“That guy’s a terrible writer,” posts a reader on a photography forum, garnering numerous likes and +1’s. “His photos are just random snapshots with no context,” states another on a different site. “I couldn’t be bothered to read what he wrote, because I’m sure he doesn’t say anything that I haven’t read before,” professes yet another critic — seemingly oblivious to his own deliciously paradoxical condemnation.
These are, of course, all comments written about yours truly.
Online forums are wonderful places for learning all sorts of things about oneself. For example, they taught me I’m not a “real” street photographer because I shoot from afar with a telephoto lens. I’m not sure exactly when my 28mm lens became classified as ‘telephoto,’ nor when ‘afar’ became defined as ‘2 meters’ — though I’ll willingly admit that I’m not a real street photographer… but that’s because there is no such thing.
On numerous occasions, I’ve read that I haven’t a clue how to properly process my photos. But can a total stranger really know how I intended them to look? Frankly, my photos look exactly the way I want them to! A more astute critic would impugn my taste, but it’s always my abilities that come under attack.
My proudest moment came when a highly agitated reader claimed that I’m such a horrible photographer, that my very existence has tarnished the profession and is preventing others from finding photographic employment. How can I not be flattered that someone believes I’m both famous enough and influential enough to ruin an entire industry!
Thanks to my penchant for shooting with Leica rangefinders, one of the most oft-repeated internet condemnations is that I’m not worthy of a Leica. More often than not, the verdict is delivered with the word “sorry” in front, as in “Sorry, but Leica’s are wasted on him.” The word’s inclusion is meant, I’m sure, to soften the verdict and illustrate the benevolence of the adjudicator. But here’s the thing — and this is going to make a lot of people on a lot of forums very happy — I am in complete agreement with this assessment! It’s true, Leica’s are wasted on me. In fact, every camera I’ve ever shot with is wasted on me.
I’ve never owned a camera that wasn’t eminently capable of producing a Pulitzer Prize winning photo. Yet I’ve never won a Pulitzer. All these cameras with all this potential — and here I am squandering them on my own personal enjoyment and dubious aesthetic values. Daido Moriyama photographed his NY ’71 book with a half-frame Olympus camera. It’s a masterpiece. I actually own two Olympus half-frames, yet neither has resulted in a collection anywhere near that calibre. Josef Koudelka’s Chaos shows what one can accomplish with the panoramic format. But two years into my Hasselblad Xpan explorations, I’ve yet to produce a single photo worthy of being a Koudelka outtake. Even today’s trendiest and most popular gear is wasted on me. My Olympus OM-D E-M1? I doubt I’ve used more than 20% of its myriad feature set. Call me “lame,” but I just haven’t gotten around to employing its watercolor art filter yet. Curiously, Leica’s rangefinder cameras are so void of bells & whistles that, in many ways, they’re actually less wasted on me than other cameras — at least I use every feature in my Leica M film bodies. However, I must sheepishly admit to not having yet pushed the “M” button on top of the M246.
So what does this rambling pre-amble have to do with Leica’s new Monochrom camera? Nothing. And everything. Its main purpose is to weed out people who land on this site expecting a blow-by-blow feature assessment. Nothing prevents people from reading something quite as effectively as actual words.
Those who are brave enough to endure the prologue are usually the sort who know (or have now learned) that ULTRAsomething is neither a news site nor a review site. ULTRAsomething is about photography gear the same way that Gilligan’s Island is about survival tactics.
My exploration of this camera is still a work in progress; my opinions are mine and mine alone; and my photos are meant to satisfy myself, and not the demands of an internet audience. In other words, everything I write about Leica’s new Monochrom M (Type 246) camera is but a guidepost — markers that people are free to connect in whatever way most benefits them.
Cents and Sensibility
Another commonly-logged complaint amongst photo forumbulists (yes, I just neologized that word), is that ULTRAsomething’s camera articles are useless. Apparently, this is because the articles never actually tell the reader whether or not to buy the camera, nor if upgrading from some previous model is worth the expense.
It’s a criticism that falls just short of being justified. Yes, it’s true. But it’s true for a rather valid reason — because to do as asked is impossible! How can I make a recommendation? I have no insight into the individual wants, needs and pecuniary status of my readers. I only have insight into my own. So that’s what I write about.
Leica’s cameras, in particular, are rather expensive. So I understand the reader’s desire to find some sort of external validation that either supports their decision to purchase one, or justifies their rationale to not. But these are, ultimately, personal questions that only the reader can answer.
I’m often tempted to take the philosopher’s way out, and suggest that very few people actually need a new camera. As I wrote in a reply to a reader’s comment in the previous article, “My 1958 Leica M2 is far better at being a camera than I’ll ever be at being a photographer.” But “need” implies rational thought and intellect — and for me, photography has little to do with either, and everything to do with emotion. Different cameras may ultimately yield similar results, but the impact they have on a photographer’s instincts, methods, motivation and passion can have a profound and real effect on achieving that result.
So add this to the long list of ULTRAsomething articles that fails to state whether a camera is actually worth the expense. Instead, I’ll suggest you can find the answer you seek by simply asking yourself two questions:
- Is this camera going to provide me with a technical, tactile or emotional advantage over a camera I already own?
- If so, then am I willing to give up X, Y and Z in order to gain that advantage?
I can’t possibly answer Question #1 on your behalf. But the remainder of this article will answer it on mine.
