Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Leicas and other Leica Mount Cameras > Leica Monochrom - All M Models

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Old 01-23-2017   #41
airfrogusmc
Registered User
 
airfrogusmc is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 4,756
I must have looked at different files than you have seen but i have processed files from the D800E and the MM and I prefer the files from the MM. Not because I have one but because I have found for B&W they have more in them and they are as sharp and you can really see it in prints. But 3200 from film is a very different beast than 3200 from the MM.

Here's a little sump'm of mine that Leica featured just in case you are interested and hadn't seen it. Kinda gets to why I prefer the MM.
http://blog.leica-camera.com/2016/12...relationships/

I also have no desire to upgrade to the new MM not saying that some shouldn't have done that. I just prefer the simpler menu and that stuff it doesn't have like video and live view.

So I think it is still a great buy if you shoot B&W and you can find them for a good price these days.

And for those that do not fully understand why a true monochrome sensor is sharper, has better low light capabilities and better DR than it's color cousin here is a decent, simple explanation.
http://www.red.com/learn/red-101/col...camera-sensors
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-20-2017   #42
BuzzyOne
Registered User
 
BuzzyOne's Avatar
 
BuzzyOne is offline
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 62
I just pulled the trigger on black M9M with just over 1000 clicks for $3K. Original sensor, but I don't really care if I need to get it replaced. The wait gives me something to live for.

It will be my first digital M. I bought it to use while I wait for my M10.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-20-2017   #43
johnwolf
Registered User
 
johnwolf's Avatar
 
johnwolf is offline
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,365
Quote:
Originally Posted by BuzzyOne View Post
I just pulled the trigger on black M9M with just over 1000 clicks for $3K. Original sensor, but I don't really care if I need to get it replaced. The wait gives me something to live for.

It will be my first digital M. I bought it to use while I wait for my M10.
Congratulations! And a pretty good price. Be sure to join us in the MM pics thread.

John
__________________
tumblr | ECLIPSED
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #44
brennanphotoguy
Registered User
 
brennanphotoguy's Avatar
 
brennanphotoguy is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: NYC
Age: 27
Posts: 785
Nice! Not a bad price either, especially for the click count.
__________________
M3 / IIIg / Rollei 3.5E3
www.instagram.com/brennan_mckissick
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #45
airfrogusmc
Registered User
 
airfrogusmc is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 4,756
Quote:
Originally Posted by BuzzyOne View Post
I just pulled the trigger on black M9M with just over 1000 clicks for $3K. Original sensor, but I don't really care if I need to get it replaced. The wait gives me something to live for.

It will be my first digital M. I bought it to use while I wait for my M10.
Congrats. Good price.

I still love mine.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #46
SaveKodak
Registered User
 
SaveKodak is offline
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: New York City
Posts: 520
21,818 will be the number to keep an eye on then. That's how many frames of Tri-X $3-Grand buys you. 1s and 0s vs silver, wood, and bone. I know what I'm picking as a medium.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #47
airfrogusmc
Registered User
 
airfrogusmc is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 4,756
Can't go from 320 to 3200 ISO from one frame to the next and get really good results at 3200 with tri x and I think of all the thousands of images I have made with my MM over the past 4 1/2 years and because I no longer have a darkroom that I would maybe would not have made. 2 large one man exhibits and been selected to be in two different group shows in New York all images made with the MM over the past 4 1/2 years.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #48
SaveKodak
Registered User
 
SaveKodak is offline
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: New York City
Posts: 520
Quote:
Originally Posted by airfrogusmc View Post
Can't go from 320 to 3200 ISO from one frame to the next and get really good results at 3200 with tri x and I think of all the thousands of images I have made with my MM over the past 4 1/2 years and because I no longer have a darkroom that I would maybe would not have made. 2 large one man exhibits and been selected to be in two different group shows in New York all images made with the MM over the past 4 1/2 years.
You could literally add an M3-6 body to my math and still make it work with only maybe a 1/3rd fewer frames, but 2 Ms. Tri-X in one and if not Tri-X pushed to 3200 then Delta.

