Leica Monochrome, test shots up.

[LucisPictor]

There seems to be some confusion about the name.
That cam is not called "Leica M9 Monochrom" but "Leica M Monochrom", although it is based on the M9.
_________________
Personal forum activity on pause!

Carsten, Moderator
Things ON SALE
Carsten = "KAPCTEH" = "Karusutenu" | T-shirt?.........................My photos from Emilia: http://www.schouler.net/emilia/emilia2011.html
Sets:
Leica M8 - Voigtländer Heliar 4.5/15 & Ultron 2/28 & Ultron 1.7/35 & Heliar 2.5/75, Leica Summitar 2/50 & Elmar 4/90, Jupiter-3, Jupiter-8,
Sony NEX-7 / NEX-3 - Tamron 2.5/24, Pentax-110 2.8 (18/24/50/70), Fujian CCTV 1.7/35, Hexanon 1.8/40 & 1.4/57, Schneider-Kreuznach Tele-Xenar 3.8/75, Zuiko 2.8/100, Leica Hektor 4.5/135, Sony SEL 2.8/16 & 18-55 OSS & 55-210 OSS, Sigma EX 2.8/19 & 2.8/30
Canon EOS 5D - Zenitar 2.8/16, Rokkor 2/28, Summicron-R 2.0/50, Nikkor-SC 1.2/55, Nikkor 1.8/85, Tamron 2.5/135, Elmar 4/180, Tamron 8/500,
Tamron 2.8-3.8/35-80, Sigma EX 15-30, Sigma 1.8/24, Canon EF 1.8/50, Tokina AT-X Pro 24-200 (EOS), Sigma 70-300
Canon EOS 300D - Steinheil 2.8/35, Zuiko 1.4/50, Helios-44 2/58, Jupiter-9 2/85, Vivitar S1 2.3/135
Nikon D1 & Fuji S2 Pro - Tamron 2.5/28, MIR 2/35, Jupiter-37 3.5/135, Soligor 3.5/70-220, Tamron 18-200
Nikon D3100 - Nikkor AF-S 18-55VR, AF-S 18-70, AF-S 55-200
Ricoh KR10x - Pentax-M 1.7/50, Rikenon 3.4-4.5/35-70
Nikon F - Nikkor 2.8/24, Nikkor-SC 1.4/50 a.s.a.
Asahi Spotmatic SPII: CZJ Flek 4/20, Tamron 3.5/35-70, Industar 3.5/5cm, Mamiya 1.8/55
EXA Varex - CZJ Biogon 2/58
Leica IIIa syn & Zorki-4 - (LTM lenses)

Leica C2, Minox 35 GL,Yashica Electro 35 GS, Kodak Retina Ia, Agfa Super Silette, Vivitar Ultra Wide & Slim, Adox Golf 66 and some others...
Sigma DP1s, Leica Digilux 2, Lumix LC-5 & FX37, Lumix FZ20, Canon G2, Sony Mavica 300, Fuji 4800Z + 4900Z, Oly C3030, Pentax Optio S, Nikon CP950, Sony V1 & F505 a.s.m.
Old list: http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic.php?t=65 (Not up-to-date, sorry!) | http://lucispictor.weebly.com | http://www.alensaweek.wordpress.com

[ForenSeil]

The new monochrome has visibly higher resolution and visibly better high ISO than the M9-P
.
Resolution looks like large format My NEX-5N looks like sh*t against that.

