The GetDPI Photography Forum

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!

Steve Huff sells his M after severe color problems, commits to MM

Status
Not open for further replies.

Zookeeper

New member
I follow Steve Huff and rather like his approach to reviewing cameras. I thought the referenced blog post was very reasonable, a nice way to work through his dilemma, one which I've also gone through myself but without the M and MM to compare side by side.

I chose the M because I'll do more color work than B&W. I still have the M9-P (good thing, the M is off to Solms for repair) and I've found that it makes very good B&W images when I was shooting for B&W in the first place. My thought was that with the MM I'd have to carry some filters (and use them) whereas with the M the filters could be applied in ACR, after the fact …as I have been doing with the M9-P images.

How many noticed that the lady and the guy are wearing the same pair of glasses?
 

GrahamWelland

Subscriber & Workshop Member
... He seemed ready to leave the MM behind, and intent frankly upon racking up as many click-through M pre/orders as possible. At the time, aside from his sales commission incentive (as I understand his business model), I attributed his comments to a general preference for color, and failure to climb the (steep) learning curve on MM post-processing. That he'd go so far as to push, even slightly, those pre/ordering the M to reconsider is a remarkable development.
I think that this is being somewhat unfair to Steve. He seems pretty genuine and not anything like KR (who'll spout any old crap to drive traffic at times) in this respect at all. I've met him personally before and both bought and sold items to/from him directly and if he's guilty of anything it's speaking his mind and baring his unfiltered emotions about the gear he tries. When he likes stuff, he says so. When he likes something else later he's just as enthusiastic. However, I wouldn't ever accuse him of being a shill to drive click throughs on gear he didn't actually honestly like or recommend faithfully.
 

Shashin

Well-known member
It it claimed that there's bullying on only one side of this dustup?
Well, if that is a comment toward me, then I apologize.

I am wondering why the OP seems to want to take Steve's words out of context to further a position that is not true--is it simply a beef with Leica? The OP has been making similar claims about the "serious color issues" in another post.

Metamerism is rather a technical word with very clear applications. Whether the M or M9 suffers from metamerism is neither here nor there--metamerism has nothing to do with color accuracy, for example. Yet the OP keeps using the term in some attempt to claim the M is a defective product. He clearly does not understand the term and simply using does not add to the conversation.

I also find it rather distasteful to try to twist someone's words, in this case Steve Huff, to further a rather dubious position. But when I simply point out that, well, lets just say, I really don't like to be patronized.

However, if I did come off sounding like I was bullying the OP, then please accept my apologies.
 

Jeff S

New member
Photomeme, you're the only person I've read who regards the M as having "severe color problems" or suggests metamerism problems.
I have no point of view here, as I haven't yet tried the new M, but you might want to drop over to the Leica Forum and read the thread titled "M color." No mention of metamerism that I recall, but some heated exchanges regarding M color problems, that some suspect (including some folks known to post on this site) might be a hardware issue.

Again, just passing along the info, not taking a position.

Jeff
 

jubbaa

Member
The impression Steve Huff left me with when I read is article was that for financial reasons he couldn't justify owning both, no other reason. He opted for the MM because he loves its simplicity,he loves shooting it and it suits his style more at the moment.
 

weinschela

Subscriber Member
This thread verges on ugly because the OP is on an anti Leica M crusade for reasons unknown. Here and at LUF. Probably elsewhere too. He's entitled to his opinion of course and debate is good. That wouldn't be ugly. But he has consistently and apparently deliberately insulted the character of good people like Jono Slack (and anyone who disagrees with the OP) and by doing so earned a spot on my ignore list. He is obviously smarter than everybody else due to his background or whatever, but that does not excuse insulting other people as in this thread (and elsewhere) or misquoting or drawing unwarranted conclusions from what other people say simply to be inflammatory. P.s. I may have missed it but I do not recall ever seeing a photograph from him.
 