I was mostly being tongue and cheek though, I don't actually resent anyone's choices here. Just enjoy injecting thought alternatives involving film in case anyone is considering picking up an analog M.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #49
airfrogusmc
Registered User
 
airfrogusmc is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 4,756
I love film, shot it for decades. I also love digital. 3200 on the MM is a very different beast than 3200 ISO film or worse trip pushed 3 stops which I never liked much.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #50
SaveKodak
Registered User
 
SaveKodak is offline
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: New York City
Posts: 520
I'm pretty sure they're both black and white photos so it's really not that different.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #51
airfrogusmc
Registered User
 
airfrogusmc is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 4,756
in large prints there is a huge difference.

Some stuff I shot at 3200 on the MM for a hospital client of mine. The image quality is amazing.

Huge prints in the main stairwell.


  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #52
SaveKodak
Registered User
 
SaveKodak is offline
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: New York City
Posts: 520
I gotta tell ya, nobody cares how sharp or grainless your pictures are. They just have to be good. Delta 3200 would render those images perfectly well, and there would be a lot of grain, and no one would object.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #53
airfrogusmc
Registered User
 
airfrogusmc is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 4,756
Well my client wouldn't have found that kind of grain acceptable
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #54
SaveKodak
Registered User
 
SaveKodak is offline
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: New York City
Posts: 520
I'm going to go out on a limb and say you never actually showed them a grainy option and asked their opinion.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #55
airfrogusmc
Registered User
 
airfrogusmc is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 4,756
I have worked with this client for decades and they specifically said they wanted clean not grainy images. They were worried about it, for one, how close the work was to viewers.

Really nice to have a B&W digital camera that can give you these kinds of files from high ISO.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #56
SaveKodak
Registered User
 
SaveKodak is offline
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: New York City
Posts: 520
So no, they never saw a grainy option. Nor did they have a chance to evaluate it at any distance, and so you can't know whether they would have found it acceptable.

Here is a random Delta 3200 scan I have on my phone. What would stop me from printing it large? Would resolving more hairs on the dog make it a better photo of a dog? Nothing, and no.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 2017-01-19-0002.jpg (33.9 KB, 35 views)
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #57
airfrogusmc
Registered User
 
airfrogusmc is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 4,756
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaveKodak View Post
So no, they never saw a grainy option. Nor did they have a chance to evaluate it at any distance, and so you can't know whether they would have found it acceptable.

Here is a random Delta 3200 scan I have on my phone. What would stop me from printing it large? Would resolving more hairs on the dog make it a better photo of a dog? Nothing, and no.
They specifically said they didn't want grainy images. Either I do that or they get someone that will. Sometimes grain is a good thing. Sometimes not. This was on of this not times. Good thing is I can always grain up the files if need be.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #58
SaveKodak
Registered User
 
SaveKodak is offline
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: New York City
Posts: 520
Meh, I don't buy your story. *shrug*
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #59
airfrogusmc
Registered User
 
airfrogusmc is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 4,756
You don't have to. You didn't pay the invoice.

BTW 80 kb compressed jpgs on a forum is no way to judge IQ.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #60
SaveKodak
Registered User
 
SaveKodak is offline
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: New York City
Posts: 520
Sure it is. You look at the photo and decide if you like it. No pixel peeping necessary. This has been the theme of our entire discussion. "IQ" has very little to do with the quality of a photograph.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #61
Ko.Fe.
Me. Write ESL. Ko.
 
Ko.Fe.'s Avatar
 
Ko.Fe. is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MiltON.ONtario
Age: 51
Posts: 4,844
Quote:
Originally Posted by airfrogusmc View Post

BTW 80 kb compressed jpgs on a forum is no way to judge IQ.
I'm not the client for stairway sized prints, but to me the only size Delta 3200 in 135 format doesn't sucks is at Flickr thumbnail.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #62
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
 
Calzone's Avatar
 
Calzone is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hell Gate, Madhattan
Age: 59
Posts: 7,725
Quote:
Originally Posted by airfrogusmc View Post
Congrats. Good price.

I still love mine.
Allen,

I still love mine too. Should have it back from Leica very soon. Perhaps by the end of the month. I used the waiting list and shipped my camera in mid December and was told 8-10 week turnaround.