Watch that in 100% view!
http://us.leica-camera.com/assets/file/download.php?filename=file_6707.JPG
Way better than Silver Efex B/W conversions or

But 8000$ are indeed to high for my taste
This is a camera for professionals
_________________
Cameras in active use: IR/UV modified NEX-5N+EVF, NEX-C3, Pentax Q, Minolta XG9, Moskva 5 6x6 Rangefinder
Lenses in active use:
MF
Samyang 8/2.8 E-Mount, Docter-Optics Olympus 100x 1.25 finite macro lens, Tevidon 16/1.8, Tominon 17/4 (10x Macro), CZJ Tevidon 25/1.4, Novoflex Macro-Noflexar 35/3.5, Minolta MD 50/1.4, Noritsu 50.7/9.5, Samyang 85/1.4, Rodagon 105/5.6, Nikon ED 180/2.8, Novoflex 400/5.6, Celestron 500mm F3.6, Novoflex 600/8
AF:
Sigma 19mm F2.8 E-Mount, Sony SEL50F18

My Blog: http://picturechemistry.own-blog.com/
(German language)

[iangreenhalgh1]

You must have special eyes, the difference in resolution is very hard to see, not surprised it has better higher iso performance as the M9 is not good in that regard and the missing colour filter means more light gets to the sensor.

I still think the difference between a BW shot from this and a conversion are so small they will only be apparent when pixel peeping (meaningless in the real world) or if you print very large, and 18mp isn't enough to get very large anyways.

We're talking a lot of money for very little improvement indeed. I could perhaps forgive the huge price tag more if Leica had actually improved the camera in other ways, an unarticulated 230k screen is ludicrous on a camera that costs this much, you can buy a 200eu Samsung with a 930k fully articulated screen...
_________________
'The question I would really consider (especially if an amateur and on a budget) is whether or not anyone (including yourself, of course) can tell the difference in any situation for which you will use the lens...and if they can, why are they burying their noses in your prints hard enough to tell the difference instead of responding to the prints emotionally and thinking about what they might mean?' - 2F/2F on apug.org

Digital: Sony NEX-3, Samsung NX100, Canon EOS 450d
35mm SLR: Konica FT-1, Konica FC-1, Konica Autoreflex T, Carena SRH760, Exakta RTL1000, Canon EOS 10qd
35mm VF: Olympus Stylus, Konica C35, Konica A4, Konica MG, Konica MT-9, Ricoh FF-9, Ricoh AF-80
35mm RF: Zorki 6, Kiev II, Kiev IV, Contax IIIa, CZJ Werra III,
Medium format: Franka Rolfix, Mess Ikonta 524/16, Voigtlander Bessa with Skopar 3.5/105, Voigtlander Bessa with Voigtar 3.5/105, Kiev 6C, Century Graphic 23, Ensign Selfix 820, Kershaw 450
MF lenses: Schneider Angulon 6.5/68, Componon-S 5.6/100, C-Claron 4.5/135, Xenar 3.5/105, Mamiya C 2.8/45, Mamiya 2.8/80, CZJ Flektogon 4/50, Biometar 2.8/80, Zodiac 3.5/30, Tominon 4.5/135, Pullin Pulnar 2.8/100
Large Format: Ernemann HEAG Series VII version II 9x12 with Kodak Anastigmat 6.3/170
Konica Hexanons 4/21, 2.8/24, 3.5/28, 2.8/35, 1.8/40, 1.4/50, 1.7/50, 1.8/50, 3.2/135, 3.5/135, 3.5/200, 4.5/300, 3.5-4.5/35-70, 4-4.6/28-135, 3.5/35-70, UC 3.5/45-100, 4/70-150, 4/65-135, UC 4/80-200. Hexars 3.5/28, 3.5/135, Konishiroku 2.8/35
Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.8/35, Skoparex 3.4/35, Tessar 2.8/50, Sonnar 1.5/50, Biotar 2/58, Pancolar 1.8/50, Cardinar 4/100, Zeiss-Opton Biogon 2.8/35
Meyer/Pentacons 2.8/28, Primagon 4.5/35, Trioplan 2.9/50, 1.8/50, 2.4/50, Primotar 3.5/50, Primotar 3.5/135
Topcon RE Auto Topcors 1.8/58, 3.5/135, 5.6/200
Russians: OKC1-18-1 2.8/18, OKC1-28-1 2.8/28, Jupiter-12 2.8/35, Jupiter-8 2/50, Industar-50 3.5/50, Industar-26M 2.8/50, Industar-22 3.5/50, Zenitar M2S 2/50, Helios-44-2, Jupiter-9 2/85, Jupiter-11 4/135, Tair-3C 4.5/300
Tokina 3.5/17, Nikon Auto Nikkor-N 2.8/24, Nikon Micro-Nikkor-P 3.5/55, Ross Xpress 3.5/4in, Ross Xpress 4/5in, Ross Xpress 4.5/8.5in, Wollensak APO-Raptar 10/541

