Old 04-30-2015   #41
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 7,847
Looks nice. Maybe I'll order one this afternoon.

G
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-30-2015   #42
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
 
Calzone's Avatar
 
Calzone is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hell Gate, Madhattan
Age: 59
Posts: 7,606
Quote:
Originally Posted by segedi View Post
With the new M246, you wouldn't need the speed. Maybe the character of f/1.4, but certainly not speed!
Good point, but shutter speed is always your best friend when shooting digital.

Also you are right: the 28 Cron wide open and a 50 Lux ASPH wide open are kinda wonderful. I also need to share these lenses, because I can't afford more.

Cal
__________________
"Vintage Hipster"
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-30-2015   #43
Corran
Registered User
 
Corran is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 800
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calzone View Post
The true advantage of a MM is the resolution. No example I could upload would show you what this camera can do. You can make crazy Salgado sized prints of 60x72 inches if you have a high shutter speed and perfect technic.
So, assuming you cropped to that aspect ratio from a 24mp file, you would have a 4800x4000 pixel file. That equates to a bit under 70dpi.

Hmm. I don't think that's going to hold up. Even if its the sharpest and most perfect 24mp out there.
  Reply With Quote

Savings
Old 04-30-2015   #44
Monochrom
Registered User
 
Monochrom's Avatar
 
Monochrom is offline
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,025
Savings

I´ll start to save money seriously.
__________________
M9 Vc 28/3.5 Ltm 5/3.5
Leica IIIF Black Paint
Fuji Gf670
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-30-2015   #45
SuperUJ
Registered User
 
SuperUJ is offline
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 318
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calzone View Post
the Bayer Filter Array degrades resolution by about a third.
This image from the OP may help illustrate Cal's point.



Mikhail's questions is almost similar to this one in film:
Does a color negative have the same dynamic range as a regular b&w film negative?
http://www.largeformatphotography.in...-film-negative

For me, it's not (only) the resolution. Rather, the dynamic range, the use of contrast filters (like in B&W films), the simplicity (purity), the post processing of the MM that make it one of a kind. The low noise in high ISO does not hurt neither.

John
__________________
My Site
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-30-2015   #46
MIkhail
Registered User
 
MIkhail's Avatar
 
MIkhail is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Posts: 887
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calzone View Post
Mikhail,
The true advantage of a MM is the resolution. No example I could upload would show you what this camera can do. You can make crazy Salgado sized prints of 60x72 inches if you have a high shutter speed and perfect technic.
You make a very good point that if one never prints beyond big meaning huge that perhaps this advantage is kinda moot.
Cal

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kwesi View Post
I have a sneaking suspicion that you are experienced enough as a photographer to be able to answer this question for your self

Calzone: Thank you for such a detailed answer.

Kwesi: Obviously I made my own choice a while ago (one year of my daughter enjoying college life in dorm vs. at home is not worth the camera for me), but I am not trying to belittle somebody else’s decision, just curious to understand.
Apparently, I was looking for the wrong advantages.Resolution is not even in my top 10 definition of “good photograph”, but again, that’s me... Still, I cannot imagine that all the people buying MM are after printing huge…
Thanks again.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-30-2015   #47
MIkhail
Registered User
 
MIkhail's Avatar
 
MIkhail is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Posts: 887
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperUJ View Post
This image from the OP may help illustrate Cal's point.


Mikhail's questions is almost similar to this one in film:
Does a color negative have the same dynamic range as a regular b&w film negative?

For me, it's not (only) the resolution. Rather, the dynamic range, the use of contrast filters (like in B&W films), the simplicity (purity), the post processing of the MM that make it one of a kind. The low noise in high ISO does not hurt neither.

John
Now, dynamic range is something I can understand. So please, show the example of something, as I was asking originally.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-30-2015   #48
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 43
Posts: 18,264
Quote:
Originally Posted by MIkhail View Post
Still, I cannot imagine that all the people buying MM are after printing huge…
Note that you already told people you weren't interested in what is most likely the #1 reason most people buy the camera.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-30-2015   #49
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
 
Calzone's Avatar
 
Calzone is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hell Gate, Madhattan
Age: 59
Posts: 7,606
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corran View Post
So, assuming you cropped to that aspect ratio from a 24mp file, you would have a 4800x4000 pixel file. That equates to a bit under 70dpi.