BTW I think the Monochrom can print a lot bigger than 135 film because of higher IQ. At a certain point grain can get distracting and hurts an image.

Cal
__________________
"Vintage Hipster"
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #63
johnwolf
Registered User
 
johnwolf's Avatar
 
johnwolf is offline
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,365
Out of regard for Nathan, may I suggest you guys take the film discussion to another thread? He clearly asked for guidance on a digital M. Why derail his thread with a film/digital argument?

John
__________________
tumblr | ECLIPSED
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #64
Richard G
Registered User
 
Richard G's Avatar
 
Richard G is offline
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: 37,47 S
Posts: 4,500
Back to the topic. I have an M9-P and M9M. The M9P is terrific but the Monochrom is better, smoother, possibly quieter. It mostly has a Canadian 50 Summicron version IV on it and it hangs around with me like my M4-2 did back in the '80s. I like to bond with an important tool. Naturally I agree with aifrogusmc about this camera.

To get one now at a good price would be brilliant. I bought mine when the 240 came out. I didn't care if that was better. The increased weight and the ugly form factor firmed my decision to stick with M9 form cameras for as long as possible. This is the great thing about Leica. Is my M6 better than my M2? Demonstrably, but my M2 has the magical single frame lines and the best shutter release of any camera: I never really needed to trade my M4-2 for the M6. Last year's or last century's Leica is more than good enough.
__________________
Richard
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #65
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
 
Calzone's Avatar
 
Calzone is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hell Gate, Madhattan
Age: 59
Posts: 7,725
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnwolf View Post
Out of regard for Nathan, may I suggest you guys take the film discussion to another thread? He clearly asked for guidance on a digital M. Why derail his thread with a film/digital argument?

John
John,

Thanks for reminding me to stay on topic. I bought my MM new about 4 years ago. It has been trouble free, and I used mine heavily. The six month wait for a sensor replacement really can be curbed to 8-10 weeks if you go the waiting list route. My sensor corrosion only stopped me from taking pictures because I sent my camera in for sensor replacement.

I know that some people complain about needing to carry three batteries, but I never needed more than two.

Compared to my SL the MM is a rather primitive camera, and for me is most like shooting a film camera because it is so basic. Anyways after four years of shooting, I still love this camera.

Cal
__________________
"Vintage Hipster"
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #66
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
 
Calzone's Avatar
 
Calzone is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hell Gate, Madhattan
Age: 59
Posts: 7,725
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard G View Post
Back to the topic. I have an M9-P and M9M. The M9P is terrific but the Monochrom is better, smoother, possibly quieter. It mostly has a Canadian 50 Summicron version IV on it and it hangs around with me like my M4-2 did back in the '80s. I like to bond with an important tool. Naturally I agree with aifrogusmc about this camera.

To get one now at a good price would be brilliant. I bought mine when the 240 came out. I didn't care if that was better. The increased weight and the ugly form factor firmed my decision to stick with M9 form cameras for as long as possible. This is the great thing about Leica. Is my M6 better than my M2? Demonstrably, but my M2 has the magical single frame lines and the best shutter release of any camera: I never really needed to trade my M4-2 for the M6. Last year's or last century's Leica is more than good enough.
Richard,

I would argue that the original MM does have an advantage over the M-246: huge midrange that more closely resembles larger formats.

The M-246 is definitely a more advanced camera, with features I don't need like video, but it does have better highlight roll off, more shadow detail, superior high ISO, and more dynamic range, but to me the rendering is kinda scooped.

Also because the MM is more basic it has it's charm. It this manner it is more like a film camera.

Cal
__________________
"Vintage Hipster"
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #67
airfrogusmc
Registered User
 
airfrogusmc is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 4,756
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaveKodak View Post
Sure it is. You look at the photo and decide if you like it. No pixel peeping necessary. This has been the theme of our entire discussion. "IQ" has very little to do with the quality of a photograph.
Either you exceed your clients expectations consistently or you are out of business and we are talking about very large prints(as you can see) in this case. The fact you are in a contained area and close to those large prints so grain size, sharpness and all of that do become important especially if the client says it is.

