Thoughts on Leica M Monochrom???

[Pioneer]

I've personally learned to love my Monochrom. It does exactly what is supposed to do and does it well. It puts me in a shooting flow that is similar to film (filters) and with no need to jump through hoops to convert later. I'm using it exclusively for my photogravure work, since I see no reason to torture myself scanning film to make digital positives for copper. The monochrom offers level of details that are in the medium format category, and for alternate process work, the possibilities are endless. I have a section on my website for the Monochrom/photogravure work, @ Dead Link Removed

I am convinced of the quality of the product and the quality of the output from the Monochrom. If I were to be completely honest with myself, and everyone else, a large part of my hesitation is because I don't feel completely ready to commit entirely to a digital workflow for all of my photography. Besides a hard learned lack of trust in the permanence of those digital ones and zeros being stored on my hard drives, I still fully enjoy exposing, developing and printing black and white film. I am afraid that once I commit the resources necessary to purchase the Monochrom I will feel compelled to leave film behind for good.

 

[rknewcomb]

The idea that a Leica digital camera is a "rich person's toy" is BS. Many folks site how expensive it is and also give crazy examples with prices that "make their case".
The Canon Eos 1ds is $6599.with no lens. I didn't price a Nikon D3 but its up there too.
One can buy a very clean M9 refurbished with warranty for about $5000. A very clean middle aged 50mm f2 Summicron is about $1000.
I suspect many of the people that make comments like the "rich persons toy" have never used a Leica and are out to make the case that backs up their own bias.
FWIW I really don't care what people think of my camera choice but I do have trouble with BS when I hear it.

 

[Pioneer]

I am not rich by any means, but I also do not consider the Leica a "rich person's toy." It is a wonderfully built tool and a very capable camera. The Monochrom is another is a terrific Leica camera in a long line of them.

But it is pricey. You cite other cameras to make your point but those are also very expensive cameras. For some of us it is expensive enough to require a considerable financial commitment.

But my difficulty is more than just with the price, though price is certainly a component. The issue is really two-fold. First, I can already shoot black and white with my M7 or with my M9. One is film and one is through PP, but both produce terrific images. Does the Monochrom provide enhanced value over the other two? Second, even though I shoot tons of b&w film, I still shoot a roll of color or slide film occasionally. I cannot do that with the Monochrom.

IMO the Monochrom is a wonderful camera. But I don't think I'm ready to sell the M7 and M9 yet to buy it.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

That will be interesting. Looking forward to your conclusions Ralph.

My conclusion is to stick with my Nikon D800.The Leica give me no improvementand I can use my Nikon with one hand. The Leics was too light for thatWho knows if I even had a hand left after paying an arm and a leg for it.It's a beautiful camera thoughand in dedicated hands capableof creating great images, but not worth the $ for me.Nikon gave me all I needfor far less, including a monochrome capture modus,which I need to investigate further,

 

[MaximusM3]

I am convinced of the quality of the product and the quality of the output from the Monochrom. If I were to be completely honest with myself, and everyone else, a large part of my hesitation is because I don't feel completely ready to commit entirely to a digital workflow for all of my photography. Besides a hard learned lack of trust in the permanence of those digital ones and zeros being stored on my hard drives, I still fully enjoy exposing, developing and printing black and white film. I am afraid that once I commit the resources necessary to purchase the Monochrom I will feel compelled to leave film behind for good.

And I don't blame you there. Personally, I have the same issues and when I do use the Monochrom, I almost feel like I'm cheating Kidding aside, I am film shooter and I only bought the Monochrom for occasional use in Photogravure work. By doing that, I have a digital positive AND, more importantly, a copper plate (which I can steel-face to make it virtually indestructible). So, any archival issues of digital files is really not important to me. There are times when I feel like shooting film and scanning (and to have the choice of optical printing if need be) and times where I don't feel like dealing with film (traveling is one of them). Haven't had a buyers of my prints question these choices or even inquire about the differences so it really comes down to my moods.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

pending a few testscomparing actual filter performance vs software filter emulation,I came to the conclusionthat I can get everything as good from my Nikon D800without spending the cash on a Leica MM and I have all the lenses I need already; sorry Leica, but you are too rich for my blood; cult status or not. I need to eat three times a day