Hmm. I don't think that's going to hold up. Even if its the sharpest and most perfect 24mp out there.
Corran,

I don't doubt your math. 70 dpi is not much.

The zoomed in crop was an 8x10 of a 60x72 inch print that was wet printed. I'm not saying that the wet print on fiber wasn't a little fuzzy, but still the resolution was remarkable. In such a large print it still somehow held together.

Salgado in his Genesis show made these monster sized prints from Pentax 645 negatives and a Canon DSLR making wet prints via digital 4x5 inch negatives. The IQ was kinda stunning, but even with this custom lab in Paris you could see a little fuzzyness if I zoomed in and eyeballed for detail on the supersized prints real close up.

I kinda decided that 24x36 inch was plenty big for the Monochrom but I also saw that I could come pretty close to Salgado using DSI. At a certain point proper viewing distance obscures the fine detail to the point that you really have to get remarkably close to see any fuzziness to the same kinda level as in the Genesis exhibition.

In comparing a wet print to an ink jet print, the detail is sharper in my inkjet prints, but the wet prints are smoother, and this smoothness of the wet print seems to get exaggerated as you print bigger. This is when comparing the same files shot with the Monochrom.

Help me understand what is going on here.

Cal
__________________
"Vintage Hipster"
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-30-2015   #50
segedi
RFicianado
 
segedi's Avatar
 
segedi is offline
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,234
My reasons for buying would be:
Dedicated B&W camera

High ISO - the ability to photograph in a basement jazz club for example where the ISO 10,000 of the MM was a stretch at f/1.4

Same form factor as M240 making it an easier system to pair up with what I have.

M mount lenses - I have a very nice DSLR and the lenses simply don't compare. M-mount lenses have a look that I like very much.

Dynamic range - judging on a very good monitor and prints are an advantage. Though I'm not lacking that in the M240.
__________________
-----------------------

Segedi.com

Flickr

Twitter
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-30-2015   #51
segedi
RFicianado
 
segedi's Avatar
 
segedi is offline
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,234
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calzone View Post
I kinda decided that 24x36 inch was plenty big for the Monochrom...
Full frame prints!
__________________
-----------------------

Segedi.com

Flickr

Twitter
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-30-2015   #52
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 43
Posts: 18,264
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corran View Post
So, assuming you cropped to that aspect ratio from a 24mp file, you would have a 4800x4000 pixel file. That equates to a bit under 70dpi.

Hmm. I don't think that's going to hold up. Even if its the sharpest and most perfect 24mp out there.
If you are printing a 5x6 foot print, it won't have to hold-up up close. Large images in Museums have been made with way worse files.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-30-2015   #54
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 7,847
MIkhail,

grEGORy's review might provide the data you are looking for: http://www.ultrasomething.com/photog...d-sensibility/

He does a good piece of careful comparison between MM, M240, and M246, at low and high sensitivity settings, and shows examples of the differences.

G
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-30-2015   #55
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
 
Calzone's Avatar
 
Calzone is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hell Gate, Madhattan
Age: 59
Posts: 7,606
Quote:
Originally Posted by MIkhail View Post
Calzone: Thank you for such a detailed answer.

Kwesi: Obviously I made my own choice a while ago (one year of my daughter enjoying college life in dorm vs. at home is not worth the camera for me), but I am not trying to belittle somebody else’s decision, just curious to understand.
Apparently, I was looking for the wrong advantages.Resolution is not even in my top 10 definition of “good photograph”, but again, that’s me... Still, I cannot imagine that all the people buying MM are after printing huge…
Thanks again.
Mikhail,

The MM is a nitch camera. It offers great resolution, but unused what is the point. For me it is likely an ultimate tool for what I want to do or attempt.