The bigger question is why do you see yourself as the film savior and why wander into a thread trying to convince those that buying film and a film camera should is a smarter option? Maybe for some it is but I know for some that it isn't. If I had not gone digital some years back I wouldn't be in business today. I still love film and actually love it's limitations at times but I do know that the files from the MM far exceed IQ wise any pushed tri-x and especially 3200. Now if that's important to someone or not that's their business but those things are at times important to me and to my clients.

It is really nice to get the IQ you need for the message and the type of image you are creating. The MM is a great choice and it is still a great choice for those looking for one.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #68
BuzzyOne
Registered User
 
BuzzyOne's Avatar
 
BuzzyOne is offline
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaveKodak View Post
21,818 will be the number to keep an eye on then. That's how many frames of Tri-X $3-Grand buys you. 1s and 0s vs silver, wood, and bone. I know what I'm picking as a medium.
What a nonsensical thing to say.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #69
BuzzyOne
Registered User
 
BuzzyOne's Avatar
 
BuzzyOne is offline
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaveKodak View Post
Sure it is. You look at the photo and decide if you like it. No pixel peeping necessary. This has been the theme of our entire discussion. "IQ" has very little to do with the quality of the composition of a photograph.
I fixed your statement for you. You're welcome.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #70
Keith
On leave from Gallifrey
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Keith is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,455
Quote:
21,818 will be the number to keep an eye on then. That's how many frames of Tri-X $3-Grand buys you. 1s and 0s vs silver, wood, and bone. I know what I'm picking as a medium.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BuzzyOne View Post
What a nonsensical thing to say.



Agree. Over the years here at RFF I've never been able to understand why 'some' film shooters feel the need to enter threads that are obviously about digital to tell us that film is their choice of medium. I suspect it's some weird badge of honour thing that I'll never get!
__________________
---------------------------
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #71
BuzzyOne
Registered User
 
BuzzyOne's Avatar
 
BuzzyOne is offline
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 62
To the OP:

I am in a similar boat as you. I shoot lots of film and have an M3 around my neck most days (unless I grab the Rollei). I have DSLR cameras for macro and high-speed stuff, Fuji X100T, but I just love film. However, I am getting older and film is a commitment. The MM1 will be my first Leica digital. (I bought it to tide me over until my damn M10 arrives!)

You can't really go wrong with the MM1. Try and find one with a replaced sensor or grab one with original guts and shoot the hell out of it. If needed, send off to the Mother Ship and they will make like new. If you hate it, you can get most of your money back depending on the deal you get when purchased.

Just remember, not too long ago people were falling all over themselves paying 8 Grand to get one of these babies!
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #72
BuzzyOne
Registered User
 
BuzzyOne's Avatar
 
BuzzyOne is offline
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith View Post
Agree. Over the years here at RFF I've never been able to understand why 'some' film shooters feel the need to enter threads that are obviously about digital to tell us that film is their choice of medium. I suspect it's some weird badge of honour thing that I'll never get!
Humans.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #73
Michael Markey
Registered User
 
Michael Markey's Avatar
 
Michael Markey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Blackpool ,England
Age: 66
Posts: 3,502
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith View Post
Agree. Over the years here at RFF I've never been able to understand why 'some' film shooters feel the need to enter threads that are obviously about digital to tell us that film is their choice of medium. I suspect it's some weird badge of honour thing that I'll never get!

Me too , it`s very odd and not very helpful to the OP in this case either.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-22-2017   #74
Richard G
Registered User
 
Richard G's Avatar
 
Richard G is offline
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: 37,47 S
Posts: 4,500
Trying to think of a reason not to get the original Monochrom. (Taken with the original Monochrom, but he's not to know that.)


L2007334.jpg by Richard, on Flickr
__________________
Richard
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-22-2017   #75
icebear
Registered User
 
icebear's Avatar
 
icebear is offline
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: just west of the big apple
Posts: 2,702
I think the easiest answer to the OP question is to visit the Monochrom thread.
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/foru...d.php?t=123460

Just my $0.02.
__________________
Klaus
You have to be there !
M9, MM & a bunch of glass, Q

my gallery:http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...d=6650&showall
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-22-2017   #76
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
 
Calzone's Avatar
 
Calzone is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hell Gate, Madhattan
Age: 59
Posts: 7,725
I think Richard made a point above in his post in reference to analog cameras, and it kinda seems the MM is such a basic camera. In this manner it is kinda like a M2 or M4 in that it is the most basic camera although digital.