Similarly, your X, Y and Z will likely be unique and very specific to you. Obviously, no one should be willing to give up X, Y and Z if X = “food,” Y = “shelter” and Z = “safety and security.” But what if X = “learning to cook, rather than going out to eat?” What if Y = “dumping cable TV and sticking with a 4 year-old smart phone running last years’ operating system?” What if Z = “mending your grandfather’s old hand-me-down zoot suit, rather than purchasing something more fashionable?”
Offense and Sensibility
As stated above, the first question I asked myself — and the question you’ll ultimately need to ask yourself — is “will this camera provide me with a technical, tactile or emotional advantage over a camera I already own?” For me, ergonomics are actually the most important factor when choosing a camera. In my case, that means a rangefinder. However, since I already own several, the fact the M246 is also a rangefinder does not provide it with any immediately apparent ergonomic advantage.
So, instead, I decided to look for advantages within the camera’s image quality capabilities. At first blush, this might seem a strange avenue for me to explore — after all, the appearance of my published photos certainly makes it seem as if I don’t actually care about image quality — and to an extent, that’s true. But it’s true only when discussing the look of my final prints. In reality, I like to capture as much fidelity as possible, because the more I capture, the greater the number of ways I can screw it all up in post-processing.
As I discussed in Sensors and Sensibility, I have a few quibbles when it comes to using digital cameras for so-called “street” photography. Believe me, this isn’t a “film vs. digital” debate. I like both and I shoot both. In fact, I don’t believe in pitting one format against the other. To me, they are two completely different mediums, with two completely different outcomes. What matters is not “which is better,” but “which is better for my intended purpose?” And for my use on the streets, I prefer to use film because of its exposure latitude, highlight response, and the “forgiving” nature of its less-clinical renderings. So the best thing a new digital camera could do for me is to negate some of that need for film, while providing me with all the inherent advantages that digital offers (workflow, resolution, flexibility).
What I saw from the tests I performed in Sensors and Sensibility is that the M246 has a tremendous amount of usable dynamic range. For my own particular brand of photography, this translates into the following tangible benefits:
- It means I can underexpose a scene (protecting the highlights), yet still have enough clean and meaningful shadow detail to pull up my subject in post processing. The end result won’t necessarily look like film, but it means I’ll be just as likely to “get a usable shot” with a digital camera as I currently do with film.
- It means I can use faster shutter speeds, which will freeze the motion blur that comes from having both a photographer and a subject that are frequently in motion. Using faster shutter speeds means shooting at higher ISO — even in bright sunlight — but with the camera’s stellar low light (shadow) capability, it’s a worthy trade-off.
- It means I can use narrower apertures, which will diminish focus errors caused by scale focusing. Again, narrower apertures mean shooting at higher ISOs than one might normally choose. But once again, the relatively minor increase in shadow noise is more than offset by the benefit of having more photos appear “in focus.”
While I initially only theorized these advantages (based on my controlled tests), I have since employed these techniques in the field. Though it will take a little while for me to adjust my habits to accommodate this wholesale change to balancing ISO, shutter speed and aperture, the theory has definitely been proven.
The M246 will absolutely provide me with more of a technical, tactile and emotional advantage than any camera I already own — because, until now, I’ve never used a digital camera that I’ve found so thoroughly satisfying for “street” work.
Dissents and Sensibility
There is a flip side to the question of whether a camera provides enough of an advantage to warrant consideration: “Does it create any disadvantages that will negate those hard-earned advantages?”
For some photographers, a black & white sensor might be a disadvantage (particularly if, like me, they’re considering upgrading from a color camera, like the M9). In my case, a monochromatic sensor actually provides a wealth of new advantages — many of which I discussed several years ago in the Fetishist’s Guide to the Monochrom series. 100% of my photography is black & white. This means that the sole advantage of using a color sensor rests in its ability to change relative tonalities after a photo is taken. But for me, this single advantage is more than offset by the Monochrom’s inherent image quality advantages, the workflow improvements for BW photography, and my own psychological need to actually shoot (and not just display) in black & white.
Many potential M246 customers are currently engaged in the whole CCD vs. CMOS sensor debate. M8’s, M9’s and the original Monochrom cameras all used CCD sensors. M240 series cameras (including the new Monochrom M246) use CMOS. There’s no doubt that they provide a different rendering, though I find the differences to be more apparent in color images. Like many, I have a slight preference for the appearance of a color file from a CCD that’s been exposed at base ISO. But I’m not shooting color. And I’m not shooting at base ISO. So any minuscule (and totally subjective) advantage of a CCD is ultimately lost on me, where the new M246’s high ISO capabilities (and thus, its shadow detail and dynamic range) tilt the balance totally in favour of its new CMOS sensor.
Another image quality debate that’s currently raging on the internet concerns the fact M246 files are 12-bit, and not 14-bit. I’ll admit, before I started testing the camera, this “issue” worried me a little. Although Leica explained its necessity, and mentioned they could see no real-world disadvantages to the 12-bit files, I had my doubts. So, during the test phase, I set out with every intention to prove Leica wrong. Instead, I proved that I was wrong. I could find no issues with 12-bit files. I could not “break” the images in post-production, like I thought I could. There was not one single shred of evidence in my testing that would make me think that the 12-bit nature of the M246 files constituted a “downgrade.” Perhaps a 14-bit version of this camera (were it possible) would have even greater fidelity — but the 12-bit version that currently exists definitely bests the performance of the previous 14-bit cameras.