I saw Salgado's Genesis show at ICP. It was really inspiring how far SS took IQ and he printed not big, but huge. It was a very crazy and ambitious thing to do. Anyways the body of work spanned about a decade, but I had to wonder what if Salgado used a Leica Monochrom instead of using a Pentax 645 to shoot medium format film, and a Canon DSLR that had a color sensor.

To get back to your original question, my Monochrom using DSI to make wet prints came really close to Salgado's quality. My shots were handheld and were not tripod shots. Also know I am not SS.

Anyways Genesis was a great show, and some of my images (perfect exposure, high shutter speed, perfect focus) were not that far away in IQ.
BTW the images that meet a Salgado standard to print Salgado huge in my file library are not that many.

Cal
__________________
"Vintage Hipster"
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-30-2015   #56
MIkhail
Registered User
 
MIkhail's Avatar
 
MIkhail is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Posts: 887
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calzone View Post
Anyways Genesis was a great show, and some of my images (perfect exposure, high shutter speed, perfect focus) were not that far away in IQ.
BTW the images that meet a Salgado standard to print Salgado huge in my file library are not that many.

Cal
I saw Salgado in a gallery while visiting Miami street photography festival, but I think those were prints from film. Impressively huge, no doubt.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-30-2015   #58
Corran
Registered User
 
Corran is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 800
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calzone View Post
...
The zoomed in crop was an 8x10 of a 60x72 inch print that was wet printed. I'm not saying that the wet print on fiber wasn't a little fuzzy, but still the resolution was remarkable. In such a large print it still somehow held together.

In comparing a wet print to an ink jet print, the detail is sharper in my inkjet prints, but the wet prints are smoother, and this smoothness of the wet print seems to get exaggerated as you print bigger. This is when comparing the same files shot with the Monochrom.

Help me understand what is going on here.

Cal

There's a lot going on from Point A (24mp file) to Point B (digital wet print).

I think there's quite a bit of difference between softness in a wet print and artifacting/pixelation from too low of a DPI on an ink print. And of course you probably aren't printing direct from the file, but uprezzing and processing the file for print. Or your lab is doing it and doing everything to make sure it works acceptably.

Personally, I printed two 36x24 images from my old D700 (about 115 DPI native). I uprezzed them, processed them as well as I could, and had them printed by a lab. One looked absolutely terrible. The other looked okay. The difference was in the images (detail vs. homogeneity, difference in tonality spread. The one with delicate tones looked awful).

This could quickly get into digital vs. film (or ink vs. wet vs. whatever) but honestly I think the reason your prints might look okay is because they are wet printed, which inherently probably smudges the details and therefore the problems and you are left with an okay, if soft, print. Which may be totally acceptable.

As I mostly shoot landscape/architecture/urban stuff I want the detail. Which is part of the reason I use 4x5. I also print my own stuff (wet/ink) so I'm aware of the limitations of the medium(s) and how to get the best I can out of a file. Also, depending on what I'm going for, sometimes I shoot with bold colors, sometimes with very delicate greyscale tones, and in my experience that's the tough part for digital.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
If you are printing a 5x6 foot print, it won't have to hold-up up close. Large images in Museums have been made with way worse files.
In my opinion viewing distance in a gallery is a myth. If patrons can get up to the print, they will get up to the print. The usual caveats about billboard images is correct, because no one sees them up close or even within hundreds of feet usually, but something in a gallery is a different animal.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-30-2015   #59
mexipike
Registered User
 
mexipike is offline
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 145
I just got a monochrom last month and I absolutely love it. I knew that the new one would be coming out soon, but I wanted to be shooting now not on a waitlist. And the $2500 in savings off a new one is a lot of money to me.

I think I'm in the same boat as calzone, in that Leica made a digital camera just for me in the monochrom! Unfortunately, I don't have the funds to get the new one too, but I'm not worried about that.

I shoot 90% black and white film and print in a darkroom. I've used a m6 for years a long with a mamiya 7ii and a rollei 6008af. For me the new monochrom is not so much about the high resolution print size, though I do like that a lot, it's about the ability to capture images with a long incredible tonal scale the same way I can work with film. Of course one could do a great job with a color camera, but for me, and it sounds like Calzone too, if what you really care about is black and white imagery why not get a camera designed for that.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-30-2015   #60
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
 
Calzone's Avatar
 
Calzone is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hell Gate, Madhattan
Age: 59
Posts: 7,606
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corran View Post
There's a lot going on from Point A (24mp file) to Point B (digital wet print).

