View Full Version : X-Pro1 owners: A kind request...
Here are some hi-ISO samples from the new Monochrome M9. You will note that they are not OOC but "... have been converted from DNG to JPEG with no other adjustments made."
http://www.ephotozine.com/article/leica-m-monochrom-sample-photos-19223
It would be interesting to hear about some X-Pro1 owners stating their own impressions about the IQ of these shots above ISO 1600 as compared to their own experience with the Fujifilm samples. Then we might have a sound idea about the relative performance levels of a top monochromatic FF size CCD sensor vs. a top APS-C size CMOS sensor. These will provide with us some insightful (and practical) information about the present state of art of the sensors as of mid-2012. Thank you.
Regards,
Bob
How about we put it up against the Nikon D4 ... a camera that nearly matches it's price! :p
How about we put it up against the Nikon D4 ... a camera that nearly matches it's price! :p
(Oh, noo!... Do you know that "lebendig gegessen" in German means "eaten alive"? ;))
david.elliott
05-20-2012, 14:40
Up to iso 1600 the noise on the x pro 1 is negligible. Above that, there is some noise to take care of in lightroom but it is no big deal.
edit - image removed temporarily for reprocessing without noise reduction
The above is a pygmy falcon photographed at the national zoo. The slight grid patterning in the photos is apparent because the photo was taken through a fine metal mesh. Unfortunately, this situation affected a lot of my photos but it cannot be helped.
This isn't my best work ever, but is a good photo to illustrate the camera's high iso capabilities and the noise at iso 3200 or in worse conditions. At any rate, to the issue of noise. This is an example of a photo that was 2 stops underexposed despite being shot at 3200 iso. The photo was brightened considerably (obviously) in lightroom and only slight noise reduction was applied. This is a processed jpeg, not a raw - no adobe support yet.
The fuji sensor is great and let's me get photos that I cannot get with my film cameras or even with previous digital cameras I've owned.
Moriturii
05-20-2012, 14:40
"state of art of the sensors as of mid-2012"
Isn't the monochrome sensor in the M9M same as the old sensor in M9 but just stripped bayern filter? So it's more like 2012 vs 2009 technology then.
The M9M files look very close to what I am getting out of my X-Pro. At lower ISO's (~800) the Leica stuff may be slightly better. At higher ISO the M9M falls behind.
The Leica files are considerably noisier than Leica's hype had led me to believe.
Note that these conclusions will depend on the algorithm used to demosaic the X-Pro's RAW files (M9M files need not be demosaic'd, of course). Since the X-Pro uses a new type of non-Beyer array, we may expect the demosaic algorithms to improve rather rapidly.
The cameras are waaay too close in performance to justify a $6300 premium. And the Fuji can do a lot of things –- useful things -- that the M9M cannot begin to do. Not least among these is its ability to do on-the fly filter bracketing, generating jpegs that use information from the color array to simulate B&W film shot with red, green, or yellow filters.
In addition, I am not a fan of the M9M's spectral response curve, which roughly simulates a panchromatic film (say, ACROS) shot through a light green filter.
mabelsound
05-20-2012, 15:10
I think the X-Pro1 is awesome at 6400. It looks more like film than any other digicam I've used. Here's an out-of-camera jpeg, converted to B&W, along with a full size 100% crop. Probably not remotely as sharp as the MM but whatever. I have the NR at -2.
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7216/7237325410_95a8c97343_c.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mabelsound/7237325410/)
Asparagus (for RFF) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mabelsound/7237325410/) by mabel.sound (http://www.flickr.com/people/mabelsound/), on Flickr
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7224/7237325644_28e63f1907_o.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mabelsound/7237325644/)
Asparagus crop (for RFF) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mabelsound/7237325644/) by mabel.sound (http://www.flickr.com/people/mabelsound/), on Flickr
mabelsound
05-20-2012, 15:14
Actually, after clicking that link, I think the Fuji looks a hell of a lot better at 100% than the MM does at 6400.
(I don't have a horse in this race, by the way--I have a regular M9 and think it is glorious at low ISO. But the Fuji has some real mojo at high ISO, I think.)
Up to iso 1600 the noise on the x pro 1 is negligible. Above that, there is some noise to take care of in lightroom but it is no big deal.
http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5231/7156088654_1e8d02424f_b.jpg
The above is a pygmy falcon photographed at the national zoo. The slight grid patterning in the photos is apparent because the photo was taken through a fine metal mesh. Unfortunately, this situation affected a lot of my photos but it cannot be helped.
