Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
p.1259 #1Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
relms wrote:
The issue is I find the colors more to my liking from the S-006 then I do from the S-007. And it does take some work to get the images from the S-007 to be what I want. So if you're smitten over the colors you get from your S2.. I'd just keep it until it dies. And at that point you'll have no choice but to buy an S-007 or S-008, but at least you'll get one at a discount by that point
Also to anyone considering the SL. It along with the A7II are almost identical color wise.. So unless you love the idea of the 24-90 zoom.. I'd wait until more native SL lenses come out before buying the camera body.Adam:
Thank you for your comments. You are absolutely correct regarding the files produced by the two respective cameras. I had the 007 for a test drive over the weekend, and I took it and the S2 out for some comparison same-scene shots yesterday. What I found is that for my primary use of a MF camera (landscapes) the higher ISO capability and speed of the 007 is of little consequence. The extra stop or two of dynamic range is a nice improvement over the S2, but certainly not worth the cost to upgrade.
But here is the thing that came as...Show more →
For me as well, aside from DR/high iso performance, the S007's improvements over the S2 are mostly matters of convenience. While much better the 007's AF still cannot be trusted for fast-paced reactive or lowlight shooting.
If I were to do it all over again I'd pick the S006. At only $1.5k or so above the S2, it seems the best value of the bunch, (GPS and level being rather useful for landscapes). For the price of a new 007 one could get two used 006 bodies with change.
Could you guys elaborate on how the 007 files need more adjustments? In my experience the S2 files look great in natural light but in mixed or artificial lighting they become unpredictable and require significant tweaking, whereas the 007 seems consistently to get colors just right.
adamdewilde wrote
relms - The S-007 feels more like a Canon or Nikon DSLR. Think 5D3 (body speed) w/85L II attached (focusing speed). That's the rough speed and feel you'd get.The issue is I find the colors more to my liking from the S-006 then I do from the S-007. And it does take some work to get the images from the S-007 to be what I want. So if you're smitten over the colors you get from your S2.. I'd just keep it until it dies. And at that point you'll have no choice but to buy an S-007 or S-008, but at least you'll get one at a discount by that point
Also to anyone considering the SL. It along with the A7II are almost identical color wise.. So unless you love the idea of the 24-90 zoom.. I'd wait until more native SL lenses come out before buying the camera body.
Thank you for your comments. You are absolutely correct regarding the files produced by the two respective cameras. I had the 007 for a test drive over the weekend, and I took it and the S2 out for some comparison same-scene shots yesterday. What I found is that for my primary use of a MF camera (landscapes) the higher ISO capability and speed of the 007 is of little consequence. The extra stop or two of dynamic range is a nice improvement over the S2, but certainly not worth the cost to upgrade.
But here is the thing that came as...Show more →
For me as well, aside from DR/high iso performance, the S007's improvements over the S2 are mostly matters of convenience. While much better the 007's AF still cannot be trusted for fast-paced reactive or lowlight shooting.
If I were to do it all over again I'd pick the S006. At only $1.5k or so above the S2, it seems the best value of the bunch, (GPS and level being rather useful for landscapes). For the price of a new 007 one could get two used 006 bodies with change.
Could you guys elaborate on how the 007 files need more adjustments? In my experience the S2 files look great in natural light but in mixed or artificial lighting they become unpredictable and require significant tweaking, whereas the 007 seems consistently to get colors just right.
Jan 04, 2016 at 09:39 AM
p.1259 #2Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
Winter road, S-006 and 70 Summarit
Jan 04, 2016 at 03:15 PM
p.1259 #3Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
Werner,
Love the Fly High shot! great depth and mood to the image.
Regards,
Tobin
Love the Fly High shot! great depth and mood to the image.
Regards,
Tobin
Jan 04, 2016 at 08:16 PM
p.1259 #4Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
Nicoi,
Lovely PP with the Q files. Very film like tones, pleasing.
Regards, Tobin
Lovely PP with the Q files. Very film like tones, pleasing.
Regards, Tobin
Jan 04, 2016 at 08:21 PM
p.1259 #5Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
Gary!
Beautiful work with the barn shots! -28 is very hardcore! Only around -2 in Nova Scotia. Cold is on its way here thou.
