How much of a seller's remorse would you get if you sold your Monochrom

[fotografz]

He didn't take it because of the tiny invisible mark?
In my experience, I'd now raise the price by 100$ for the lost time and energy. He wants it? 100$ extra.

So this is where we are: a camera not selling because of an invisible mark. The fact that it's a camera is unimportant. It's not about a camera anymore, but about a status.

The whole "Buy/Sell" gestalt is a bi-product of how damned expensive all this stuff is now, and how fast it becomes perceptually outdated.

So when you get that shiny new Leica M its value will already be falling like a stone in anticipation of the next $7K+ M camera. Everyone just keeps buying one full color Dodo after another.

The MM is the first digital camera that somewhat defies all that because it is so specialized, and those experienced in B&W work know that. It does super high ISOs with clean tonality and razor sharp acuity. B&W shooters do not need more than that, and no color rangefinder approaches it in either of those key performance attributes. It is a keeper in a transient digital world.

In the 35+ years of using Leica M film cameras I shot maybe 10 rolls of color film ... M equalled B&W to me, and now it does again. The biggest quandary I have now is whether to secure a second MM and get rid of all color M cameras.

-Marc

 

[docmoore]

Dave,

As Marc mentioned .... it is a question not answered yet and I am afraid you would not recognize the camera by the time I divest it.

The real problem is finding one....should have bought another before all the good news hit the fan.

Bob

 

[D&A]

Dave,

As Marc mentioned .... it is a question not answered yet and I am afraid you would not recognize the camera by the time I divest it.

The real problem is finding one....should have bought another before all the good news hit the fan.

Bob

Thats OK..if it resembles a camera found in a fire sale (literally from a "FIRE" sale)...thats better than nothing...LOL! It is basic black in color (ha, no pun intended)....so maybe no one will notice that it's non-functional hanging around my neck. I'll bring it up to eye level every few minutes. .

Serious though, I suspect that the MM will be available for as long as the M-E is in prooduction but in smaller #'s of course and if sold in quantity, would of course prompt a monochrom replacement....thats just good marketing. Whether it's based on the M240 or some future incarnation of a digital M, no way to know. This is of course all conjecture, but just like there might (or probably) will be a future M240-P down the road, so too might there be a future monochrom.

Still now is now and that is what we have to deal with in terms of available cameras. After working with a lot of the MM files files and even comparing simultanioulsy with my own M9 (same lens, same subject at same time), depending on lighting and a number of other scene related factors, the advantage even at ISO 320 set on both cameras, is quite telling.

Dave (D&A)

 

[Jeff S]

The MM is the first digital camera that somewhat defies all that because it is so specialized, and those experienced in B&W work know that. It does super high ISOs with clean tonality and razor sharp acuity.

I never expected or needed my film Ms, loaded with Tri-X, to do "super high ISOs (ASAs) with clean tonality." The M8.2 serves fine as my front end to producing fine b/w prints, which is my only goal. There's no reason for camera lust and never a thought about depreciation. My camera has paid for itself many times over already. Oh, and same for the second, used, M8.2 I bought as a back-up.

For others, the MM is key. Different strokes...again.

I do, however, look forward to reports regarding weather sealing on the M240. Now that's a practical advantage that could bring back the comfort level of using a film M without worry.

Jeff

 

[KurtKamka]

I took a temporary detour from the land of M for several years after having owned an M8, M8.2 and finally an M9. I really believe that the upgrade route for me was in the end a pursuit of something that I was finally able to find in the MM. The extra ISO has provided me with an opportunity to venture further into the night and early mornings where action on the street is most interesting. I can set out on a walk of the streets before daylight or after the sun sets with the confidence that my stealthy little light gatherer is going to come away with the shot. The earlier digital versions of the M are simply unable to punch in the same weight class in this regard.

Everyone's criteria for their gear is different. Everyone gets to the results they want to achieve in different ways. Thank goodness for the choices that are available.