This isn't my best work ever, but is a good photo to illustrate the camera's high iso capabilities and the noise at iso 3200 or in worse conditions. At any rate, to the issue of noise. This is an example of a photo that was 2 stops underexposed despite being shot at 3200 iso. The photo was brightened considerably (obviously) in lightroom and only slight noise reduction was applied. This is a processed jpeg, not a raw - no adobe support yet.
The fuji sensor is great and let's me get photos that I cannot get with my film cameras or even with previous digital cameras I've owned.
Do you think it was the noise reduction that softened the photo like that? I think it may look better sharper - even with some noise....
mabelsound
05-20-2012, 15:24
Do you think it was the noise reduction that softened the photo like that? I think it may look better sharper - even with some noise....
I tend to agree. Noise isn't the problem with digicams, in my opinion. The problem is ugly noise. I tend to keep luminance NR all the way off in Lightroom for the sake of clarity.
Quite eager to start working with the RAW files in LR--hope this becomes possible soon.
The following crops are all ISO 6400, all are 100% crops from the same size final pictures; the first one from the M9M samples , the others are from two random X-Pro1 pictures.
My inquiry: As being X-Pro1 user, can you get similar results at ISO 6400 like the ones below or these are rather extraordinary samples?
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7236/7237339716_246b3c577d_b.jpg
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7092/7237423778_a4dfaf5607_b.jpg
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8163/7237340024_06495aa13c_b.jpg
mabelsound
05-20-2012, 15:44
Yes, my asparagus shot above is a random snap. This is simply what the XP1 looks like at 6400.
david.elliott
05-20-2012, 15:49
Do you think it was the noise reduction that softened the photo like that? I think it may look better sharper - even with some noise....
Don't think so. It isn't any sharper even with zero noise reduction applied. I really only have a couple ticks of lightroom's noise reduction on.
I think it is soft due to shaky hands and fluffy birdness combined with a photo through a fine mesh fence. :)
Two other somewhat sharper photos from the same zoo outing at iso 3200 and underexposed at that iso.
edit - images removed temporarily for reprocessing without noise reduction
david.elliott
05-20-2012, 15:50
I tend to agree. Noise isn't the problem with digicams, in my opinion. The problem is ugly noise. I tend to keep luminance NR all the way off in Lightroom for the sake of clarity.
Quite eager to start working with the RAW files in LR--hope this becomes possible soon.
Agreed - hopefully very soon.
I don't care for the m9 monochrom's high iso noise. Just looks fuzzy. Does not resemble film, at least in my opinion.
Nice quick snaps. :)
Yes, my asparagus shot above is a random snap. This is simply what the XP1 looks like at 6400.
Thank you. Actually your crop shows the better grain (noise) structure than all the samples here. With a sharper rendering lens probably the asparagus details would be more enhanced.
I remember when I had my X100 I was pretty impressed with the camera at 3200 but not so much at 6400. The 6400 files did convert very well to black and white though I recall where the noise vaguely simulated grain!
The Xpro appears to be a stop better than the X100.
That M9M sample is pretty horrible IMO and I hope it's not representative of the camera's true output at high ISO's ... if it is I'd be surprised!
100% at ISO 3200.
• The M9M crop (top) is from the link at the top of this post.
• The X-Pro1 crop (bottom) is from a RAW file developed in RPP64 (beta software) with NO noise reduction, NO sharpening, NO tonal curve adjustments.
Oh, did I mention that the X-Pro file was intentionally underexposed by a stop, then pushed a stop during development? Well, it was.
You're going to need that drink, Leica.
http://semilog.smugmug.com/Other/35-Biogon-C-test-photos/i-ndg3JHw/3/X3/comparo-0.jpg
Here's the full image from which the above crop is taken. Sharpening now applied but still no NR or tone curve manipulation:
http://semilog.smugmug.com/Other/35-Biogon-C-test-photos/i-Nm3jwvZ/0/X3/ex3-X3.jpg
Thank you semilog.. This is a most clear advantage and one does not need Hubble-class eyeglasses to note also the resolution differences.