 

[RalphLambrecht]

to me ,the Leica MM is like overstepping the line from passion to insanity.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

well, next week I'll have the opportunity to compare it side-by-side with my Nikon D800. then,I'll be able to tell, but I'm hoping thatan image that started as a 14bit-color capture,andconverted in PSand beefed up by somebody who knows what they are oing
(me
)will beat the LeicaMonochrome capture.Let's see where my big mouth gets me.I'll report.

the short report:Nikon D800 owners need a Leica MM as much as they need a Ferrari Teste rosa. Nikon's monochrome settings are excellent.for me ,the case is closed;money saved; on what can I spend it now?Epson 3880,ink and an Adobe CC subscription?

 

[rknewcomb]

Very different shooting platforms and shooting experiences - different horses....

 

[Pioneer]

I think for me there are really two competing issues.

First, the idea of working in digital with the same basic restrictions that have always been imposed with black and white film is very attractive to me. With the Monochrom in hand I cannot choose to shoot in color because it is not there. If you really think of it, that is psychologically unique. Obviously my M9 allows me to use color if I want. Even with a film camera I can finish the roll, or rewind early, and insert a roll of color film if I wish. For the first time since color film became commonly available, this is not true.

Of course the opposite side is that you can do the same basic thing with an M3 and a roll of Tri-X, and for a LOT less money. Of course if you digitize the film you will need a scanner, but even with that included it still is far more economical to take the film route, at least from the perspective of the initial purchase price. If you are part of the crowd who believe that digital costs nothing after the initial purchase then at some point the cost of film and developing overtake the cost of the Monochrom. At that point, of course, the Monochrom pays for itself and becomes "free." I am afraid I don't fully subscribe to this idea since there is always some cost associated with any activity, however difficult it may be to accurately assess it. Besides, the initial outlay is usually the big barricade to most people. The thought of eventually amortizing that cost is nothing more than an intellectual exercise.

Of course the film route includes additional costs that aren't always considered, a time and convenience cost, but for most of us our time probably is not worth the additional cost of the Monochrom. Based on quality reviews it may not exactly be an apples to apples comparison either since the Monochrom files may have more potential resolution to use than the same file of a film scan. If you do need that additional resolution than the Monochrom may in fact be a better option for you than film. All of this assumes that the Monochrom is used by an amateur. There are other accounting benefits available to a professional in the conduct of their business that may in fact make the Monochrom a reasonable business expense.

But, for me, the Monochrom, though a very tempting piece of equipment, is not something I am ready for now. Truth be know I may not ever be ready for it. The M9 was a BIG step outside of my financial comfort zone, then and now, and I know that I am not getting all the benefit from that purchase that I could. Though I do not regret that decision right now, there are times when I feel guilty that I am not putting that money to good use by using it all the time. At those points I am sometimes tempted to sell it.

Of course tomorrow I may feel different. Some days it is relatively easy to resist GAS, other days it seems almost overwhelming. But this is the way I feel right now.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

OMG I think you're right there, the price is without lens!!!

Amazing!

What are they thinking?The more it costs;they more people think it's worth?not me I'll stick to my D800

 

[pschwart]

Anyone know how many of these have been sold?

 

[MaximusM3]

Come on guys, tiring arguments. Many who can afford to buy the MM do it simply because they can. It is a great camera but it is still just a camera. Of course, a D800 or an M9 can be just fine, because in the end it doesn't matter. Personally, I told myself that I could only justify the MM if I could sell enough photogravures to pay for it and I did. Six prints and it's now free. For the enthusiastic hobbyist who has to stretch simply to own it and live in a vacuum, posting images on the internet, the camera is a giant waste and overkill of course.

 

[Felinik]

What are they thinking?The more it costs;they more people think it's worth?not me I'll stick to my D800

I'll never get a Leica no matter, I can't stand the rangefinder style viewfinder, then I'd have to get either a Leica R or one of the S models…

I'm gearing up in Nikon film gear right now, selling all my Pentax film gear as it seems Ricoh will never release a Pentax FF Digital. So next year I'll look into a used D-600 to complement the film bodies I now have (F301, FE2, F3) ..


JF

 

[RalphLambrecht]

I can't follow your lead;I could open a Nikon museum as it is.