Having thus debunked (or dismissed) the currently trending internet-based worries, I do have one actual issue to report. It concerns the way a geometrically alterered image can bring out noise patterns in the shadows. It’s a problem I first reported back in Part 3 of the Fetishist’s Guide to the Monochrom. At the time, I didn’t fret over it too much — it affected only a small percentage of my photos and, when it did, I could spend some extra time and energy minimizing the effect in post-production. Unfortunately, this issue is still present in the new M246.
In brief, this problem is as follows: Monochrom noise is extremely fine. It’s more like a light dusting of static than any sort of de-mosaicing noise or “film grain.” Because of this, even at high ISO values, the shadows appear relatively noiseless. However, if you boost those shadows by a couple of stops, you’ll start to see what looks like a loosely textured “weave” — much like you’d see if you looked closely at a fine wool suit fabric. If you then alter that image geometrically, you’ll begin to see patterns emerge. Even a simple rotation (such as you might perform to level a horizon) will cause a sort of tilted, grid-like pattern to appear in the amplified shadow regions. If you perform any non-linear geometric distortions (such as lens correction or keystone correction), then the shadow noise will display a subtle moire-like effect with undulating lines and waves appearing within the noise. Remember when you learned about magnetism in grade school? You’d sprinkle some iron dust on a paper and the dusting looked totally random. But when you brought a magnet near it, those iron particles would begin to form patterns. That’s exactly what can happen to the amplified shadow noise in a high ISO Monochrom file.
The best way to minimize any pattern is, of course, to avoid doing what causes it to appear: Don’t shoot at high ISO; then don’t add add several stops of exposure to that file’s shadows; then don’t manipulate the heck out of that image’s geometry.” Right — you might as well tell me to give up photography. So the next best way to minimize the patterns is to actually add some irregularity to the shadow noise. If I have a file that I know will be tortured in post-processing, I’ll add some noise to the shadow regions, then export an upsized version of that file from Lightroom. This works much the same way that dithering works in digital audio. Because digital audio is so clean, any time you re-sample it, you end up with audible artifacts that are imprinted on the sound by the processing algorithms. In order to render these artifacts inaudible, noise is added to the file before it’s resampled.
I have no idea if this is what’s happening with Monochrom files, but on the surface it seems that the noise is so fine that it actually enables us to see exactly what sort of pattern-based processing algorithms are being used by our image processing software — algorithms that are supposed to be invisible to the naked eye become visible because there’s not enough noise to mask them. I’ve tested Monochrom files with both Capture One and Lightroom/Camera Raw, and the results are essentially the same.
If my theory is correct, and if the Monochrom continues to grow in popularity, some enterprising developer might be well served by adding an automatic dithering option to their RAW converter — precisely for the purpose of dealing with low-noise, fine-grained files like those produced by the Monochrom. Hopefully, I’ll find some time this month to perform further tests, and seek out the guidance and knowledge of both Leica and various RAW converter developers. If I find out more, I’ll post a follow-up article.
Vents and Sensibility
Though my testing of the new Monochrom M246 uncovered a cornucopia of tangible imaging advantages, I do have a few issues regarding the camera’s ergonomics. Granted, the M246 is still a rangefinder, and a rangefinder is the #1 requirement for my particular style of shooting. But there are a few worrisome trends developing in today’s digital rangefinders — some of which dampen my enthusiasm somewhat.
I must first begin with a confession: Two years ago, when I first took Leica’s new M (Type 240) for a “test drive,” I had a rather negative response. To say I didn’t like the new body would be an understatement. The 100g of excess weight really annoyed me. The relocated menu button sat directly beneath where my thumb wanted to rest, forcing it over onto the LCD, where its extra thickness cause my wrist to ache. I was completely discombobulated by the fact that, when I brought the camera to my eye, I couldn’t see any frame lines until the camera “woke up,” which felt like an eternity. I suffered separation anxiety over Leica’s decision to remove the frame line select lever, and was even inexplicably annoyed there was no longer a number following the letter “M.” After a single evening spent shooting the M (240), I felt a renewed sense of appreciation for my slimmer (in hand), lighter and “proper” M9.
But this only represents half a confession. Because back in 2006, when Leica released the M8, I had a similarly negative response. Though roughly the same weight as a film M, the M8’s extra thickness made the camera feel much heavier and seem far clunkier. Gripping it made my wrist ache. It seemed to take a similar measure of eternity to write a file to the SD card, and I was totally distressed by the thunderous noise that would spring forth from its shutter.
It was 2009 before I finally purchased an M8, deciding that my dislike of digital SLRs was greater than any ergonomic issues I might have had with the M8. Over time, I grew rather accustom to the M8’s extra thickness and, though it still never felt as good in-hand as a film M, I was able to build up enough wrist strength that it no longer hurt to carry it all day. I never did adapt to the shutter sound, which is one of the reasons why I upgraded to the M9 immediately upon its announcement.
So it’s rather ironic that I immediately dismissed the M240 for failing to match the ergonomics of the M8/M9 when, in fact, I once dismissed that earlier line for its own collection of ergonomic issues. Progress always exacts its price. Fortunately, when the Monochrom M (Type 246) arrived, I was mentally prepared from both my previous M240 experience and from my M8 experience, which taught me that first impressions weren’t always lasting impressions.
