As mentioned previously, when I was in Chiang Mai a couple of weeks ago, I shot three rolls of Tri-X with my M6, using film for the first time in three years. My emotional response was to want to sell both my M9-P and the M-Monochrom — these cameras have had their sensors replaced in Wetzlar with the new non-corrosive ones, respectively, last November and this month.
I say \"emotional\" for two reasons: first, I love the way Tri-X renders highlights, which is important for shooting in the bright and harsh tropical light in which I often shoot; and, second, I enjoy the way the M6 feels and handles when shooting, much more than the M9-P/MM. All that makes me think I might want to sell both these cameras and shoot only film for a while, and see what comes out at Photokina or subsequently — whether Leica can make an M-camera (no interest in the SL) that has the form-factor of the M6 (i.e., more comfortable in the hands than the M9-P/MM) or eventually have a sensor that handles highlights more gracefully, like film, so that one does not have to fight \"those great blobs of file, to paraphrase the sone, when shooting in bright, harsh light.
What got me excited about shooting Tri-X was the first picture below from Chiang Mai — then I looked at two of my favorite photos, also shot with Tri-X and the M6 over ten years ago:
M6 | Summilux-35 FLE | Tri-X @ISO 400 stand developed for 1 hour in Rodinal 1:100, gentle inversion after 30 minutes. Chiang Mai
So, consider the above pictures as arguments for selling the digital-Ms, but it\'s not a simple or easy decision. Below are two pictures taken at the same place (the baseman food court of the CentralPlaza Chiangmai Airport). The same light, but a different day. The first picture was taken about a week earlier with the M9-P (showing Chinese tourists hugely enjoying their lunch) and is a substantially better photograph. When I went back there with the M6, I didn\'t find a scene that was as interesting. Nevertheless, the second picture does show that the low (and harsh) light is not such a challenge for Tri-X at ISO 1600.
The decision is so difficult because I can do a lot that I like with the M9-P or the MM. A compromise would be to sell just the MM but, basically, I like the idea of shooting only with one camera — and should that be film? Wanna \"talk me down\"? Any thoughts?
M9-P | Summilux-35 FLE | ISO 640 (pushed 2.3 stops to effective ISO 2713 | f/2.8 | 1/500 Chiang Mai
M6 | Summilux-35 FLE | Tri-X @ISO 1600 stand developed for 1 hour in Rodinal 1:100, gentle inversion after 30 minutes. Chiang Mai
As mentioned previously, when I was in Chiang Mai a couple of weeks ago, I shot three rolls of Tri-X with my M6, using film for the first time in three years. My emotional response was to want to sell both my M9-P and the M-Monochrom — these cameras have had their sensors replaced in Wetzlar with the new non-corrosive on, respectively, last November and this month.
I say \"emotional\" for two reasons: first, I love the way Tri-X renders highlights, which is important for shooting in the bright and harsh tropical light in which I often shoot; and, second, I enjoy the way the M6 feels and handles when shooting, much more than the M9-P/MM. All that makes me think I might want to sell both these cameras and shoot only film for a while, and see what comes out at Photokina or subsequently — whether Leica can make an M-camera (no interest in the SL) that has the form-factor of the M6 (i.e., more comfortable in the hands than the M9-P/MM) or eventually have a sensor that handles highlights more gracefully, like film, so that one does not have to fight \"those great blobs of file, to paraphrase the sone, when shooting in bright, harsh light.
What got me excited about shooting Tri-X was the first picture below from Chiang Mai — then I looked at two of my favorite photos, also shot with Tri-X and the M6 over ten years ago:
M6 | Summilux-35 FLE | Tri-X @ISO 400 stand developed for 1 hour in Rodinal 1:100, gentle inversion after 30 minutes. Chiang Mai
So, consider the above pictures as arguments for selling the digital-Ms, but it\'s not a simple or easy decision. Below are two pictures taken at the same place (the baseman food court of the CentralPlaza Chiangmai Airport). The same light, but a different day. The first picture was taken about a week earlier with the M9-P (showing Chinese tourists hugely enjoying their lunch) and is a substantially better photograph. When I went back there with the M6, I didn\'t find a scene that was as interesting. Nevertheless, the second picture does show that the low (and harsh) light is not such a challenge for Tri-X at ISO 1600.
The decision is so difficult because I can do a lot that I like with the M9-P or the MM. A compromise would be to sell just the MM but, basically, I like the idea of shooting only with one camera — and should that be film? Wanna \"talk me down\"? Any thoughts?
M9-P | Summilux-35 FLE | ISO 640 (pushed 2.3 stops to effective ISO 2713 | f/2.8 | 1/500 Chiang Mai
M6 | Summilux-35 FLE | Tri-X @ISO 1600 stand developed for 1 hour in Rodinal 1:100, gentle inversion after 30 minutes. Chiang Mai