[Attila]

[Orio]

[Orio]

Whole image:




100% crops:










The M9 monochrome will have to visibly (i.e. with simple eye vision and no measuring instrument) beat this level of detail
(using my same lens Biogon 2/35) to support the claim that it has "visibly better resolution" than the M9.
_________________
Orio, Administrator
T*
Support the Ornano film chemicals company and help them survive!
http://forum.mflenses.com/ornano-chemical-products-t55525.html

[trifox]

I would leave discussion regarding 8K USD price for someone else

STEVHUFF's examples? I think they're pretty cool, I must admit.

...gradation curves, chemicals, papers, developers bla bla ...
too much stuff to use, too much time to spent plus impact on environment.

Looking at the pictures taken with Leica Monochrom - the gradation is quite cool.

It definitely looks different from a common digital and following PP.

One really interesting comment on Steve Huff's site is that a user of M9 is saying he wouldn't buy it because of this:
...it won’t make me a better photographer and I doubt anyone would ever be able to tell the difference at normal print sizes between the two.

We live in a digital era and there's no time for developing film, right?

So, the question is - are we really missing our lovely grain on pictures?

I think that film still remains 'better' regarding grain.

but from a pre-press operator's (or photshop retoucher) point of view:
grain is not a benefit - you would hate a grain on your pictures when editing them in photoshop.

i.e. - grain was extremely a bad issue in printing industry until digital came over here
I do remember when we discussed all these issues with photographers regarding grain;
they hated (photographers) a grain on pics, we hated (retouchers) a grain on scans
who liked a grain on pictures? - to be honest, no one.

well - one of the first digital pictures were totally funny and unusable


but nowadays - we trying to re-create and imitate a grain with digital cameras - oh no!
Because some love it? Retro?
Rich people want to see nice GRAINY PICS in their wedding albums trying to explain their friends:
'Look, we've got pics taken with Leica Mono. They're so nice, aren't they?'
...and people around want to have the same pics in their albums
Is this is a purpose?

We are moving backwards ..

People hated grain even ISO 400 looked pretty nasty sometimes..

Now? ISO400 is nothing to certain digital cameras

If I were about to create some sort of grain on my pictures - I would use a film camera and not a digital sensor.

Grain on film is natural and it can be very nasty.

tf
_________________
Flickr.com

[Orio]

I see no problem in liking grain, but to people who do, I always say "shoot film" instead of adding fake grain in Exposure or Silver FX Pro.
No problem with any position in general, but it's important from all sides not to underestimate and not to overestimate either.
If I had 8000 Eur I would be very happy to buy a M Monochrome, but I would not feel urge to justify the expense by making exaggerated positive reports.
I would buy it just because I like it and it would not feel diminishing to me if I wasn't able to demonstrate that it resolves visibly more than a normal M9, unless it wasn't true.
On the other side, I don't have the money for an M Monochrome but this would not push me to say that it's wasted money and grossly overpriced etc. etc.
The product is there, people who have the money can buy it, people who don't can buy something lesser, we live in a competitors' market so if the M Monochrome (or M9 for that matter)
is largely overpriced as someone says, then it would be easy for the competitor manufacturers to produce the same camera at a largely inferior price.
If they don't, then maybe it's a reason for the critical ones to start thinking that maybe it isn't as easy as it seems, and that the camera is not really overpriced after all.
In the end, just enjoy the tools that you have, I have an M9 and am super happy of it, but this does not prevent me from enjoying a lot doing and printing my own B&W film with equipment
that is largely inferior in price and quality to the M9. This shows that enjoying photography is not reserved to those who can buy an M9 or a M Monochrome.
End of the story, for me.
_________________
Orio, Administrator
T*
Support the Ornano film chemicals company and help them survive!
http://forum.mflenses.com/ornano-chemical-products-t55525.html