I’ve been in possession of a prototype M246 for a month now, and I’ve had the opportunity to take it for several dozen walks. In general, I’m still somewhat annoyed by both the weight and ergonomic concerns. When I bought the M8, it was the lightest, most compact high-fidelity digital camera I owned. I never had to choose between my “good” camera and my “portable” camera — they were one and the same. But a lot has changed since then. Today, the 240-series M’s are the heaviest, least compact digital cameras in my (temporary) possession. Now, when I walk out the door, I must once again choose between fidelity (Leica) or portability (any of my other digital cameras).
Fortunately, for the past month, the choice wasn’t mine to make. I had to take the M246 because I had to test it. And the more I tested it, the more I fell in love with it. In the end, I felt about the M246 the way I ultimately felt about the M8 — that my appreciation for what the camera could do (and how it did it) was greater than my dislike for its heavier, more awkward body.
Thankfully, Leica returned the exiled frameline select lever to the M246. The missing number after the letter “M” (which, admittedly was about as ridiculous an annoyance as has ever been stated) was also rectified, because the M246 has no logo or model demarkations whatsoever. I’m still not totally thrilled with the electronic framelines, but at least they seem to be set for 2m (making framing a bit more WYSYWIG than my M9). Hopefully, now that Leica has put the framelines under battery control, they’ll go the extra step in a future model M and make them expand and contract dynamically with distance. Then, at least, there will be a tangible benefit to waiting for the framelines to “wake up.”
My other problem with the 240-type body was (and continues to be) the placement of the Menu button, which is located directly beneath the spot at which my thumb usually grips a camera. This is an issue I have with nearly every modern digital camera, and not just Leica. Customer demand for larger LCDs has reduced the space available for control buttons. So whenever I carry a camera in hand (which is always), those buttons are in the way — forcing my thumb onto the LCD, where the extra thickness makes the camera feel awkward. I’ve taken to using my old first-generation Match Technical Thumbs Up, which I purchased for my M8 back in the day. Although it partially obscures this camera’s thumb dial, it provides an alternate way of carrying the camera — at least until my wrist gets more buff.
One caveat, however, is that when the Thumbs Up is attached, then Leica’s external electronic viewfinder can’t be used. Which segues nicely into the next topic…
Kaizen and Sensibility
Like most every aspect of modern camera design, I have a love/hate relationship with live view cameras. Technically, I’m fine with the whole idea of live view — particularly when it’s offered as an addition to a more traditional ‘optical’ view, which I greatly prefer to use. Any frustrations I do have with live view cameras tend to expand or contract based on their implementation.
In order for live view to be useful for me, it needs to offer two things: focus peaking and an electronic viewfinder. Fortunately, both are present on the M246, but each has caveats. Specifically, the focus peaking works reasonably well, but I find it slightly more difficult to see than on some other camera models. The other necessity — the electronic viewfinder — is available only through purchase of an external contraption. External viewfinders, by nature, are large, clumsy and inelegant. This one also happens to be of only mediocre optical quality.
In spite of my tempered enthusiasm for this camera’s live view implementation, I’m still thrilled to have it. That’s because the M246 is, at heart, a classical rangefinder with a fully optical viewfinder and focus mechanism. Every modern camera manufacture makes a live view camera, but which of them can sell you an honest-to-goodness rangefinder? Just one — Leica. Yet, as much as I need and rely on rangefinders, there are times when it’s not the optimal way to focus. Fast lenses shot wide open? They benefit from live view. Those 90mm and 135mm Leica lenses that go unloved and unmounted for months on end? They have renewed purpose thanks to live view’s ability to easily focus them. Low ambient light? Another prime reason for using live view. The viewing, framing and focusing options on the 240-series are an absolute delight — combining all the benefits of rangefinder cameras with the shot-saving benefits of a focus-peaking live view when you need it. So the presence of live view on a Leica M series camera — even an implementation as middling as this — is the cherry atop the icing on the gravy on the cake.
Suspense and Sensibility
Let’s revisit my first pre-purchase question, “Will the Leica M Monochrom (Type 246) provide me with a technical, tactile or emotional advantage over a camera I already own?”
The answer is absolutely, unequivocally and enthusiastically “yes.” The camera’s technical advantages are leagues above any other camera I own. The emotional benefits of shooting a digital monochromatic camera proved themselves to me back when I first tested the original M9-based Monochrom, and they continue with this camera. The tactile victory is a bit less one-sided: I find the heavier body and electronic framelines somewhat less desirable than what my M9 offers. But these quibbles are more than offset by the benefits of live view, the quieter shutter, the beefier battery and the overall reliability of the M246.
So with Question #1 definitively answered, I have now moved on to question #2: “Am I willing to give up X, Y and Z in order to gain that advantage?”
I am presently in the process of defining exactly what X, Y and Z might mean to me… In the meantime, I’ve still got Leica’s prototype M246 in my possession, and I’m in no hurry to remind them of that fact.
©2015 grEGORy simpson
ABOUT THESE PHOTOS: At the end of most articles, I provide technical details about each of its photos: what camera, which lens, what film and developer. In this case, all the photos are taken with a prototype Leica M Monochrom (Type 246), and thus do not require any film or development data. I could, of course, provide lens information, but frankly I’m sick of writing about gear. I will tell you that all these photos were taken with either a Leica 28mm f/2 Summicron, a Leica 50mm f/2 Summicron APO, my old 1946 thread mount Leica 35mm f/3.5 Elmar or the Voigtlander 21mm f/4 Color Skopar.