Regards,
Tobin
Beautiful work with the barn shots! -28 is very hardcore! Only around -2 in Nova Scotia. Cold is on its way here thou.
Regards,
Tobin
Jan 04, 2016 at 08:23 PM
p.1259 #6Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
Could you guys elaborate on how the 007 files need more adjustments? In my experience the S2 files look great in natural light but in mixed or artificial lighting they become unpredictable and require significant tweaking, whereas the 007 seems consistently to get colors just right.
Mind you, I have not had a lot of experience with the S007, having used it only for a test drive over the weekend, but to my eyes, the files from the S2 have more depth straight out of the camera, than those from the S007. However, the 007 supposedly has a 2-3 stop higher dynamic range, and that could cause the RAW files to look duller out of camera, much the same as the files from the M240.
I do know, as Adam pointed out, that the 007 files are extremely malleable, and that with proper adjustments to contrast, highlights and shadows they can match, or perhaps exceed, the look of the S2 files. David Farkas pointed out in his review of the 007 that he exposes for the highlights, knowing that there is detail in the dark, near-black shadows, that he can pull from those files in post processing.
I took both the S2 and 007 with me to Henderson Beach State Park yesterday, shooting each camera in turn, and later, when I reviewed them in Lightroom, I found that the higher percentage of keepers came from the S2. This is far from scientific. If I had more time shooting with the 007, and if I discovered better techniques for processing those files, then I might reach a different conclusion.
The other consideration is that subconsciously I could be that I will the S2 files to look better in order to suppress the urge to upgrade to the 007.
Here is a shot from yesterday using the 007 and 70 Summarit, adjusted in Lightroom, +64 shadows, +71 whites, -71 Blacks, +23 Clarity, Custom Tone Curve (basic S-curve). Not bad, but it took a lot of tweaking to get there.
Jan 04, 2016 at 08:26 PM
p.1259 #7Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
Alpha_Geist wrote:
Super image Abram! Love the gnarled detail and presence.
Thanks Adam!
I was almost, kind of considering selling my 50 Summicron for a Summilux but that bridge shot of yours convinced me not to.
Super image Abram! Love the gnarled detail and presence.
Thanks Adam!
I was almost, kind of considering selling my 50 Summicron for a Summilux but that bridge shot of yours convinced me not to.
Jan 04, 2016 at 08:38 PM
p.1259 #8Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
Here's my first image of the new year. Waited for sunrise at the Golden Gate Bridge. Shot again with my M240 and 35 Summicron ASPH.
Sunrise at GGB. by Abram Goglanian, on Flickr
Sunrise at GGB. by Abram Goglanian, on FlickrJan 04, 2016 at 08:41 PM
p.1259 #9Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
Such a quick pace here. I might have to post a photo every day just to keep up with the flow. Maybe everyone else sees it that way, too, which just makes it harder to keep up. :-)
M9, 35 FLE. This lens has lots of convenient quirks.
Good morning, Portland. (25)
Joakim, those red barn shots have a very nice level of focus/defocus. I'd like to train my eye to be able to get just the right level of softness without blurring things out into smear and bubble.
Robert & Joakim, your S sunrise/set shots both have such delicate pastels without any apparent sacrifice with strong hue and brightness contrasts. Love it. I think it says something about that sensor that you both post images with very similar, very delicate attributes, but it also says something about your ability to see and capture the same.
Robert, that last shot with the varying textures of sand, water, and cloud, not to mention the colors and tones ... part of me wants to print it, hang it, and stare at it; another part of me wants to study the histogram and spot colors and learn about high-key shots, something I've never practiced.
Dylan, the last one with the prominent triangle grabs me. Perhaps its the geometry of the image? Circles, squares, triangles. Regardless, the long horizontal shadow in the middle of the frame creates a barrier, but there's just enough light there to allow my eyes to traverse between tension areas. Nice.
Adam, if the SL is close to the A7II in color, then I'm even more glad that I went with the M9. One of the deciding factors for me was comparing the M9 & MM versus the M240 & M246, where the MM appears to benefit much more from a lack of the Bayer filter, implying that the M9's filter is much stronger, which would theoretically result in better color ingredients. It looks like Leica has moved toward higher sensitivity at a sacrifice of filter density. I'm coming to the tentative conclusion that digital cameras were better back when they were designed by photographers and engineers rather than marketing departments. All I know is that I ended up happy ... still need to learn how to use it properly, but I don't think the tool itself is restricting my results in any manner ... so long as I can keep buying batteries for this thing.