I think there's quite a bit of difference between softness in a wet print and artifacting/pixelation from too low of a DPI on an ink print. And of course you probably aren't printing direct from the file, but uprezzing and processing the file for print. Or your lab is doing it and doing everything to make sure it works acceptably.

Personally, I printed two 36x24 images from my old D700 (about 115 DPI native). I uprezzed them, processed them as well as I could, and had them printed by a lab. One looked absolutely terrible. The other looked okay. The difference was in the images (detail vs. homogeneity, difference in tonality spread. The one with delicate tones looked awful).

This could quickly get into digital vs. film (or ink vs. wet vs. whatever) but honestly I think the reason your prints might look okay is because they are wet printed, which inherently probably smudges the details and therefore the problems and you are left with an okay, if soft, print. Which may be totally acceptable.

As I mostly shoot landscape/architecture/urban stuff I want the detail. Which is part of the reason I use 4x5. I also print my own stuff (wet/ink) so I'm aware of the limitations of the medium(s) and how to get the best I can out of a file. Also, depending on what I'm going for, sometimes I shoot with bold colors, sometimes with very delicate greyscale tones, and in my experience that's the tough part for digital.



In my opinion viewing distance in a gallery is a myth. If patrons can get up to the print, they will get up to the print. The usual caveats about billboard images is correct, because no one sees them up close or even within hundreds of feet usually, but something in a gallery is a different animal.
Corran,

Thanks for your insights. Your explanation about the smudging of detail makes sense. BTW the one file that I was considering for printing huge was an urban landscape that has mucho detail.

Also know that I shoot a lot of B&W in 120 in 6x6, 6x7, and 6x9. The Monochrom gets really close to 120 film in tonality, and I definately get the mids of medium format. My trick I learned is to use specifically Heliopan 2X yellow filters marked "Digital." It seems these filters marked "Digital" have both a UV and IR filters built in as well as the 2X yellow that is the sweet spot on my Monochrom. Broad histograms that lack clipping is pretty easy to do. It seems light that otherwise contributes to clipping is tamed to the point that clipping is either greatly reduced or eliminated.

Like a large format shooter I shoot as if I am going to contact print, and my post processing in LR is very minimal. The mids are rich. Also the 28 Cron is a magic lens on the MM.

Also know that I'm using Piezography on a 3880 for B&W. Really complements my MM.

Cal
__________________
"Vintage Hipster"
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-30-2015   #61
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
 
Calzone's Avatar
 
Calzone is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hell Gate, Madhattan
Age: 59
Posts: 7,606
Quote:
Originally Posted by mexipike View Post
I think I'm in the same boat as calzone, in that Leica made a digital camera just for me in the monochrom! Unfortunately, I don't have the funds to get the new one too, but I'm not worried about that.
M,

I don't have the funds either. I'm not selling my MM, but I feel the M-246 is another dream come true. I feel like Leica is really targeting me. In another thread I state that "The new M-246 is a camera I can't live without."

Seems like another camera especially made for me.

Cal
__________________
"Vintage Hipster"
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-30-2015   #62
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 43
Posts: 18,264
Quote:
Originally Posted by MIkhail View Post
Are my comments bothering you?
No, but I guess I'm bothering you. I meant no disrespect. I'll leave you alone now.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-30-2015   #63
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 43
Posts: 18,264
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corran View Post
In my opinion viewing distance in a gallery is a myth. If patrons can get up to the print, they will get up to the print. The usual caveats about billboard images is correct, because no one sees them up close or even within hundreds of feet usually, but something in a gallery is a different animal.
I agree... but do you expect perfection in a 5x6 foot print up close? I don't. However, to see the whole image, you have no choice but to stand back somewhat. I do know that my non-photography friends do not go up to an image and look for artifacts... they would only go up to look at a fine detail in the content.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-30-2015   #64
_lou_
Registered User
 
_lou_'s Avatar
 
_lou_ is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 110
Will its sensor rot, too ?
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-30-2015   #65
JeffNYC
Registered User
 
JeffNYC's Avatar
 
JeffNYC is offline
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: New York City
Posts: 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calzone View Post
John,

Looks like Leica made another camera especially built for me. I want to know the price pronto so perhaps I can pre order one. I was wise when the M-240 came out to secure a chrome 90 Macro Elmar to exploit possible live view to use this camera also as a scanner.