Does it matter which lens was used for which photo? I hope not. Because my only intent for the past few weeks was (as I stated at the end of Sensors and Sensibility) “to determine whether or not the M246 is capable of stooping to my level.” Sure, Leica’s new Monochrom is designed for the production of stunning images. But I don’t actually take stunning images and, honestly, I don’t even really like stunning images. So if the camera can only produce such images, it’s of little value to me. Instead, I needed to learn whether or not the M246 could take photos that were unmistakably mine. You know — lo-fidelity, high-cheekiness, dubiously useful snapshots of day-to-day life. Mission Accomplished… and in spades.
REMINDER: If you find these photos enjoyable or the articles beneficial, please consider making a DONATION to this site’s continuing evolution. As you’ve likely realized, ULTRAsomething is not an aggregator site — serious time and effort go into developing the original content contained within these virtual walls.
Great article. You really have to take all those negative comments with a grain of salt, as these days complaining has become a national sport. As an owner of an M240, I generally agree with your first impressions with the camera. I too felt that there was really no need to make it that heavy. My “thing,” if you can call it that, is camera ergonomics. I realize that Mr. Ives at Apple can’t design everything, but I find that that today, even with Leica, there seems to be an imbalance in how some of their camera-lens combos handle overall when it comes to weight/dimension distribution. Granted that this has reached critical levels with other camera manufacturers, but Leica is not immune to it. My hope was (and I guess, still is) that future iterations of the M line will ease up a bit on weight, so I was a bit surprised to hear that the M246 didn’t address this issue. Doesn’t make me very hopeful for the M240 replacement, whenever it comes out, although admittedly, some of the recent rumors being put out by La Vida Leica do give me a semblance of hope.
Hi Eric: Thanks for taking the time and effort to comment!
I should mention (lest I be misunderstood) that I actually enjoy stumbling across the criticism. One must if one’s going to write a photography blog (particularly the ULTRAsomething blog) for nearly seven years.
This might be a good place to make an actual product recommendation (unlike the way I deftly skirted doing so in the article). The product I recommend is a book called, Lexicon of Musical Invective. The book is nothing more than a compendium of mean-spirited, off-target, pompously-proclaimed assessments of various classical composers, as delivered by their contemporaries.
It’s been in print continuously since 1953. I purchased a copy nearly 30 years ago, and it had a profound effect on my ability to absorb any and all criticism. All I have to do is pick it up and flip to any page… For example, Page 147 (in my edition):
“It is one’s duty to hate with all possible fervor the empty and ugly in art; and I hate Saint-Saëns the composer with a hate that is perfect.” — J. F. Ranchman, 1896.
or… flip… flip… Page 221:
“There is lately come to town an Italian gentleman, to whose brassy screeds and tinkling cymbals it is expected that all habitués of the opera must listen, to the utter exclusion and oblivion of the old musical worthies who delighted the world with their immortal works… before the Father of Evil had invented Signor Giuseppe Verdi.” — G. A. Sala, 1863.
Not only do I consider this book required reading for anyone whose creative endeavours expose them to criticism, but I recommend it to all who choose to criticize — because today’s online pundits, gadflies and detractors could learn a whole lot about venomous criticism from their professional forefathers. 😉
This is priceless, thanks or sharing those quotes. As someone who handles customer complaints from time to time, I find welcome humour in Slush Pile Hell – abrupt responses to unsolicited manuscripts from a publishing agent. You might enjoy some of these… http://slushpilehell.tumblr.com/
Nice article and photos. I especially liked #2 and #3. Always fun to read about Leicas, which I have not been able to afford for over 50 years. How does one get on their list for loaners? Do they make any cameras that fit in a shirt pocket like my Canon 330HS? If you’re aiming for respect in the photo world, you could always work as a nanny and then die in obscurity. Be sure to box up your negs for the auction.
If it’s any solace, I’ve found your blogs on the M246 to be the best. I can identify with much of what you’ve written. I’ve owned hundreds of cameras over the years (film cameras from Olympus, Hasselblad, Leica) to any number of digital cams from Fuji, Canon, Nikon and again, Leica. Each camera was a better camera than I was as a photographer (though I have made real money from my photography).
It may be heresy to say on the internet, but many people buy Leica because they think the most expensive camera must produce the best images. I’ve proven (to myself) that my old D7000 with the 50 f/1.4G (worth around $700 USD) is indistinguishable from photos taken with the M240 and Summilux 50 f/1.4 (a $10,000 kit).
It reminds me of my other passion – guitars. I could buy the exact same guitar as Clapton, SRV or BB King and sound like a rank amateur, yet each of these artists could string rubber bands across a cigar box and sound better than 99% of other guitarists. Tools don’t make the artist.
What I love about Leica is the minimalist approach to it all (and the substantial build quality). I connect with these cameras on a very fundamental level. They make me THINK about each shot because each photo requires user involvement and offers little in the way of automation. Overpriced, but worth every penny. But they aren’t magical.
The internet is full of arm-chair experts and sanctimonious snobs bemoaning 12-bit vs. 14-bit DNGs or the definition of authentic “street” photography.
Nice article. Well expressed opinion, and good accompanying photographs.
Love this quote “and ULTRAsomething is about photography gear the same way that Gilligan’s Island is about survival tactics.” Made me laugh out loud – had to quote it and “tweet” it.
Sad that much written on-line is without regard for another’s feelings, without regard for facts, and generally un-intelligent. I think a lot of it is written to excite and incite others. Do your best to disregard the cruder criticisms. I have been a victims of incorrect and basely motivated on -line criticism. Took me a while to get over my sadness. I no longer look at those sites .. I’ve seen celebrity mean tweets by Jimmy Kimmel – part of being a celebrity, I guess.