Onward!
Cheers,
Jon
M9, 35 FLE. This lens has lots of convenient quirks.
Good morning, Portland. (25)
Joakim, those red barn shots have a very nice level of focus/defocus. I'd like to train my eye to be able to get just the right level of softness without blurring things out into smear and bubble.
Robert & Joakim, your S sunrise/set shots both have such delicate pastels without any apparent sacrifice with strong hue and brightness contrasts. Love it. I think it says something about that sensor that you both post images with very similar, very delicate attributes, but it also says something about your ability to see and capture the same.
Robert, that last shot with the varying textures of sand, water, and cloud, not to mention the colors and tones ... part of me wants to print it, hang it, and stare at it; another part of me wants to study the histogram and spot colors and learn about high-key shots, something I've never practiced.
Dylan, the last one with the prominent triangle grabs me. Perhaps its the geometry of the image? Circles, squares, triangles. Regardless, the long horizontal shadow in the middle of the frame creates a barrier, but there's just enough light there to allow my eyes to traverse between tension areas. Nice.
Adam, if the SL is close to the A7II in color, then I'm even more glad that I went with the M9. One of the deciding factors for me was comparing the M9 & MM versus the M240 & M246, where the MM appears to benefit much more from a lack of the Bayer filter, implying that the M9's filter is much stronger, which would theoretically result in better color ingredients. It looks like Leica has moved toward higher sensitivity at a sacrifice of filter density. I'm coming to the tentative conclusion that digital cameras were better back when they were designed by photographers and engineers rather than marketing departments. All I know is that I ended up happy ... still need to learn how to use it properly, but I don't think the tool itself is restricting my results in any manner ... so long as I can keep buying batteries for this thing.
Onward!
Cheers,
Jon
Jan 04, 2016 at 09:55 PM
p.1259 #10Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
Dancing In The Light And Dark by Werner Utsch, on Flickr
Thank you Tobin !
Thank's Jon for your words on the last page. Same effect here....
Jan 05, 2016 at 02:22 AM
|
p.1259 #11Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
Well other then colors being subjective. The problem is that all sensors can be made similar (note I said similar). So it's hard to talk about one camera being better then another.
I suppose when someone says it's easier to get the colors you like straight out of camera. They mean a few things. One the DR is at a sweet spot for said individuals taste. Which generally translates to the image isn't to contrasty, but also isn't to flat. The second would be that the colors (for me skin tones) start off close or exactly like they are. So really all I need to do is adjust exposure slightly, and correct any fumbles with the WB and I'm usually set (w/the S-006 that is).
Now this is an oversimplification and there are tons of other factors involved. But I think that's kinda what I mean when I say out of camera raw files are closer to what I like.
I could of course get more technical about how shifting one color affects the other colors. But again, it's all really subjective at the end of the day. Plus lenses also play a large part The S-lenses seem more similar in their colors with regards to each other (and they're almost color neutral). Much better then the wild M lenses (though that is what gives M lenses part of their character and charm).
Hope this makes sense.
Jon, as for the M9, it's a great camera. I have issues with the actual camera itself, not the IQ. You made a good choice with the M9 and 35FLE. And yes lots of batteries needed!
The SL will have it's day. I'm sure the native SL lenses will redeem the camera.. Until then, I always have the M and S systems!
I suppose when someone says it's easier to get the colors you like straight out of camera. They mean a few things. One the DR is at a sweet spot for said individuals taste. Which generally translates to the image isn't to contrasty, but also isn't to flat. The second would be that the colors (for me skin tones) start off close or exactly like they are. So really all I need to do is adjust exposure slightly, and correct any fumbles with the WB and I'm usually set (w/the S-006 that is).
Now this is an oversimplification and there are tons of other factors involved. But I think that's kinda what I mean when I say out of camera raw files are closer to what I like.
I could of course get more technical about how shifting one color affects the other colors. But again, it's all really subjective at the end of the day. Plus lenses also play a large part
The S-lenses seem more similar in their colors with regards to each other (and they're almost color neutral). Much better then the wild M lenses (though that is what gives M lenses part of their character and charm). Hope this makes sense.