I was about to praise Leica's noise structuring showing no pattern, as if inducing a kind of acutance we're accustomed from film, however I see here its totally adverse effect: With film it contributes to resolution, here it's eating into resolution. How sharp and well-defined the pages of the books in your sample!
(I did not like the algorithm Leica employing.. it's rather illusive..)
Tim Gray
05-20-2012, 16:43
FWIW, I have seen better samples from the M-M at high ISO. But the X-Pro1 does look great!
Don't get me wrong. I think the M9M is a nifty camera. But not $6300 niftier than the X-Pro.
Tim Gray
05-20-2012, 16:52
Don't get me wrong. I think the M9M is a nifty camera. But not $6300 niftier than the X-Pro.
Even if it was the best camera in the world, the M-M isn't $6300 niftier than the X-Pro. No argument there. Diminishing returns and all. But that's pretty much true of all Leicas.
But, there is a ISO 10,000 DNG floating around from Jono Slack that you can play around with. Looks better in my mind than those linked above.
http://www.slack.co.uk/slack/Download.html
I'm looking forward to seeing what the M9M is capable of and what its real strengths will be. At the moment it's all pie in the sky stuff IMO and while comparing it's files to the Xpro's is fun it's not really getting at what the M9M is all about!
Alternately it may just turn out to be the ultimate Leica con job!
rbelyell
05-20-2012, 17:35
if its not the highly touted resolution and high iso ability, what exactly is the 'M9M" all about? i'm not trying to be a smart ass, i honestly dont understand what youre meaning is.
tony
willie_901
05-20-2012, 18:06
if its not the highly touted resolution and high iso ability, what exactly is the 'M9M" all about? i'm not trying to be a smart ass, i honestly dont understand what youre meaning is.
tony
Ditto... No smart ass attitude here either.
mabelsound
05-20-2012, 18:10
If you love B&W and love Leicas, the MM is probably a dream. Honestly. It is probably the closest thing the digital world has to an M3 loaded with TriX. But so far, M digital is just not about the high ISO.
if its not the highly touted resolution and high iso ability, what exactly is the 'M9M" all about? i'm not trying to be a smart ass, i honestly dont understand what youre meaning is.
tony
Well ... I was being kind, and optimistic!
If it's strengths aren't high ISO or blinding resolution then it has to be about tonal gradation that goes beyond what we have with our currrent digital systems.
If it doesn't have that it's a complete waste of money and as I said the ultimate Leica con job!
I'm not defending the camera because it's a Leica but I am trying to make sure it doesn't get cucified in my own mind before before it makes it to the last supper! :p
I also may add ... I'm no Leica fan boy since shelling out $6500 for a camera that turned all my blacks magenta a few years back. I still rate that as one of the greatest photographic crimes of this century! :D
rasterdogs
05-20-2012, 19:15
If you love B&W and love Leicas, the MM is probably a dream. Honestly. It is probably the closest thing the digital world has to an M3 loaded with TriX. But so far, M digital is just not about the high ISO.
+1
There really is nothing like a Leica from a physical tool perspective.
I'll never be able to afford a digital Leica and I love my Xpro-1 but the physical presence of a Leica is unique.
Whether if it is a prudent use of financial resources is another question.
-rasterdogs
loquax ludens
05-20-2012, 19:22
Contrast and saturation seem low in all of the M9M images on the following two sites. Is that by intent?
http://www.ephotozine.com/article/leica-m-monochrom-sample-photos-19223
http://www.slack.co.uk/slack/Download.html
Tonal scale seems pretty good, but the rather flat washed out look doesn't seem desirable to me. Maybe if you printed them on grade 3 paper...
Tim Gray
05-20-2012, 19:53
Contrast and saturation seem low in all of the M9M images on the following two sites. Is that by intent?
I think the initial reviewers are doing more or less straight conversions so people have a sense of what the camera is capable of.
If you shoot film, think of the files as flat scans. You can really change up the tonality a lot with these files with very little ill effects.
noimmunity
05-20-2012, 20:52
You're going to need that drink, Leica.
Or maybe that's just the Kool-Aid that I've been hearing everybody talk about?
Having contributed to the melee in this thread, it may be incumbent on me to remind that sense of perspective is in order.