I agree with your criticism of increasing weight and depth. I hope Leica makes a thinner, lighter M – even at the sacrifice of all of the brass.
I’m a new reader here (in case you noticed a big spike of activity of one on your blog index recently) and really enjoy your blog! You’re in good company as a target of criticism from the forumbulists: Dan Neil who won the Pulitzer Prize for his car reviews (car reviews!!!) basically writes cultural observations refracted through the prism of a car review and while many gear heads appreciate (and poorly ape) his unique writing style, many also criticize him for not listing all the specs and minutiae of the cars and writing a more conventional review. Who cares? All that stuff is just a search away.
Anyway, all this to say that your writing seems to be of similar intent: it often places photography in a cultural context and that seems to be an important thing barely anyone is doing.
Andre:
Wait. What? Really?! You can win awards for writing columns like this?! Now I feel doubly-inadequate — turns out there are TWO categories of Pulitzer I’m suddenly not good enough to win…
Seriously, thanks for the info about Dan Neil. I had no idea the way I wrote was an actual “genre” — I thought it was just a mental disorder.
Thanks for spiking my blog stats, and for taking the time to comment.
Egor. I laughed out load.
I read passages to my wife. And, before you wonder at the type of relationship we must have to read to her from ULTRAsomething, well, just know, you made her laugh as much and she couldn’t care less about the photography portion of life.
Goes to show, you are definitely on the right track. Who needs gear reviews when you can be ENTERTAINED!
Keep thinking your great thoughts and sharing them with us.
Time to go, I have a gear review to write. Oh, the irony!
-Don
PS: The photos are great evidence that the M246 is definitely the digital camera for you!
Don:
Thanks for the dual comments.
I’m a bit surprised to hear I’ve become a crossover artist, and am now winning new fans in the arena of “family entertainment.” Maybe that whole “Gilligan’s Island” reference wasn’t as far fetched as I intended…
And I’m glad you enjoyed the photos. They are definitely the sort of shots I relish taking, which makes me a particularly good match for any model of Leica M… but this one’s got that certain extra “something.”
Hi egor
Great article – or should I say Great entertainment? I think I can say that I agree with everything (and as a fellow traveller with the new camera, that’s pretty good). More than that I really enjoyed the read.
About the thickness . . . . I also carry my camera in my hand – always – even though our country paths might not require quite such an instant response as your city streets. But I have no problem with menu buttons or thickness as I carry it in my left hand holding on to the lens. With a film camera you need to carry it in your right hand (where the wind on lever sits), but with digital I prefer to have my left hand positioned on the focus ring. I’m not sure that this is any faster than your way, but I don’t think it’s any slower, and it never occurred to me that the menu button was in a bad place.
Which just goes to show how hard it is to speak for others – most of the people I see carry their camera bouncing along on their front – or their side.
All the very best
Jono Slack
When I have read an ULTRAsomething article I feel calm, and it lasts several minutes.
For a while I had the M240 and the MM and I really noticed the difference in weight. But I also noticed the MM’s stupid screen and medieval drawbridge and portcullis shutter. Hopefully edition Next will be lighter and thinner.
I’m lazy enough today that my perfectly good, or to borrow from you – still superior to me Ricoh GR gets more use than my M. I increasingly use the M-P with a 50mm while carrying the GR in a pocket for 28mm. So re-losing the 100g might make me notice the weight of the modern M less.
Ultimately I like two things about Leica – that they continue to innovate just enough to stay viable; and, ironically, that when you own one there’s no big need to upgrade.
P.S. – your self-depracation is all well and good, but I draw the line at the Xpan, where I think you are more than a match for the camera than any other user whose work I have seen.
Hi Linden:
Apparently Newton’s Third Law of Motion also applies to blogging. Because the calm you feel upon reading one of my articles is directly opposite the hyper state of agitated irritability I experience while penning it. Though my state lasts for days (not minutes), so I guess the process must generate a lot of heat.
And thanks for the Xpan compliment — I really enjoy shooting with it, though it’s such a different mindset from standard-frame photography. I find it takes me a couple of days to “train myself” to see that way then, when I’m done, it takes a couple days to return to shooting a normal aspect ratio. I find it difficult to “dabble” in it.
Egor
All I can say is “thank you”. Thoroughly enjoying your writing style and more importantly your sensibility and sense of humor. I usually flip through images pretty quickly online, but I find myself taking my time and really looking at your photos. The two girls taking their selfie in the first picture is just perfect.
Rich
Thanks, Rich.
And thanks for taking the time to actually look at what’s inside the photos — though I must admit, sometimes they’re so subtle, even I’m not sure if I “get” them.
I really like your way of describing the mental process of getting a new camera / or not. Also I like your positive take on the whole culture of internet trashing.
I have never had a fullframe Leica between my hands, I have never been a b/w purist, nor did I ever do much manual focus work.
Anyways I sit here with the sensation that if I guy like me – took the plunge into that rangefinder / b&w / manual focusing mindset – it would do wonders for my whole photografic experience…
Thanks… I guess?!
I made my own decision to “invest” in a Leica M a little while ago, but there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that your honest experiences and observations regarding your journey, had a significant influence on my thinking.
It never occurred to me to criticise your writing or photography. I must have missed that memo, but then again I’ve been too busy taking photos on my own Leica journey.