[iangreenhalgh1]

On the higher resolution thing, don't forget it's the same sensor, they just removed the colour filter, that one small change means that the resolution cannot be more than a small fraction better, to be much better resolution it would have to have a better sensor. The improvement is merely that gained from not having a filter. So why is it more expensive than an M-9? I can't see any reason for it to be more expensive, surely it should be the same price as it is the same camera after all, just got a couple of minor tweaks.
_________________
'The question I would really consider (especially if an amateur and on a budget) is whether or not anyone (including yourself, of course) can tell the difference in any situation for which you will use the lens...and if they can, why are they burying their noses in your prints hard enough to tell the difference instead of responding to the prints emotionally and thinking about what they might mean?' - 2F/2F on apug.org

Digital: Sony NEX-3, Samsung NX100, Canon EOS 450d
35mm SLR: Konica FT-1, Konica FC-1, Konica Autoreflex T, Carena SRH760, Exakta RTL1000, Canon EOS 10qd
35mm VF: Olympus Stylus, Konica C35, Konica A4, Konica MG, Konica MT-9, Ricoh FF-9, Ricoh AF-80
35mm RF: Zorki 6, Kiev II, Kiev IV, Contax IIIa, CZJ Werra III,
Medium format: Franka Rolfix, Mess Ikonta 524/16, Voigtlander Bessa with Skopar 3.5/105, Voigtlander Bessa with Voigtar 3.5/105, Kiev 6C, Century Graphic 23, Ensign Selfix 820, Kershaw 450
MF lenses: Schneider Angulon 6.5/68, Componon-S 5.6/100, C-Claron 4.5/135, Xenar 3.5/105, Mamiya C 2.8/45, Mamiya 2.8/80, CZJ Flektogon 4/50, Biometar 2.8/80, Zodiac 3.5/30, Tominon 4.5/135, Pullin Pulnar 2.8/100
Large Format: Ernemann HEAG Series VII version II 9x12 with Kodak Anastigmat 6.3/170
Konica Hexanons 4/21, 2.8/24, 3.5/28, 2.8/35, 1.8/40, 1.4/50, 1.7/50, 1.8/50, 3.2/135, 3.5/135, 3.5/200, 4.5/300, 3.5-4.5/35-70, 4-4.6/28-135, 3.5/35-70, UC 3.5/45-100, 4/70-150, 4/65-135, UC 4/80-200. Hexars 3.5/28, 3.5/135, Konishiroku 2.8/35
Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.8/35, Skoparex 3.4/35, Tessar 2.8/50, Sonnar 1.5/50, Biotar 2/58, Pancolar 1.8/50, Cardinar 4/100, Zeiss-Opton Biogon 2.8/35
Meyer/Pentacons 2.8/28, Primagon 4.5/35, Trioplan 2.9/50, 1.8/50, 2.4/50, Primotar 3.5/50, Primotar 3.5/135
Topcon RE Auto Topcors 1.8/58, 3.5/135, 5.6/200
Russians: OKC1-18-1 2.8/18, OKC1-28-1 2.8/28, Jupiter-12 2.8/35, Jupiter-8 2/50, Industar-50 3.5/50, Industar-26M 2.8/50, Industar-22 3.5/50, Zenitar M2S 2/50, Helios-44-2, Jupiter-9 2/85, Jupiter-11 4/135, Tair-3C 4.5/300
Tokina 3.5/17, Nikon Auto Nikkor-N 2.8/24, Nikon Micro-Nikkor-P 3.5/55, Ross Xpress 3.5/4in, Ross Xpress 4/5in, Ross Xpress 4.5/8.5in, Wollensak APO-Raptar 10/541