 

[Pioneer]

Oh Felnik! Please, say it isn't true! Ok, no FF Pentax, very frustrating I know. I do understand, but Nikon?

 

[Felinik]

Oh Felnik! Please, say it isn't true! Ok, no FF Pentax, very frustrating I know. I do understand, but Nikon?

Have you ever laid your hands on a Nikon FE/FE2 or F3 ?

If not, do your homework then get back and let me know what you have to say then….




JF

 

[Pioneer]

Have you ever laid your hands on a Nikon FE/FE2 or F3 ?

If not, do your homework then get back and let me know what you have to say then….


JF

I have owned the F, the F3HP, the F4, the F100 and most recently, the D600. I didn't own them all at once but I bought each one attempting to determine what everyone found so attractive about them. The only one of the batch that I enjoyed at all was the F, so I kept it. The rest are all gone. Never handled the FE but decided enough was enough.

Same thing happened with Canon but I do think they go it right with the original 5D, so I kept that one too. Helps offset the disappointment over a FF Pentax I guess. Not very weather resistant but it does OK. Darn nice black & white for a digital.

No, I've done my homework, and in my book the Pentax SV, Spotmatic and LX were more than a match for the vaunted Nikon or Canon, but to each his own. I guess that is why there are so many different cameras.

Have a terrific Holidays.

 

[jacksond]

My choice for a summer course (non photographic) is a Leica M6, Voigtlander 40mm, Voigtlander 40mm, and a Fuji X100S for digital. I'm thinking of getting a Plustek film scanner soon rather than buying any more digital gear. I also have a Minolta X700 and a few lenses for that.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

I'll stick to the Nikon D800,but, what do Ido with the $15kI just saved?

 

[Felinik]

I have owned the F, the F3HP, the F4, the F100 and most recently, the D600. I didn't own them all at once but I bought each one attempting to determine what everyone found so attractive about them. The only one of the batch that I enjoyed at all was the F, so I kept it. The rest are all gone. Never handled the FE but decided enough was enough.

Same thing happened with Canon but I do think they go it right with the original 5D, so I kept that one too. Helps offset the disappointment over a FF Pentax I guess. Not very weather resistant but it does OK. Darn nice black & white for a digital.

No, I've done my homework, and in my book the Pentax SV, Spotmatic and LX were more than a match for the vaunted Nikon or Canon, but to each his own. I guess that is why there are so many different cameras.

Have a terrific Holidays.

I've had loads of really nice Pentax film bodies, and still do have some left, but since there's no FF digital in sight, and I want to keep my lens investments in one and the same range for both film and digital, Pentax was out of the game and I do prefer Nikon to Canon, especially on the film side…




Happy New Year

JF.

 

[Pioneer]

I've had loads of really nice Pentax film bodies, and still do have some left, but since there's no FF digital in sight, and I want to keep my lens investments in one and the same range for both film and digital, Pentax was out of the game and I do prefer Nikon to Canon, especially on the film side…




Happy New Year

JF.

I am really kidding you, as I am sure you know. Nikon has always made some great camera equipment.

Enjoy your photography and have a Happy New Year,

 

[Dunga]

Hi everyone,

Thanks for this thread, because it sparked a latent curiosity: can you get good (final) frames straight out of camera or do you always need to post-process?
I remember reading some years ago that you get neutral/flat frames straight out of camera.

I ask because I've been shooting a lot of film lately and i've grown a bit lazy with digital shots.
I don't really like spending time in Lightroom/Photoshop anymore.

 

[faberryman]

Thanks for this thread, because it sparked a latent curiosity: can you get good (final) frames straight out of camera or do you always need to post-process?

That's for you to decide. Shoot a few frames and post process them. If you don't think they look better than SOOC, you have your answer.

 

[alentine]

… good (final) frames straight out of camera or do you always need to post-process? …

Hello Dunga,
All first generation digital photos are already post-processed at a stage before it show in an LCD.
And in the context of “true digital b&w” , its impossible to differentiate between two photos on the screen, but it’s easy to differentiate a gelatin silver print from inkjet print.
That I think can draw what’s true from what’s not true!
As Ralph concluded, price is not justified, and I add no matter what’s the claims are!