Jon, as for the M9, it's a great camera. I have issues with the actual camera itself, not the IQ. You made a good choice with the M9 and 35FLE. And yes lots of batteries needed!
The SL will have it's day. I'm sure the native SL lenses will redeem the camera.. Until then, I always have the M and S systems!
Jan 05, 2016 at 01:16 PM
p.1259 #12Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
Starting to think about color--
Daily dose of color theory.
Inside, the additions. (The tag on the left reads "no further loads to be added to service without consulting PGE first". I have no idea what print size would be required to make that legible ... something else to experiment with.)
Even hurdles stand aside.
Werner, I wouldn't have expected visible depth of field at normal shooting distance with a 15/4.5, but that shot does it wonderfully.
Adam, I'm currently getting to the point in this thread, a few years back, where you've got an M 240 and find the focusing much more accurate. I'm simply stunned by how easy it is for me to quickly find focus with my 35/1.4 on the M9, and if the 240 is that much better ... yeah, I'd better not put my fingers on one. Still, in a few months or a year I'll probably want to have this camera's sensor replaced (currently minor and nowhere nearly as bad as it was with your M9), and at that point I'll have to decide whether to move to the 240 platform or just get another M9/MM while this thing's in the shop.
Cheers,
Jon
Daily dose of color theory.
Inside, the additions. (The tag on the left reads "no further loads to be added to service without consulting PGE first". I have no idea what print size would be required to make that legible ... something else to experiment with.)
Even hurdles stand aside.
Werner, I wouldn't have expected visible depth of field at normal shooting distance with a 15/4.5, but that shot does it wonderfully.
Adam, I'm currently getting to the point in this thread, a few years back, where you've got an M 240 and find the focusing much more accurate. I'm simply stunned by how easy it is for me to quickly find focus with my 35/1.4 on the M9, and if the 240 is that much better ... yeah, I'd better not put my fingers on one. Still, in a few months or a year I'll probably want to have this camera's sensor replaced (currently minor and nowhere nearly as bad as it was with your M9), and at that point I'll have to decide whether to move to the 240 platform or just get another M9/MM while this thing's in the shop.
Cheers,
Jon
Jan 05, 2016 at 09:21 PM
p.1259 #13Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
A random study of some stumbled-upon skylights.
I love using the rangefinder for reflections, makes it all so easy to choose where to focus.
I don't enjoy the number of shots I have with a bit of fence in foreground, or a railing through someone's face etc.. still haven't found a way to mentally adjust for parallax beyond chimping it!
If I am shooting through a fence/railings, I have to physically put the lens through a gap and work backwards from there. Definitely a price worth paying, just annoying sometimes. Maybe there is some better method I've failed to figure out?
I love using the rangefinder for reflections, makes it all so easy to choose where to focus.
I don't enjoy the number of shots I have with a bit of fence in foreground, or a railing through someone's face etc.. still haven't found a way to mentally adjust for parallax beyond chimping it!
If I am shooting through a fence/railings, I have to physically put the lens through a gap and work backwards from there. Definitely a price worth paying, just annoying sometimes. Maybe there is some better method I've failed to figure out?
Jan 05, 2016 at 10:35 PM
p.1259 #14Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
JonPB wrote:
Adam, I'm currently getting to the point in this thread, a few years back, where you've got an M 240 and find the focusing much more accurate. I'm simply stunned by how easy it is for me to quickly find focus with my 35/1.4 on the M9, and if the 240 is that much better ... yeah, I'd better not put my fingers on one. Still, in a few months or a year I'll probably want to have this camera's sensor replaced (currently minor and nowhere nearly as bad as it was with your M9), and at that point I'll...Show more →
Like all things.. You get use to doing something a certain way. A specific look and way of processing. But that IDEAL will change if you buy the M240 and spend time with it. Then, you'll like it, and won't want to go back
Weird that I don't feel that way about the S-007. I just can't seem to let go of the S-006. Perhaps it's the cost to performance ratio.. I expect so much out of the S-007, but I like so much about the S-006 that the math just doesn't add up.