[sichko]

[Hari]

http://youtu.be/WNzYdWqjWh0

- video from the Leica forum guys
_________________
Leica M9 -> Super-Wide Heliar 15/f4.5 ASPH. + Leica Summilux M 35/f1.4 ASPH. + Leica Noctilux 50/f1 + Voigtlander Nokton M 50/f1.1 ASPH. + Canon 50/f1.2 LTM + Leica Summilux 50/1.4 ASPH. + Leica Summarit M 50/f1.5 + Zeiss ZM Sonnar 50/f1.5 + Leica Summitar 50/f2 + Leica Summar 50/f2 + Leica Elmar M 50/f2.8 E39 + Leica Summilux 75/f1.4 + Leica APO Summicron M 75/f2 ASPH. + Voigtlander Heliar 75/f2.5 + Leica Summarex 85/f1.5 + Leica APO Summicron M 90/f2 ASPH. + Leica Summicron M 90/f2 E55 + Leica Elmarit M 90/f2.8 E46 Black Made in Germany + Leica Elmarit M 90/f2.8 E46 Chrome Made in Germany + Leica Apo Telyt M 135/f3.4

Canon 5D / Canon 350D / Contax AX -> C/Y Zeiss 28/2.8 MMJ + C/Y Zeiss 35/1.4 MMJ + C/Y Zeiss 50/1.4 MMJ + C/Y Zeiss 50/1.7 MMJ + C/Y Zeiss 85/1.4 MMJ + C/Y Zeiss 135/2.8 MMJ + C/Y Zeiss 80-200/4 MMJ + Leica-R 60/2.8 E55 + Leica 80/1.4 E67 + Leica-R 180/4 + EF-L 24/1.4 + EF 50 1.8 II

The full list here:
http://forum.mflenses.com/list-your-photo-equipment-here-t4080,start,180.html

Results here:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dementedjesus/

[Hari]

some random b&w shots from the m9

all shot in raw color, pp to b&w using lightroom

good or bad, to my eyes my m9 delivers the results that make me happy -> (less than 1-2 minutes of post processing done on the images)

edit: i replaced some images which may have been too dark on your monitors


m9 + leica summitar 50 f2 (1939-1953)







m9 + heliar 75 f2.5


















m9 + summilux 75 ->
















what's life without some humor -> (seen in the toilet of the bar i was in)


_________________
Leica M9 -> Super-Wide Heliar 15/f4.5 ASPH. + Leica Summilux M 35/f1.4 ASPH. + Leica Noctilux 50/f1 + Voigtlander Nokton M 50/f1.1 ASPH. + Canon 50/f1.2 LTM + Leica Summilux 50/1.4 ASPH. + Leica Summarit M 50/f1.5 + Zeiss ZM Sonnar 50/f1.5 + Leica Summitar 50/f2 + Leica Summar 50/f2 + Leica Elmar M 50/f2.8 E39 + Leica Summilux 75/f1.4 + Leica APO Summicron M 75/f2 ASPH. + Voigtlander Heliar 75/f2.5 + Leica Summarex 85/f1.5 + Leica APO Summicron M 90/f2 ASPH. + Leica Summicron M 90/f2 E55 + Leica Elmarit M 90/f2.8 E46 Black Made in Germany + Leica Elmarit M 90/f2.8 E46 Chrome Made in Germany + Leica Apo Telyt M 135/f3.4

Canon 5D / Canon 350D / Contax AX -> C/Y Zeiss 28/2.8 MMJ + C/Y Zeiss 35/1.4 MMJ + C/Y Zeiss 50/1.4 MMJ + C/Y Zeiss 50/1.7 MMJ + C/Y Zeiss 85/1.4 MMJ + C/Y Zeiss 135/2.8 MMJ + C/Y Zeiss 80-200/4 MMJ + Leica-R 60/2.8 E55 + Leica 80/1.4 E67 + Leica-R 180/4 + EF-L 24/1.4 + EF 50 1.8 II