Thanks for your work. Written and photographic, it’s inspiring…
If I had a personal top-ten list of gear reviews, your review would be the number one, miles ahead of the rest. All your comments about the pros and cons of the camera are very useful and make 100% sense to me. And your images are fabulous! Thank you very much for sharing your view with us!
Thanks Sthlm!
Glad you enjoyed the article.
I gather from your name that either 1) your parents were allergic to vowels, or 2) you’re from Stockholm? That’s a place I’ve always dreamed of going but… well… much like owning a Leica Monochrom, it still remains a dream.
Really fun to read your approach to looking at the new monochrome. As someone who’s made a living with cameras for over forty years I find it interesting to see that your struggle is the same as mine in some ways. I’ve got plenty of cameras, and usually use the one for the job. Over the years, that’s ranged from an 11 x 14 view camera to a Fuji X100. With many in between. I’ve owned a Leica of one kind or another most of that time and every once in a while get to use one on a job. What I’ve found for myself, is that I’m personally the happiest with a Leica or a Nikon F in my hand when I’m shooting for myself. I don’t always get to do that, there’s where the justification comes in. Me time. Keep on putting it out there, if even to give your detractors a sense of purpose. That can be their “Me” time, while your making photographs.
Randy:
Thanks for the kind comments!
Though, now that you mentioned shooting with an 11×14, I do feel a bit silly having moaned on-and-on about the M246’s weight and ergonomics. 🙂
I’m new to UltraSomething (thanks for the link, Jono!) and enjoying it.
Two good articles on the MM246 … I’ll keep reading.
I think the MM246 will be a fine addition to my kit so I’ve ordered one. I’ll let you know my evaluation when I get it, if you’re so inclined. It will be briefer than yours, I suspect, with no disparagement intended regards the length of your articles.
Regards critique, one of my favorite pieces is Mark Twain’s “Fenimore Cooper’s Literary Offenses.”
Be well, and keep going with the photographs.
Hi Godfrey:
Once you’ve got an article post, feel free to drop back in with a comment and let ULTRAsomething’s readers know where they can find it…
gee…I LIKE your photographs…what does that say about ME?
I always enjoy your writing, even when it’s about equipment. I won’t be ordering the new Leica, not because I don’t want one, but simply because I’d rather spend that money on travel and good food & wine and maybe using the cameras I already have a little more often.
Keep up the great work, or as Bob Dylan once sang, “keep on keeping’ on”.
“gee…I LIKE your photographs…what does that say about ME?”
It says you have impeccable taste, obviously. 🙂
Thank you, Egor, for a wonderful piece of writing. I bought the original MM a couple of years ago. Great! For me personally, the thing about the MM was all the stuff it didn’t have. I could have done without the LCD screen, but as it is useless for anything else but to see the menues and to check the histogram, it’s ok. So, in my opinion, live view, EVF and movie function is rather more of a downgrade than an upgrade. Woulden’t mind the improved ISO range, though…
Best regards, FC
PS. Like you, I don’ give a rat’s ass about what “people” think about my photos, but I do care about what knowledgable persons whose eyes I trust think about them. But that’s a different story.
Hi Finn,
Thanks for commenting. I agree about the original Monochrom. For me, the fewer features a camera has, the more I like it… probably why I went gaga over the Leica M-A a few months ago (and why I’ve developed a fondness for point-and-shoot film cameras over the last few years).
I will admit though, after using the new M246 for a few weeks, I’ve found the Live View helpful on several occasions: wide open critical focusing at f/1.4 (Noctilux users will really delight in Live View); focusing in ridiculously low light is now possible; plus the new life that the camera has given the 90mm and 135mm lenses (though, frankly, I don’t have a clue how to use these lenses effectively yet, since I never have before). But, 99% of the time, the M246 is still just a rangefinder — a slightly too thick and too heavy rangefinder… but a rangefinder.
Hi Egor,
Another enjoyable read, well thought out and written. Cheers.
I must admit to having a good old chuckle throughout the article, as it all felt comfortably familiar.
As a ‘street photographer’, blogger and writer, my experience has been in a similar vein with regards other folks attitudes towards the work I produce, and for as long as I can remember.
Somewhat strangely though, if I don’t get at least a few ‘heartfelt’ appraisals per month, I worry that I’m doing something wrong. 😀
Keep up the fine work and hard effort and look forward to more,
Kev
Hi Kevin:
Thanks for empathy. I agree with you that those “heartfelt” appraisals are necessary. I never fear the naysayers, no matter how nasty they might get. It’s the “non-sayers” that I fear! No one wants to release an article (or series of photos) into the wild, only to have it sucked into internet oblivion!
Great post Gregory.
It will be (I hope) a long time before I replace the MM, which is my favorite camera ever (just ever so slightly menaced by the super-portability of the Ricoh GR with OVF). And I do very much hope that by then Leica will have indeed overcome the bloat factor that seems to have bugged their designers.
As you say, the M9 is already a bit of a rude shock compared to the film Ms, thick enough and heavy enough to be a pain on the wrist after a while (how do D810 users cope?). 100 more grams are 100 too many, in my book…
But back to the MM and the M246 — well, hard to go back to their color sisters & BW conversion once you try the liberating depth of those files…
Thanks again for sharing your mind in such great style!
