make any decisions. The pricing of the M10 will be relevant too, because it provides insight into Leica's gross strategy and will tell me where I (and my pocket) fits in.
If it is a 24 mp CMOS in the M10, why should be expect it to produce better B&Ws than, say, a D3X? The MM, however, does have potentially significant benefits. How real world visible they are remains to be seen and I, for one, will be making test prints before I'd part with cash for a MM.
As for the dynamic range, this is the part I am curious about. Does the MM really have an advantage over the M9. some say yes and some no. I don't know enough to know, but at normal day to day speeds the ability to recover vast amounts of shadow detail seems to be what users have reported and, if so, this effectively amounts to the same thing. One can expose conservatively for highlights and bring up shadows.
Clearly if the M10 were to have a 40 MP colour CMOS it might be a different matter, but pigs will fly first, most likely.
The Ming review of the MM suggests it can easily keep pace with the D800E for resolution and has, IMHO, decidedly better comparison photos on his site: less clinical and more organic.... and more like what I like. That matters, and it is half the size, and I own Leica lenses... and lots of reasons. I am certainly not completely averse to reappraising the leica digital M concept and may well abandon it altogether. I just need to know more before I make any decisions. The pricing of the M10 will be relevant too, because it provides insight into Leica's gross strategy and will tell me where I (and my pocket) fits in.
leicashot
Well-known
Sorry but I have to disagree. Those websites can be a good guide but the is no (pardon the pun) black and white in this area. I doubt Leica would go this route if what you're saying is true. At the end of the day, until a legitimate comparison review is made or I test myself, such assumptions, and it is 'assumptions' are purely that - assumptions.
Although a new reviewer, Ming Thein would be the best reviewer/photographer on the internet. i believe what he says 100%. Why else would Leica entrust him to be the very first? http://blog.mingthein.com/2012/05/23/leica-m-monochrom/
ChrisN
Striving
As a long-time user of the Pentax K5, which is very highly rated by DxOMark for dynamic range (currently ranked 3rd at 14.1 stops), I would simply remind people that DR is not necessarily the most important factor in determining overall image quality.