KurtKamka

Subscriber Member
I know that you are not referring to me, Alan. But let me say that the thread on LUF is not an anti-Leica rant in any form. The people that I mentioned in the thread are all very experienced and passionate Leica shooters. None are trolls or Leica haters. We all want to see Leica develop and introduce the best possible products.

Personally, I've purchased the DMR, Digilux, M8, M8.2, M9, S2 and way too many Leica lenses. I believe I/we do have some credibility and do know what we are talking about.

The new M is exactly what I want to be shooting for color street work. It's extremely frustrating that it's not the finished product that it should be right out of the box.
 

edwardkaraa

New member
With all due respect, Kurt, the AWB on the M is not any worse than that on the M9. The AWB on the M9 produces ugly cyan cast, while the M produces ugly yellow cast. In both cases they are unusable, and correctable. By the way, I use one single WB setting for all my daylight shooting with the M9.
 
shrug. The AWB on the M9 got it wrong about 70% of the time (way too cool). The AWB on the M240 gets it wrong about ~30% of the time.

Now the the fact that Leica BROKE a beautifully working auto ISO model going from the M9 to the M pisses me off way more than any perceived color issue.
 

CronoZero

Member
Clearly, the answer to all of this is for Leica to start selling a monochrome M240 (which I still want to call M10) :D

I'm hoping color/AWB gets fixed before I get mine as I had to make a lot of life/gear changes to afford one. I thought hard about getting the MM, but kept remembering that I hated using the M9 :shocked:. It wasn't a rangefinder thing, as I love my Zeiss Ikon and would gladly purchase a digital version of that.

I guess also, for those curious, Huff sold his MM to fund the M240 then sold that to get another MM.
 

glenerrolrd

Workshop Member
With all due respect, Kurt, the AWB on the M is not any worse than that on the M9. The AWB on the M9 produces ugly cyan cast, while the M produces ugly yellow cast. In both cases they are unusable, and correctable. By the way, I use one single WB setting for all my daylight shooting with the M9.
Ed

Sorry I have to disagree here . I am not seeking an unusual level of accuracy here ...I have well over 25K M9 captures and now more than another 10k with the D800E ..both produce fairly consistent AWB when doing street shooting . Right out of the camera I appreciate having an AWB as a reference . This does not mean that I don t use a grey card or adjust to taste in post processing .

The new M has an AWB equal to using an 81a filter ...this over saturates the yellow/orange in skin tones as a starting point . (diglloyd reports on this in detail including measuring the difference between the M9 and the M to a correct WB) But its more than that ....

The M out of the camera DNG has a bias toward yellow green bias and the M9 has a bias toward blue magenta ....this of course can be to some extent corrected with custom camera calibrations . In fact if you try the various profiles available ..you would see that the adobe standard adds substantial magenta to the rendering . Just do some before and after on the embedded profile verse a custom profile and you can see the differences.

But thats not all ...the new M DNG is highly saturated overall ..not necessarily in a bad way but like a different film stock . It also has a much different tone curve which takes advantage of the larger DR . Both of these contribute to the complaints about skin tones .

I am not convinced that these can all be completely fixed with firmware and raw processing refinement . Rather I think they will be improved upon and a new standard established ..but this is pure speculation .

The point I think thats being made is that new M color using AWB is not very good as it stands today particularly if you are concerned about skin tones . I think thats a very fair point of view based on my tests of the M and review of the examples cited .

This is not to say that M files can not be processed by a skilled photographer to an excellent result or that having a warm saturated rendering doesn t make certain photographs look great straight out of camera .

Be clear ...I depend on my M bodies for 70% of my work and have a real desire to transition to the new M if for no other reason than the better high ISO performance . However I watched as others chased their tails trying to get the S2 files right during the first 6 months after introduction . Leica and Adobe really got it right eventually ...so I am hopeful . But I ve chosen to wait and see rather than frustrate myself trying to custom process my M files .

I voted with my decision to return my new M and to delay my order for a 2nd . That never would have happened with the M9 which was fabulous IMO at introduction .