 

[moreammo]

To me, that camera is bordering on a scam. In a blind test, one could never guess which is from a color sensor or from the monochom.

I wouldn't regret selling it.

I disagree. If someone will take a photo of a red apple next to a green bell pepper with both the mono and the m9 and convert the m9 file to b and w as they normally would.. I think the results will be obvious. I saw this done recently... the mono acts as b and w should... the m9 not so much.

 

[douglasf13]

I never expected or needed my film Ms, loaded with Tri-X, to do "super high ISOs (ASAs) with clean tonality." The M8.2 serves fine as my front end to producing fine b/w prints, which is my only goal. There's no reason for camera lust and never a thought about depreciation. My camera has paid for itself many times over already. Oh, and same for the second, used, M8.2 I bought as a back-up.

For others, the MM is key. Different strokes...again.

I do, however, look forward to reports regarding weather sealing on the M240. Now that's a practical advantage that could bring back the comfort level of using a film M without worry.

Jeff

Agreed. I actually add grain to my M9 B&W images, and, from what I've seen, although the tonality is different between M9 and MM B&W images, I can't really say one is better than the other, and neither necessarily looks like film. Either way, if I was more of a B&W shooter looking for a new Leica M, I see no reason not to go MM.

The M240's weather sealing is the most interesting thing about the camera to me, too. I'm pretty happy with the M9 for the most part.

 

[D&A]

I disagree. If someone will take a photo of a red apple next to a green bell pepper with both the mono and the m9 and convert the m9 file to b and w as they normally would.. I think the results will be obvious. I saw this done recently... the mono acts as b and w should... the m9 not so much.

I often enjoy when two cameras (or lenses for that matter) are compared in such a fashion. Not so much for bragging rights or to say, hey my camera (or lens) is better than yours. It's simply out of interest to see how they perform under near identical situations and also to see if it's possible for one to come close to emulating the other through both in-camera settings as well as post processing.

By test shooting the MM along side the M9 (as I have had the opportunity to do), the initial differences could be readily seen) but I also came to the conclusion that even setting a lower ISO of 320 with both cameras, the differences also greatly depends on a good many factors, such as subject, lighting and tonality of the scene etc.

With that said, a low ISO image with a red apple and green pepper I would be very interesting to see and compare with both cameras...especially after one adjusts (post processes) the MM image to display their vision of the pic and then do the same with the M9 file. Again its not at all making a statement about whether a M9 can be a close substitute to a MM (although some might see it that way)....not at all. Just an interesting exercise for comparitive reasons and an exercise in gaining knowlege about both cameras.

I just reently did the same thing with the new Leica "S" and the Pentax 645D, using both systems 120mm macro's to make the comparison as close as possible at the same time and shooting the same subject. Again not expecting the 645D can performance match the Leica's lenses and image quaility in general...but to see differences in image characteristics and to also determine how the Pentax does in this comparison with what is rarely argued, their best performing lens....their 120 f4 macro (FA verion in my case)...since all the Leica "S" lesnes are spectacular in performance. When time permits in a few weeks, I'll post a comparitive pair or two of these images in the medium format forums.

Dave (D&A)

 

[wentbackward]

.. I think the results will be obvious.

Indeed they are absolutely different. A colour sensor goes through a demosaicing algorithm, monochrome does not. Compare shooting the MM through a blue filter versus applying a blue filter in post on the M9 (or any colour camera), it will accentuate the relative weaknesses.

 

[NB23]

I disagree. If someone will take a photo of a red apple next to a green bell pepper with both the mono and the m9 and convert the m9 file to b and w as they normally would.. I think the results will be obvious. I saw this done recently... the mono acts as b and w should... the m9 not so much.

The person showing that test probably had no clue about what a proper BW should look like.
A proper tweak in the right color channels and there you have the proper BW M9 file.
Photoshop's "auto B&W" isn't the optimum way to convert a color file.