Here is a crop from a 16 Mpix scan of a 35mm ACROS negative (ISO 100). Essentially the same magnification as the 100% M9M and X-Pro samples posted upthread. Now, since this is not a drum scan the grain is accentuated. But, nevertheless, it looks a lot like the M9M at ISO 3200. And so far as I know, no one here is complaining about the results they get with ACROS.
On a 96 dpi monitor the cropped section would correspond to something like a 33 x 50 inch print.
http://semilog.smugmug.com/Other/35-Biogon-C-test-photos/i-HVzLX5h/0/X3/acros-X3.jpg
Moriturii
05-21-2012, 00:21
But these ACROS images produce a level of tonal quality that the M9M hasn't been anywhere near, not in the examples we've seen so far.
The ACROS is just WOW!
Well ... I was being kind, and optimistic!
If it's strengths aren't high ISO or blinding resolution then it has to be about tonal gradation that goes beyond what we have with our currrent digital systems.
If it doesn't have that it's a complete waste of money and as I said the ultimate Leica con job!
I'm not defending the camera because it's a Leica but I am trying to make sure it doesn't get cucified in my own mind before before it makes it to the last supper! :p
I also may add ... I'm no Leica fan boy since shelling out $6500 for a camera that turned all my blacks magenta a few years back. I still rate that as one of the greatest photographic crimes of this century! :D
Actually this is not what this thread was about. Leica may update/upgrade the M9M in the very future or introduce another monochromatic body, this time based on a CMOS sensor for instance. From my end it has nothing to do with a certain brand.
I was looking for some practical, empirical comparison results to be observed and confirmed easily, without much insight; to reveal where the state of the CMOS technology has reached, what it means for us for practical use and whether it's feasible to stick to CCD technology anymore.
Why specifically the M9M against the X-Pro1? Because the former is (indeed!) the pinnacle of the Full Frame CCD technology optimized for hi-ISO by sacrificing color output. The latter is the present state of art CMOS sensor, however being 2.25X smaller APS-C size and with color output and no gimmickry.
The proof of the pudding is in the eating. With the above comparisons it's up to everyone to derive their own conclusions. For me, however, one substantial outcome: CCD is not worth to base designs anymore if the product is to be employed for practical photography while the option of CMOS was available.
Just my two cents..
Sure -- but remember that the ACROS was shot at ISO 100. With these new digital cameras we can readily work at ISO 3200 -- five stops = 32X lower light. And operated at their native ISO's (200-320 for the X-Pro), these sensors are just amazing.
philosomatographer
05-21-2012, 01:04
I have had a careful look at the samples posted, and in my opinion (not being an X-Pro 1 owner, however), they are just shockingly bad for a $15,000 camera/lens combination.
Half of them are mis-focused, and the noise pattern is extremely "gritty" at a per-pixel level, it reminds me of computer graphics from the early 1990s that were converted to 4-bit (16-colour greyscale).
The limited dynamic range compared to the standard M9 (not to mention B&W film) also shows. I honestly think somebody is absolutely crazy to part with this kind of money for something so technologically limited - whether they have the means to do so or not.
Just my opinion - not Leica-bashing, I am a happy M3 user.
But these ACROS images produce a level of tonal quality that the M9M hasn't been anywhere near, not in the examples we've seen so far.
The ACROS is just WOW!
+1
No amount of Leica hype, or Fuji hype, will change this fact. It is simply the advantage that film has over digital B&W - IF this look is what you like and are after. But if you like the digital B&W look, there are a number of cameras to choose from.
rbelyell
05-21-2012, 04:19
I also may add ... I'm no Leica fan boy since shelling out $6500 for a camera that turned all my blacks magenta a few years back. I still rate that as one of the greatest photographic crimes of this century! :D
keith i couldnt agree more. personally, after that fiasco, i put absolutely zero faith in anything leica claims, and constantly chuckle at protestations of the brands present superior quality. i'm actually sorry that this latest product seems at this point to be pretty disappointing, because i was hoping its success might inspire imitation, as philosophically i think an optimized for monochrome cam is a great idea.
tony
willie_901
05-21-2012, 04:58
Thanks Keith... it is usually best to be kind and optimistic.
My hypothesis is Leica faces a huge handicap with their sensor technology and they are doing the best they can with what they have.
Well ... I was being kind, and optimistic!
If it's strengths aren't high ISO or blinding resolution then it has to be about tonal gradation that goes beyond what we have with our currrent digital systems.