I am sure we just have different perspectives on how the color "issue " affects our work but I think its hard to deny that it exists .
 

tashley

Subscriber Member
My 2 cents: I was originally, during my early phase with the M240, of the opinion that it had two issues: one, AWB to warm and two, a need for a good camera calibration profile in Lightroom - the 'embedded' one is basically, as fas as I can see, made with an X-Rite.

So I took to carrying a WB card at times and shooting reference files. I also took to using the Adobe profile rather than the embedded. But all that notwithstanding, there are still quite a few files that I find very hard to get looking normal.

Now I do understand that people have their own home-brew LR tweaks to the calibration values and that these seem to work well for correcting, for example, skin tones. But my personal opinion is that this is not good enough. That a camera of this ambition, price and heritage should do notably better rather than pushing its users into the old familiar 'it's no biggie, there will be a firmware fix/there are calibration tweaks that work' routine.

The trouble with the digital Ms is that they do often seem to require some remedial work on the part of the user (IR filters anyone? Cornerfix for wides on M9? Colour on M240?) and that this will be seen as part of the character of the brand by some and as a royal and unwarranted PITA by others.

Back to the fact that some files seem hard to get corrected properly: to me, and I fully acknowledge that this opinion is provisional and partial and might very well be proved incorrect, there is something slightly wrong. It might be something that firmware and better calibration profiles can eventually deal with, who knows. But I have a sniff of a scent on the breeze that it is more of a hardware issue. Maybe.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
I guess also, for those curious, Huff sold his MM to fund the M240 then sold that to get another MM.
If that is case why should there be a discussion as to what he buys and sells? Clearly it has nothing to do with making photos.
 

weinschela

Subscriber Member
I know that you are not referring to me, Alan. But let me say that the thread on LUF is not an anti-Leica rant in any form. The people that I mentioned in the thread are all very experienced and passionate Leica shooters. None are trolls or Leica haters. We all want to see Leica develop and introduce the best possible products.

Personally, I've purchased the DMR, Digilux, M8, M8.2, M9, S2 and way too many Leica lenses. I believe I/we do have some credibility and do know what we are talking about.

The new M is exactly what I want to be shooting for color street work. It's extremely frustrating that it's not the finished product that it should be right out of the box.
I don't disagree on the above if what you are referring to is the color thread. I also don't disagree on the merits -- but I have not canceled my order either. It was a different thread on LUF where the OP let loose his venom.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Lol. This is a Leica forum you know. Koolaid is pretty strong.

Okay now I have not followed anything on the new Leicas but once again I keep going back to square one with them and once again its the same old story of half baked at release. Patience grasshoppers is the key to buying Leica if you don't have it buy something else its just that simple. There is simply no reason to get your panties twisted by it or defend it either. They are nice systems with unique qualities and functions but I will repeat my main mantra and that is your needs may not match my needs or anyone else's needs. Your color may not match what is there or not and your raw converter just maybe **** at the moment. It's all subjective and as a tester and reviewer not all is always Rosie on any new release . Every cam I know in recent years has issues. Nikon D800 had major AF point issues for instance . Okay from me as a personal message. I'm not so sure why there are such defenders and detractors of such a high degree when it comes to Leica. It's like a jar of poison sitting on a table and people are forcing it down others throats. I can't even read LUF and please let's not make GEtDPI even resembling the venom. People have opinions which in your eyes be right, wrong or just flat out stupid. But a key here is believe what you want to but there is no reason to defend it till death. Seriously I have my own personal things in life that are far more important to deal with that this venom just spills into it. Folks you don't need this in your life. I realized with a sick wife my life is just to ****ing short and backed off on all this crap and I feel better. Take the advice relax either enjoy your gear or throw it in the river. This is about Art and enjoying the joy of photography which end of day is truly the only thing that matters. Get off this stress bandwagon it's not worth your health. And BTW your never going to be right or wrong in any debate just another opinion. So trust me get off I'm the only one that knows this stuff train too. Egos get you nowhere. Okay I said it and time to go enjoy my Sunday. I suggest everyone else has a great day too. Peace out
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top