What is wrong with that? Certainly a M10 is a much more advanced M-body.

Also I kinda hate one sided rigid thinking. I for one still shoot film, own film M-bodies and medium format, but I consider digital a separate medium. I favor both mediums and encourage both. I don't feel like I have to make a choice or say one is better.

What is the matter with having flexible thinking and being open?

Cal
__________________
"Vintage Hipster"
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-22-2017   #77
SaveKodak
Registered User
 
SaveKodak is offline
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: New York City
Posts: 520
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith View Post
Agree. Over the years here at RFF I've never been able to understand why 'some' film shooters feel the need to enter threads that are obviously about digital to tell us that film is their choice of medium. I suspect it's some weird badge of honour thing that I'll never get!
Well you wouldn't be so confused if you quoted this part of what I was saying:

"I was mostly being tongue and cheek though, I don't actually resent anyone's choices here. Just enjoy injecting thought alternatives involving film in case anyone is considering picking up an analog M."

The conversation I was having with airfrog was about how to evaluate an image, what's acceptable to clients. There is a notion on "the internet" that ties the quality of a photograph to the accuracy of a photograph. This is something I'll take any and every opportunity to dispel.

For the record, I even have MM images in my portfolio. They look great. I would never say that the camera is not capable of excellent results*, I just make the argument that it's simply a poorly made camera. From my experience B&W conversions from better sensors still do better than those old CCDs which are literally rotting from the inside out. If they were cheaper one could say it's worthwhile, but $3 grand is more than what I paid for my M240. It ain't worth it. And any extra resolving power due to the lack of a CFA is simply meaningless in real world pictorial applications.

The absolute key advantage of the MM IMO is that it's a camera that simply cannot be color. You lose that element of choice paralysis and can focus on making pictures with it. I wish more brands would put out monochrome sensors for that reason. If Fuji put out a Mono X100 I'd seriously consider buying it just to have an always-B&W camera for my weddings. Choice paralysis represents one of the worst aspects of digital photography in my opinion. I just resent the premium and the mythologizing.

*This is actually not saying much. The lowest-end Canon Rebel's imaging sensor is fully capable of breathtaking results, under the right set of circumstances and in the right hands.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-22-2017   #78
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
 
Calzone's Avatar
 
Calzone is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hell Gate, Madhattan
Age: 59
Posts: 7,725
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaveKodak View Post
"I was mostly being tongue and cheek though, I don't actually resent anyone's choices here. Just enjoy injecting thought alternatives involving film in case anyone is considering picking up an analog M."
Did you ever consider that many here on RFF already own film M's? Did you ever consider that many here might shoot both film M's and digital M's? Might many here have mucho decades of shooting film?

I say this "tongue in cheek." LOL.

Cal
__________________
"Vintage Hipster"
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-22-2017   #79
SaveKodak
Registered User
 
SaveKodak is offline
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: New York City
Posts: 520
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calzone View Post
Did you ever consider that many here on RFF already own film M's? Did you ever consider that many here might shoot both film M's and digital M's? Might many here have mucho decades of shooting film?

I say this "tongue in cheek." LOL.

Cal
Which one of my points are you actually addressing? It seems like you're seeing an argument that I didn't actually try to make.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-22-2017   #80
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
 
Calzone's Avatar
 
Calzone is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hell Gate, Madhattan
Age: 59
Posts: 7,725
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaveKodak View Post
Just enjoy injecting thought alternatives involving film in case anyone is considering picking up an analog M."
Read your quote. I find this mucho funny. Now double funny. I guess you don't read what you write.

Kinda funny that someone on this Leicacentric Rangefinder forum might not consider an analog M or be interested in film. Do you really need to state the obvious.

Then again: do you think that Monochrom owners do not have film "M" bodies? Do you think others here do not have mucho experience shooting film?

Tongue in cheek: it comes across that way.

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 23:38.


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.