If it doesn't have that it's a complete waste of money and as I said the ultimate Leica con job!
I'm not defending the camera because it's a Leica but I am trying to make sure it doesn't get cucified in my own mind before before it makes it to the last supper! :p
I also may add ... I'm no Leica fan boy since shelling out $6500 for a camera that turned all my blacks magenta a few years back. I still rate that as one of the greatest photographic crimes of this century! :D
willie_901
05-21-2012, 05:16
keith i couldnt agree more. personally, after that fiasco, i put absolutely zero faith in anything leica claims, and constantly chuckle at protestations of the brands present superior quality. i'm actually sorry that this latest product seems at this point to be pretty disappointing, because i was hoping its success might inspire imitation, as philosophically i think an optimized for monochrome cam is a great idea.
tony
I was only slightly disappointed with how Leica handled the M8 release. After all, all they had to do was state the truth, and point out the advantages of having the IR filter in front of the lens. I would have probably bought a M8 if Leica stated from day one what was going on, why they chose that design, and the advantages of putting a filter in front of the lens.
What really opened my eyes was how the Leica users initially denied there was a basic flaw. They initially claimed a few tweaks in PS would fix everything. Then there were the early reviewers either didn't understand the basics of the issue or were reluctant to highlight an obvious problem for any number of reasons.
So I decided I would never own a Leica product used or new. I lost faith in the company, the users and the reviewers.
What really opened my eyes was how the Leica users initially denied there was a basic flaw. They initially claimed a few tweaks in PS would fix everything. Then there were the early reviewers either didn't understand the basics of the issue or were reluctant to highlight an obvious problem for any number of reasons.
Divinity is not necessarily over the validity of the facts; it's more over what we want to believe in. And it's among our constitutional rights to believe in things proportional to what we pay for them. :rolleyes:
Tim Gray
05-21-2012, 06:15
But these ACROS images produce a level of tonal quality that the M9M hasn't been anywhere near, not in the examples we've seen so far.
The ACROS is just WOW!
I say this as a 100% film shooter: The M-M files can be adjusted. The samples posted haven't been adjusted to provide them that kind of tonality. It's probably there if you want it. Shooting shiny metal things helps too.
Nice looking picture by the way.
So I decided I would never own a Leica product used or new. I lost faith in the company, the users and the reviewers.
Meanwhile, many continue to enjoy the great camera the M8 actually is despite your lack of trust in them as users. :)
willie_901
05-21-2012, 12:42
I agree.
I happen to enjoy great cameras as well.
I say this as a 100% film shooter: The M-M files can be adjusted. The samples posted haven't been adjusted to provide them that kind of tonality. It's probably there if you want it. Shooting shiny metal things helps too.
Nice looking picture by the way.
I can't see any amount of adjusting making the Monochrom files match the range of tonality of film - it simply isn't in there to bring out. That doesn't mean it can't produce great shots -they are just different from film.
Here are some hi-ISO samples from the new Monochrome M9. You will note that they are not OOC but "... have been converted from DNG to JPEG with no other adjustments made."
http://www.ephotozine.com/article/leica-m-monochrom-sample-photos-19223
Regards,
Bob
Jeez, yeah let's do a test underexposing high iso images. Next!
^--- Are you saying that the photographer pointed the camera at a middle grey and moved the aperture ring and shutter dial until the little red dot between the two arrows lit up, or are you saying that he didn't do that?
Jeez, yeah let's do a test underexposing high iso images. Next!
I could not understand your point. The sample pictures were not taken by me; they're from an independent test site: Ephotozine. If you are able to provide better samples then you are most welcome. Also, if you're against the X-Pro1, then we can supply some samples by the Nex-5N, for example.
fiddlergene1
05-22-2012, 16:28
I took a look at the monochrome shots. I have to say that I am so so glad I never fell for the Leica 'Emporer's New Clothes' bs. I loved my M6 and the lenses. But I'm a photographer, not a doctor or lawyer or rich industrialist. So I'll just fondle my XP1 tonight before I go beddy-bye and thank God for giving me the common sense to see through the Leica bs.
jsrockit
05-23-2012, 04:31
I have to say that I am so so glad I never fell for the Leica 'Emporer's New Clothes' bs. I loved my M6 and the lenses.
Sounds to me like you fell for Leica just a little bit no? ;)
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.