I still love my CCD look on my Monochrom. How cool to have another M-body with another sensor. I'm in heaven. Another dream comes true, and I'm a lucky guy.

Thank you Leica.

Cal
This is like the price is right...
Cal, I'm going $7995
__________________
currently shooting:

Leica, Nikon, & Fuji


Flickr Gallery:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jeffcolen/
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-30-2015   #66
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 7,847
Quote:
Originally Posted by _lou_ View Post
Will its sensor rot, too ?
Jono Slack is a beta tester that worked with the new Monochrom2, code named "Elliot" (the original Monochrom is code named "Henri"). The question came up on another forum:

Quote:
V: Is Elliot's cover(glass), less prone to pitting than Henri's? That is the US $7450 question.

JS: It's completely different - so I'm almost certain that it's not prone at all - Certainly, nobody at Leica is worried about it!
My understanding is that the CMOSIS sensors in typ 240 and 246 cameras are not prone to any of the sensor issues that were seen in the Kodak designed sensors in the M8-M9-MMonochrom series of cameras. They're of a completely different genera.

G
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-30-2015   #67
robbeiflex
Registered User
 
robbeiflex's Avatar
 
robbeiflex is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Luxembourg
Posts: 1,002
Quote:
Originally Posted by _lou_ View Post
Will its sensor rot, too ?
No, this is rather a way to update the product line to eliminate new sensors problems from going to market.

The remaining question is: When will the M-E Typ 24x arrive?
__________________
"They say, ‘If you use this digital camera, you can take a clear picture in the dark’. The dark should stay dark. You can’t really see that much, and you don’t really want to see that much anyway.” Nobuyoshi Araki 2006

My Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-30-2015   #68
Vince Lupo
Registered User
 
Vince Lupo's Avatar
 
Vince Lupo is offline
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Baltimore, MD, USA; Toronto, Ont, Canada
Posts: 4,017
They're supposed to be shipping mid-May. I already spoke to my Leica 'pusher', and I'll maybe look into one later on in the year. Gotta save the pennies first!
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-30-2015   #69
Corran
Registered User
 
Corran is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 800
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calzone View Post
Also know that I shoot a lot of B&W in 120 in 6x6, 6x7, and 6x9. The Monochrom gets really close to 120 film in tonality, and I definately get the mids of medium format.
I don't doubt it - I find the D800E with a good lens/technique can just about match a typical 4x5 image scanned on a consumer flatbed like most people do, at least in terms of digital resolution. A wet print vs. wet print scenario wouldn't be the same deal. Tonality is a different story either way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
I agree... but do you expect perfection in a 5x6 foot print up close?
Personally, yes, in some instances.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
I do know that my non-photography friends do not go up to an image and look for artifacts... they would only go up to look at a fine detail in the content.
Right, and at 70 DPI native it isn't going to be there, is my point. At least not comparatively to a print at a higher DPI.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-30-2015   #70
airfrogusmc
Registered User
 
airfrogusmc is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 4,717
My last exhibit were all 18 X 12 prints in 20 X 24 mats and frames and some friends of mine (silver gelatin heads one was one of my college professors) were amazed at the print quality of the ink jet prints from the MM. I shot with Blads for decades and I agree that the files are a lot like medium format B&W as far as sharpness and tonality. The range in the MM files are spectacular.