Giovanni: Yeah. If I had an original Monochrom, I’d be a lot less tempted than I am now. But as someone whose only digital M is the M9… Hmmm…
I gotta admit. If it weren’t for Leica releasing the new Type 246 Monochrom, I wouldn’t have bothered to ever pick up a 240-series camera again. I’d convinced myself it was too clunky and unwieldy. But it’s amazing how much “lighter” and “streamlined” the camera gets each time I import a day’s shots into my Lightroom library. Why, it’s practically a feather now. 🙂
Egor,
I enjoyed your articles about Leica´s new Monochrom – thank you. I would like to explain this more distinguished but I am afraid that my English is not sufficient. Keep on – writing and taking pictures.
Best regards,
Klaus
Thanks, Klaus!
Thanks Gregory for sharing more of your insights; amen to your comments.
I am just about to finally make the leap from my M9 + M9P to an MM (i can somewhat ‘justify’ to myself spending 4 large ones on a camera, but 8 is still out of the question, plus I do not feel any interest towards live view, movie, etc.), and i think the MM will be all that i need and more.
Having jumped back and forth from Leicas (film and digital) to other cameras, I realize that the main reason I always end up with one in my hands is that it IS the camera that i LOVE shooting with the most.
All other debates over technical features, performance, cost, ergonomics, practicality are pointless to me. I just KNOW that if i love the camera it reflects positively in how much I shoot (and I am one of those who still shoot digital as if it was film, i will rarely shoot more than one ‘roll’ per outing, unless the subject(s) require it), and in the quality of the outcome.
so, are ready to pull the trigger on this one? it looks like it is your ‘soul mate’ and a great complement to your film work….
enjoy your beautiful Vancouver in the summer!
Stefano:
Nice to hear from you again!
The original Monochrom is certainly no less wonderful now than it was before the M246 came out. It was my dream camera for three years. But, alas, it always remained just a dream. Personally, I think the fact photographers can now choose between TWO monochromatic Leica M cameras is unbelievable (and extremely fortuitous).
One factor that sways me in favour of the M246 is that it has some weather sealing. It’s not a camera I’d let get caked in snow nor use to document a hurricane, but I wouldn’t be too concerned about pulling it out and shooting on a typical rainy day. There is absolutely no way I would ever shoot my M9 in the rain, and since the original Monochrom is based on the M9, that became the deciding factor that prevented me from purchasing one. Yeah… the cameras are expensive. But they’re TWICE as expensive if you live in Vancouver, and can thus only use them half the number of days… Of course (if I recall correctly), you live a couple thousand miles down the coast from me, where it rarely rains… but isn’t this an El Niño year? I know the weather forecasters keep ‘warning’ us that it’s going to be an unusually warm and dry summer and fall — which means it might be unusually wet for you. 😉
hello there,
yes, your memory does serve you right, and here in LA it really never rains, just like the song says …. this is looking like an unusually “wet” year, and we are probably seeing as much rain in 6 months as you would see in a weekend up there!!
i never worried too much about shooting in any weather with my cameras (i spent this last winter in Montreal, was working on a long project there, and the bad weather never stopped me from going out with the M9; snow is not as ‘bad’ as rain, of course, and as long as you keep the camera under your coat when not using it, you should be fine – of course up there the bigger issue was the cold, you need to be quick with your shoot before your fingers freeze!).
i am about to relocate to europe, so i will be following your blog from across the ocean,
be well
stefano
Hi Gregory,
thanks for sharing your opinion on the new Leica MM. I really enjoyed reading your article and watching some wonderful “street” photography pictures.
Hope I’ll meet you someday here in downtown Vancouver… you’ll recognize me for having one of the few Leica ME in the world 😉
David
Hi David:
Nice to hear from a fellow Vancouver photographer! If you ever see me shooting around town, feel free to stop me and say “hello.” Of course, it’s highly unlikely that you’ll ever actually see me. I managed to perfect the art of invisibility around the same time I learned to scale focus with reasonable accuracy.
Loved the first part of the your piece, Gregory. It really emphasized what I was going through when I first considered selling my Nikon D2H bodies and all the lenses and accessories as I transitioned from a working news photographer to retirement forced due to the recession. To be honest, I did not read all of your words about the new Monochrom because, as much as I would love one, digital Leica is way out of my price range. I settled instead for a pair of Fuji X-System (X100S and X-E1 w/35mm f1.4) and my dad’s old Yashica Electro35 GS.
But I digress. One of the reasons I frequent your blog is you seem to make more sense that a lot of gearheads. And, for that, I thank you. Keep the great sound bites coming!!!
Richard:
You might think I’d be immune to it by now, but it still irks me every time I hear of another photojournalist forced into “early retirement” by a society that believes photography is nothing more than a technical endeavour.
It’s like saying, “writers are people who spell better than the general public. But now that we have spell checkers, we no longer need writers because everybody can spell!”
Perhaps we will return to a time when society once again appreciates that photographers can be story tellers, poets, politicians and entertainers — and not just interchangeable cogs who record a scene without thought, emotion, context or meaning.
But I too digress… See I told you I get irked! Thanks for writing, and keep the Electro35 GS stocked with film!
I still frequent the sites of still-working PJs and admire them for carry forth the tradition with some great work. But a return to where editors and other bean counters see the value of a dedicated photographer are probably gone forever. News organizations are too intent on being “everything to everybody”. I once followed the career of a young shooter at a sister paper before I left the news biz. The push by higher ups for video for the website has really hurt his still shooting skills. It is a shame as he had a really great eye for “seeing” and capturing great still images. So I fully understand you getting “irked”.
I am slayed 🙂