And the SL is what it is.. I think it offers a lot, but it also costs a lot. And it's make it or break it factor IMHO is the native lenses.. And right now there is only one. So we're leaning towards break it.. IF the 50Lux-L comes out, and it's amazing... It'll really make it the system to own. Or at least make it worth the cost IMO.
Adam, I'm currently getting to the point in this thread, a few years back, where you've got an M 240 and find the focusing much more accurate. I'm simply stunned by how easy it is for me to quickly find focus with my 35/1.4 on the M9, and if the 240 is that much better ... yeah, I'd better not put my fingers on one. Still, in a few months or a year I'll probably want to have this camera's sensor replaced (currently minor and nowhere nearly as bad as it was with your M9), and at that point I'll...Show more →
Like all things.. You get use to doing something a certain way. A specific look and way of processing. But that IDEAL will change if you buy the M240 and spend time with it. Then, you'll like it, and won't want to go back
Weird that I don't feel that way about the S-007. I just can't seem to let go of the S-006. Perhaps it's the cost to performance ratio.. I expect so much out of the S-007, but I like so much about the S-006 that the math just doesn't add up.
And the SL is what it is.. I think it offers a lot, but it also costs a lot. And it's make it or break it factor IMHO is the native lenses.. And right now there is only one. So we're leaning towards break it.. IF the 50Lux-L comes out, and it's amazing... It'll really make it the system to own. Or at least make it worth the cost IMO.
Jan 05, 2016 at 11:59 PM
p.1259 #15Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
JonPB wrote:
Starting to think about color--
https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1462/23575647543_5952e723c7_c.jpg
Daily dose of color theory.
https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1631/24119864721_7f56ae062d_c.jpg
Inside, the additions. (The tag on the left reads "no further loads to be added to service without consulting PGE first". I have no idea what print size would be required to make that legible ... something else to experiment with.)
https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1648/24094401732_613f5c0f99_c.jpg
Even hurdles stand aside.
Werner, I wouldn't have expected visible depth of field at normal shooting distance with a 15/4.5, but that shot does it wonderfully.
Adam, I'm currently getting to the point in this thread, a few years back, where you've got an M 240 and find the focusing much more accurate. I'm...Show more →
Sweet Steve Prefontaine street mural Jon! He was an inspiration during my high school track & field and cross country adventures.
Starting to think about color--
https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1462/23575647543_5952e723c7_c.jpg
Daily dose of color theory.
https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1631/24119864721_7f56ae062d_c.jpg
Inside, the additions. (The tag on the left reads "no further loads to be added to service without consulting PGE first". I have no idea what print size would be required to make that legible ... something else to experiment with.)
https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1648/24094401732_613f5c0f99_c.jpg
Even hurdles stand aside.
Werner, I wouldn't have expected visible depth of field at normal shooting distance with a 15/4.5, but that shot does it wonderfully.
Adam, I'm currently getting to the point in this thread, a few years back, where you've got an M 240 and find the focusing much more accurate. I'm...Show more →
Sweet Steve Prefontaine street mural Jon! He was an inspiration during my high school track & field and cross country adventures.
Jan 06, 2016 at 11:46 AM
p.1259 #17Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
Early morning derelict pier..... Q (Type 116)
Rusty Nail by James Burden, on Flickr
Rusty Nail by James Burden, on Flickr
Jan 06, 2016 at 06:55 PM
p.1259 #18Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
Love the soldier shot Mitch, very cool/sinister in equal measure.
Some Bondi skateboarders, M7/50 Lux pre ASPH/Portra 160/CPL
Some Bondi skateboarders, M7/50 Lux pre ASPH/Portra 160/CPL
Jan 06, 2016 at 08:00 PM
p.1259 #19Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
Not only didn't we get a white Christmas but we had 80 degrees and sunny. Instead of sitting inside by a fire it was sit out on the patio in shorts.....
Take with the Q
Take with the Q
Jan 06, 2016 at 08:14 PM
p.1259 #20Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
MP & 50 Summicron
Sacramento Nights by Alpha Geist, on Flickr
MP & 75 Summicron
裕司 (Yuji) by Alpha Geist, on Flickr
Sacramento Nights by Alpha Geist, on Flickr
MP & 75 Summicron
裕司 (Yuji) by Alpha Geist, on Flickr
Jan 06, 2016 at 11:29 PM