Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
Thats the thing. No camera company maintains a static look. They’re all evolving always because sensor tech and sensor capability changes with advancement. So the idea that there’s this one unified color is just untrue. There’s a reason many yearn for M9 color and later on M10 color… and neither camera reproduces color the same way even if both are pleasing to most.
I've been shooting Leica cameras since the 1980s when I used R and M series for photojournalism and have owned or used every evolution of Leica digital cameras. Yes sensors are changing and as a result color but there was a pretty consistent Leica look / color. With the SL2-S and the M11 files are now nearly indistinguishable from other brands. IMHO.
Could that just be more a result of modern lens design and sensors capable of reproducing increased dynamic range than it is actual color reproduction? In the film days the only thing that distinguished brands was lens design and to a lesser extent PP choices in the darkroom. So the “Leica look” was about the optics more than the color reproduction as the film stocks were unilaterally the same.
Looks like a cool Ford model A!
Undoubtedly modern lens designs and dynamic range contribute to the change. And it's obviously not unique to Leica. Discussions here like Fuji GFX100s and "THAT" MF look come from the same evolution.
That's one of the reasons there has been such huge demand for R lenses that have been converted for digital video use. Albeit for DV cameras with smaller censors. But I don't agree that film stocks or processing were unilaterally the same.
Care to elaborate that snobbish "no"? I am talking from own experience and based on statements from people in the know. Not everyone there likes the fact that Leica stopped developing their own custom sensors.
FWIW, I fall into this camp.
I second this. I have SL & S systems as well, and no amount of tweaking in LR or C1 can replicate the colors of the S, and the S system as a whole, has a unique look from the more modern & clinical look that is becoming commoditized across brands, makes, and models. From an artistic perspective, I appreciate this about the S system, which goes back to my previous comment.
Then I sold my A7R4 because I was never satisfied with my creative juices while using it. My Fuji 100S also has a Sony sensor. Will I sell it because of the way the files look? Who knows. If the M11 has a Sony sensor will it bother me like others mention? Hey you IQ4150 owners better sell and get a P45+.The underlying silicon (likely by Sony, but not confirmed), does not have that much influence on color. The toppings (Bayer filter, the filtering glass, and its thickness), as well as firmware, have the most influence on colors and the look. The toppings are custom-made by Leica.
I think the constant sarcasm kills this forum. I am just saying the Leica S files look different and more pleasing to me - ofc you can do and buy whatever you want.So I guess I sold my IQ4150 because its files looked like big Sony A7R4 images.
All Sony sensors are killing our creativity.
For me it's COVID that keeps my creative juices low since I'm a street guy first and landscape second.