And wanted to say the the 18 MP original mono has been compared to the D800 in regards to sharpness and DR because it is native B&W. No RGB to deal with. I know my files from my MM beat the files from 5DII and IIIs
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-30-2015   #71
Jan Pedersen
Registered User
 
Jan Pedersen is online now
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Vicinity of Portland OR
Age: 63
Posts: 565
This new M 246 got me dreaming. I never thought i would buy a new Leica since i bought my M6 in 86
It is a lot of money for a camera body so it will take some sacrifices to buy one but the itch have started now.
I look forward to see some images and reviews both here and on other forums.
__________________
_____________________________
http://janlpedersen.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-30-2015   #72
asiafish
Registered User
 
asiafish is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 123
I scrimped, saved and even sold my Harley-Davidson to buy the original M Monochrom and a pair of Leica lenses two-years-ago. The new one looks like an improvement in almost every way, and I hope Leica sells a boatload of them.

Me though, I plan on continuing to explore my current Monochrom for years to come. It has been, and will remain my prized possession, a true source of inspiration and an absolute pleasure to own and use. Oh, and the image quality is INCREDIBLE!
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-30-2015   #74
Harry S.
Registered User
 
Harry S.'s Avatar
 
Harry S. is offline
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Shellharbour, Australia
Age: 33
Posts: 491
Quote:
Originally Posted by jloden View Post
Some pictures from Iceland shot with the new M Monochrom (Typ 246) are up on the Leica blog:

http://blog.leica-camera.com/photogr...d-in-80-hours/

I struggle to believe that a competent photographer couldn't achieve those images with an M240 or any other modern digital color camera.

To this day I still don't see the hype of the MM, and B&W was all I did for the first few years of this hobby.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-01-2015   #75
airfrogusmc
Registered User
 
airfrogusmc is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 4,717
It's not hype. Once you work with the files you know it's not hype but even more than that it's about not using B&W as a second choice or a fallback. It's like putting a roll of B&W film in your camera and fully committing to that vision. That way of seeing.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-01-2015   #76
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 43
Posts: 18,264
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corran View Post
Right, and at 70 DPI native it isn't going to be there, is my point. At least not comparatively to a print at a higher DPI.
True, but I think there's not a one size fits all answer for me. It just depends on what the image is.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-01-2015   #77
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 43
Posts: 18,264
Quote:
Originally Posted by MIkhail View Post
Sorry for being somewhat brush.
Hey, no problem. Sorry for the confusion.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-01-2015   #78
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
 
Calzone's Avatar
 
Calzone is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hell Gate, Madhattan
Age: 59
Posts: 7,606
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffNYC View Post
This is like the price is right...
Cal, I'm going $7995
Jeff,

I like the $7495.00 price better.

Cal
__________________
"Vintage Hipster"
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-01-2015   #79
Dante_Stella
Rex canum cattorumque
 
Dante_Stella's Avatar
 
Dante_Stella is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,547
From the test reports I have seen (MM vs. M246), apparently you'd have to really look for the CCD magic with the original one. There is a slightly different color sensitivity; looks like it might be less like having a light green filter.

Dante
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-01-2015   #80
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
 
Calzone's Avatar
 
Calzone is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hell Gate, Madhattan
Age: 59
Posts: 7,606
Quote:
Originally Posted by airfrogusmc View Post
My last exhibit were all 18 X 12 prints in 20 X 24 mats and frames and some friends of mine (silver gelatin heads one was one of my college professors) were amazed at the print quality of the ink jet prints from the MM. I shot with Blads for decades and I agree that the files are a lot like medium format B&W as far as sharpness and tonality. The range in the MM files are spectacular.

And wanted to say the the 18 MP original mono has been compared to the D800 in regards to sharpness and DR because it is native B&W. No RGB to deal with. I know my files from my MM beat the files from 5DII and IIIs
Thanks for your insights.

I also would like to add that Leica also does not use an anti alias filter on any M-body digital cameras, and and this lack of an AA filter also adds to resolution and sharpness.

Am I wrong in judging Leicas claim of a "100% increase in resolution?" To me it is like Leica is almost saying the M-246 24MP sensor is like a 48MP sensor. I don't buy that. My estimate would be that the M-246 sensor is kinda like a 32 MP sensor as far as resolution and sharpness.

Still pixel size has its own richness.

Cal
__________________
"Vintage Hipster"
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 18:34.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.