Thanks Luka! I think what you said about shadow latitude of the X1 is pretty much true of the M8 too. I like that landscape but I think it would be a good candidate for HDR because I'd like to see the sky the exposure level of the original.
The problem is not so much exposure - I can add an ND grad filter like this:
While I do have a lot of headroom as far as exposure goes, the tonality isn't all that good (i.e. actual usable dynamic range). The color rendering isn't very nuanced which puts limits on what global operations you can do.
Compare it to this shot, with my 5DII + 21 Distagon:
This one has had no fill light added and the actual usable dynamic range is much higher and the colors are much more nuanced.
By the way, I've equalized the white balance on both shots above (manual entry of values) yet the overall tones are quite different.
Yeah, I was thinking you could add a grad filter. And I also tend to like the color rendition of sunsets from the 5D2 better. The M8 seems to go toward a much stronger yellow tone than is actually there. On most other subjects, I like the M8 color better although the WB is sometimes right on and sometimes way off.
I would agree that your 5D2 shot is more nuanced but the X1 shot is more dramatic. I think the sky saturation in the last X1 version is quite a bit higher than the original and it's even a little too much for me and I usually like them that way. I'm sure you could spend a good bit of time playing with it. I know I've sometimes spent more time on sunset shots than on most other subjects. Your first version comes a lot closer to the 5D2 version.
Great set of shots Rod. Really love the first set
Nice shots Luka! There are so many choices with the 50's. Seriously web presentation does not do any of the lenses any justice. You must try them out yourself, and see what fits your style.
I went out to practise a bit tonight... I could have used a better location.. but this will give me a chance to start working on cloning things out.. vignette may be a bit heavy too, lol.. anyway, a practice shot from tonight.
Rod, Wow! I can appreciate those. Long lenses can be tough. I had a 90 and those can take some skill to pull those kind of shots off.
Ok guys, I think I have hung out at this thread a little to long. The digital M has given me the itch once again. I have tried to stay away. I may have another M8 in my hands. I'm going to sleep on it though. I like the fact that I can practice more wihthout the costs of film.
Anywho, here are a couple of "digital" M6 shots.
I need some fall colors in the mix.
For anyone interested, these were all 35 Summicron ASPH.
Charles and other M9 users who also have canon/nikon cameras..
Do you find the base ISO to be really dirty? I find that regardless of what I do, my M9 doesn't give me clean images, and that's at all ISO settings... In fact, I'm thinking the low ISO's on the M8 gave better files then the M9 seems to be giving me (sold M8 long ago, just looking back at old NYC photos).. I'm not impressed with Leica right now. I'm missing my Canon 5DII, 1Ds3 and Zeiss ZE lenses (they're sitting in the dry cabinet waiting to be used).
I spent one whole day in a shop testing all of Leica's offerings, then not impressed, I picked up two of the "budget" lenses (by Leica standards)... And went out for another day of shooting, again unimpressed. At this point I have no intention of buying anything better (lens wise), as the body really doesn't seem up to my standards. Although I do have to say, it's a damn convenient camera to carry around your neck, I took it with me for a bike ride, it was really quite fun to shoot with one hand while riding the bike with the other.
When I look at websized files that you guys have upload, they look pretty impressive, I'm stumped?! As I didn't get any of that from all my testing, and my field trip today.
A shot taken today at 90mm, since I ranted and you've all read this far
Nice shot Adam I am finding that the M9 at base ISO is very clean. All the photos I upload virtually have no PP, less than I had with the 5DII. However it did take a while before I had the ACR RAW convertor working right in CS5 64 bit. Sometimes I calibrate different profiles too and use them as presets.
First thing that comes mind Adam, is check the RF calibration. With my almost new M9, I had it sent away to be checked and it was out of calibration back focusing. It is an easy fix, and took 3 days. I have had similar problems with second hand lenses and sent them away to be recalibrated. The 50 Lux Asph was sent back to Germany, and fixed under warranty for a 5 year old lens. This has made a huge difference. This is not mentioned alot in forums, but you are dealing with a simple mechanical device, although easy to fix, and even do it yourself.
IMO, no question on the best portrait lens: The 75mm f/1.4 Summilux. Perfect combination of sharpness and slight softening from spherical aberration that makes for a great portrait. I think I've posted this here before:
A close follow-up would be the new Voigtländer 75mm f/1.8 Heliar Classic.
Jeff
Jeff thanks, in the photos you've showed me, I'm sold on the 75lux, maybe I need to see more photos of the Voigtlander though.
BTW, what's the going rate on these forums for a 75lux? Any specific model to look out for? I tried one at the camera shop, and I couldn't hit focus at 1.4, maybe it had issues, or maybe my M9 does?!!
I'm going to give my M9 a month, if it doesn't make me 5DII+ZE happy, I'm selling it
Nice shot Adam I am finding that the M9 at base ISO is very clean. All the photos I upload virtually have no PP, less than I had with the 5DII. However it did take a while before I had the ACR RAW convertor working right in CS5 64 bit. Sometimes I calibrate different profiles too and use them as presets.
First thing that comes mind Adam, is check the RF calibration. With my almost new M9, I had it sent away to be checked and it was out of calibration back focusing. It is an easy fix, and took 3 days. I have had similar problems with second hand lenses and sent them away to be recalibrated. The 50 Lux Asph was sent back to Germany, and fixed under warranty for a 5 year old lens. This has made a huge difference. This is not mentioned alot in forums, but you are dealing with a simple mechanical device, although easy to fix, and even do it yourself.
Thank you Adam!
I personally would not calibrate the M9 myself, but I know Dan (Thrice) has done it. In Australia, we have Camera Clinic, Leica authorized is brilliant. Quick turn around and cheap. Camera Clinic have a lens collimater and can calibrate any lens, to be optimized for what eever specs you wish.
Um, about processing, I shot some DNGs at around 200 ISO and there's a heck a lot of noise.. Is it because my mac is reading the DNG all wrong? Is LR3 a good prog to use?? Does it have profiles built in?
I'm going to go check LR3 right now, see how it works for processing DNGs most of the images I shot were jpg files because they were just used to test lenses etc.
adamdewilde wrote:
I find that regardless of what I do, my M9 doesn't give me clean images, and that's at all ISO settings... In fact, I'm thinking the low ISO's on the M8 gave better files then the M9 seems to be giving me (sold M8 long ago, just looking back at old NYC photos).. I'm not impressed with Leica right now. I'm missing my Canon 5DII, 1Ds3 and Zeiss ZE lenses (they're sitting in the dry cabinet waiting to be used).
I spent one whole day in a shop testing all of Leica's offerings, then not impressed, I picked up two of the "budget" lenses (by Leica standards)... And went out for another day of shooting, again unimpressed....Show more →
Well, you are complaining a lot but you aren't really being clear about what is bothering you, so it is impossible for anyone to help you. Can you be more specific?
The base ISO issue cannot be real, there must be some explanation here. The 5DII has known base-ISO problems, so if you are happy with that, and unhappy with the M9, which is known for clean images up to about ISO 640, something else is going on.