 

[Vivek]

Perhaps it is better to do away with this thread?

The OP has decided to keep the MM.

 

[Shashin]

The person showing that test probably had no clue about what a proper BW should look like.
A proper tweak in the right color channels and there you have the proper BW M9 file.
Photoshop's "auto B&W" isn't the optimum way to convert a color file.

Please, show us your test where you took a Monchrom and M9 file and produce the same result.

 

[algrove]

My prints have never been so good since I got my MM. The tonal range with high resolution and a special crispness really shines with prints. That is the deal maker, prints.

 

[docmoore]

Perhaps it is better to do away with this thread?

The OP has decided to keep the MM.

Agree...

Really comes down to those who appreciate the strengths of the Monochrom and those who do not.

Let them shoot 8x10 film, develop in Pyro ....

Me, I will run around with this little box, throw a few files into LR/PS and still have time to tend the grill for dinner. :ROTFL:

Bob

 

[D&A]

Agree...

Really comes down to those who appreciate the strengths of the Monochrom and those who do not.

Let them shoot 8x10 film, develop in Pyro ....

Me, I will run around with this little box, throw a few files into LR/PS and still have time to tend the grill for dinner. :ROTFL:

Bob

Bob, I appreciate the monochrom, honestly I do! Lord knows how many times I test shot the camera and examined and post processed it's files. OK, what's for dinner and while "YOU" tend to the grill, mind if I walk around the neighborhood with your monochrome?

Simply too many years of smelling the hypo & fixer and spooling roll after roll of film canasters, it's sort about time to move onto another medium for B&W imagery. Although some exceptionally fine work has been done with any number of color digital cameras (and I've seen some very nice work)....the monochrom if nothing else has some very distinct advantages and an exceptional amount of latitude with regards to adjustment and malleability of it's files.

Dave (D&A)

 

[moreammo]

Please, show us your test where you took a Monchrom and M9 file and produce the same result.

Yes please do, i would love also to know how. my skills are lacking in this area as i have not been able to achieve this. this is not to say that i can not get a result i like with my M9, i certainly can and will continue to do so. but the fact remains it would take some work to make it get the correct tone to color match as the MM will do natively.

-Jon

 

[airfrogusmc]

I love mine. No scam at all if you see in B&W. Its files are sharper with more DR and the high ISO performance makes it a real gem for the street.

 

[airfrogusmc]

Yes please do, i would love also to know how. my skills are lacking in this area as i have not been able to achieve this. this is not to say that i can not get a result i like with my M9, i certainly can and will continue to do so. but the fact remains it would take some work to make it get the correct tone to color match as the MM will do natively.

-Jon

Plus the files have more range and are sharper than the files from an M9. Its the perfect camera if you see and shoot B&W. And the high ISO performance is stunning and something the M9 lacks.

A corporate event I shot for a client a week or so back.

The MM and 35 Lux FLE at 6400 ISO.

 

[NB23]

Please, show us your test where you took a Monchrom and M9 file and produce the same result.

As I already stated in this thread, I looked at over 3000 Monorkum
Images and I kept on seeing better looking M8, M9 and dslr files in the same
Threads as well as in other threads. After so many hours contemplating the subject, my conclusion was unequivocal.

Now if you want to see what is a true fine 20x24 FB selenium toned print coming out from the finest IIc and focotar-2, and from the finest hands, you can send me 900$. My going rate.
Such a print usually sets things in the right perspective.

 

[airfrogusmc]

As I already stated in this thread, I looked at over 3000 Monorkum
Images and I kept on seeing better looking M8, M9 and dslr files in the same
Threads as well as in other threads. After so many hours contemplating the subject, my conclusion was unequivocal.

Now if you want to see what is a true fine 20x24 FB selenium toned print coming out from the finest IIc and focotar-2, and from the finest hands, you can send me 900$. My going rate.
Such a print usually sets things in the right perspective.

You couldn't make a usable 6400 ISO M9 image.