The full list here:
http://forum.mflenses.com/list-your-photo-equipment-here-t4080,start,180.html

Results here:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dementedjesus/

[Orio]

Your pictures look extremely dark on my monitor - some near the point of pure black.
_________________
Orio, Administrator
T*
Support the Ornano film chemicals company and help them survive!
http://forum.mflenses.com/ornano-chemical-products-t55525.html

[Hari]

[iangreenhalgh1]

They are dark but only the last three look too dark to me.
_________________
'The question I would really consider (especially if an amateur and on a budget) is whether or not anyone (including yourself, of course) can tell the difference in any situation for which you will use the lens...and if they can, why are they burying their noses in your prints hard enough to tell the difference instead of responding to the prints emotionally and thinking about what they might mean?' - 2F/2F on apug.org

Digital: Sony NEX-3, Samsung NX100, Canon EOS 450d
35mm SLR: Konica FT-1, Konica FC-1, Konica Autoreflex T, Carena SRH760, Exakta RTL1000, Canon EOS 10qd
35mm VF: Olympus Stylus, Konica C35, Konica A4, Konica MG, Konica MT-9, Ricoh FF-9, Ricoh AF-80
35mm RF: Zorki 6, Kiev II, Kiev IV, Contax IIIa, CZJ Werra III,
Medium format: Franka Rolfix, Mess Ikonta 524/16, Voigtlander Bessa with Skopar 3.5/105, Voigtlander Bessa with Voigtar 3.5/105, Kiev 6C, Century Graphic 23, Ensign Selfix 820, Kershaw 450
MF lenses: Schneider Angulon 6.5/68, Componon-S 5.6/100, C-Claron 4.5/135, Xenar 3.5/105, Mamiya C 2.8/45, Mamiya 2.8/80, CZJ Flektogon 4/50, Biometar 2.8/80, Zodiac 3.5/30, Tominon 4.5/135, Pullin Pulnar 2.8/100
Large Format: Ernemann HEAG Series VII version II 9x12 with Kodak Anastigmat 6.3/170
Konica Hexanons 4/21, 2.8/24, 3.5/28, 2.8/35, 1.8/40, 1.4/50, 1.7/50, 1.8/50, 3.2/135, 3.5/135, 3.5/200, 4.5/300, 3.5-4.5/35-70, 4-4.6/28-135, 3.5/35-70, UC 3.5/45-100, 4/70-150, 4/65-135, UC 4/80-200. Hexars 3.5/28, 3.5/135, Konishiroku 2.8/35
Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.8/35, Skoparex 3.4/35, Tessar 2.8/50, Sonnar 1.5/50, Biotar 2/58, Pancolar 1.8/50, Cardinar 4/100, Zeiss-Opton Biogon 2.8/35
Meyer/Pentacons 2.8/28, Primagon 4.5/35, Trioplan 2.9/50, 1.8/50, 2.4/50, Primotar 3.5/50, Primotar 3.5/135
Topcon RE Auto Topcors 1.8/58, 3.5/135, 5.6/200
Russians: OKC1-18-1 2.8/18, OKC1-28-1 2.8/28, Jupiter-12 2.8/35, Jupiter-8 2/50, Industar-50 3.5/50, Industar-26M 2.8/50, Industar-22 3.5/50, Zenitar M2S 2/50, Helios-44-2, Jupiter-9 2/85, Jupiter-11 4/135, Tair-3C 4.5/300
Tokina 3.5/17, Nikon Auto Nikkor-N 2.8/24, Nikon Micro-Nikkor-P 3.5/55, Ross Xpress 3.5/4in, Ross Xpress 4/5in, Ross Xpress 4.5/8.5in, Wollensak APO-Raptar 10/541