Comparison of M8 vs M9 for Monochrome Conversions

Discussion in 'Leica M Camera Forum' started by Brian, Apr 5, 2014.

  1. Brian

    Brian Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Apr 3, 2013
    Several users that have owned the M8 and M9 have commented that the M8 images do not require as much work to yield a good monochrome conversion. I took the M8 and M9 today to get some images, and play with them with Silver Efex 2 and LR4.4. I'll post some more, as I get time. 1956 KMZ on the M9, and Valdai J-3 on the M8. 8-bit DNG with the M8, standard. Will post some 16-bit later.

    13655604264_2cb31e8159_o.

    Simulated Yellow filter. I tried to keep the same distance, the 1.33x crop of the M8 is evident.
     

    Attached Files:

    • Like Like x 2
  2. Brian

    Brian Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Apr 3, 2013
    This is the 16-bit DNG, Valdai wide-open, no IR cut.
     

    Attached Files:

  3. brusby

    brusby Leica Place Regular Subscribing Member

    96
    Mar 1, 2014
    Thanks Brian. It's always interesting trying to uncover what's fact and what's fiction.

    I'm only able to view on my phone right now, but the 2nd photo (m8?) looks a bit darker, particularly the area of the trees and surrounding vegetation. I'm guessing it's just the 2 aperture mechanisms being a bit out of calibration with each other???


    Addendum:

    Now that I've had a chance to view these first two images on my computer monitor, the level differences seem very minor. They were quite pronounced on my iPhone earlier today. But, Brian, I see you've edited your post tonight and I'm just wondering whether any brightness adjustment was made to the images or whether my phone or computer monitor is lying to me. :confused:
     
  4. Brian

    Brian Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Apr 3, 2013
    This Cannon is Black- test of Shadow detail,

    M9 up first, F4, Simulated Yellow.

    13655198563_d60b4bbcc9_b.

    M8, 8-Bit DNG, No IR Cut, F4, simulated Yellow.

    13655443664_e21f064436_b.

    M8, 16-Bit DNG, No IR Cut, Simulated Yellow.

    13655015405_07d88df8ff_b.
     
  5. Brian

    Brian Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Apr 3, 2013
    M9, F4, Simulated Yellow,

    13655197923_9a0f920e86_b.

    M8, F4, Jpeg from DNG-8, Simulated Yellow

    13655092245_30ce87743a_b.

    M8, F4, Jpeg from DNG-16, Simulated Yellow

    13655042923_fef72da2d4_b.
     
  6. Brian

    Brian Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Apr 3, 2013
    M8, Jpeg from DNG-16, F4, Simulated Yellow.

    13655364904_1cf4a75b51_b.

    Same, from the DNG-8,

    13655123243_fd34dd0317_b.

    From the M9.

    13655518904_a880509fd2_b.
     
  7. Brian

    Brian Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Apr 3, 2013
    Okay. I;m going out on a Limb here...

    I like the results from the M8 DNG-16, seems to have more shadow detail. The spectral response is different between the sensors, the M8 has a lower response to reds- but extends into the IR.
     
  8. Brian

    Brian Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Apr 3, 2013
    With the IR Cut filter,

    Leica M8, KMZ J-3 at F8.

    13655168433_260fc32b1e_b.

    IR Cut filter, KMZ at F1.5. All of these are Simulated Yellow.

    13655163453_a9ff212574_b.

    On the M9 at F1.5, "ISO 80".

    13655511624_ea4a62c388_b.
     
  9. Brian

    Brian Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Apr 3, 2013
    M9, at F4,

    13655193603_d573c03c0d_b.

    M8, IR-Cut filter, F4,

    13655166103_aa4d307fd0_b.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. brusby

    brusby Leica Place Regular Subscribing Member

    96
    Mar 1, 2014
    Hmmm, but most of the m9 shots are darker overall. I'm not sure it's safe to draw any conclusions, particularly about shadow detail, until that issue is addressed.

    Now you've got me wondering what's causing the overall brightness differences. Is it the different sensitivities to varying wavelengths displayed by the two sensors? Or is it just a matter of having used different lenses on the cameras, with the lens on the m8 letting in more light than the one on the m9? I'm guessing the best way to resolve it is to do some tests with the same lens on both cameras, and without changing the aperture even the slightest amount. If the same apparent level differences persist, then it's safe to conclude the sensors or associated electronics are the cause.
     
  11. NJH

    NJH Leica Place Regular

    97
    Apr 29, 2013
    The brightness difference is very surprising, Brian are all these shots metering the same from the camera?

    I greatly prefer the M9 images in this set but that is entirely due to the M8 ones looking to mid tone heavy, a lot of the M9 images look a little under exposed though.
     
  12. Brian

    Brian Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Apr 3, 2013
    I edited the post to add the pictures of the cameras, did not change the existing images. The contrast of the J-3 (and Sonnars in general) increases dramatically when stopped down to F2.8~F4.

    The 16-bit DNG images from the M8 have much lighter shadows, the 8-Bit DNG appears to have more "Macro-Contrast" as darker pixels with close values get "truncated" into a compressed bin. That's what I think is going on.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  13. Brian

    Brian Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Apr 3, 2013
    This was an "ease-of-use" test, both cameras set to 0 compensation and aperture preferred auto.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. NJH

    NJH Leica Place Regular

    97
    Apr 29, 2013
    Thanks Brian, maybe its because I have been shooting film again rather than digital but I see the same thing in a lot of MM images. Just to much dark and not enough highlights to make the image pop in general IMHO. Many seem to like dark looking images though.

    I know that the metering in Leica bodies couldn't have changed much, my M6 and M8 meter more or less identically, it was something I checked when I bought the M6.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  15. Brian

    Brian Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Apr 3, 2013
    I think it's a style of late, someone on another forum stated that my M Monochrom images were flat. I put up some of my Panatomic-X in Microdol. Then got, "Oh, I used to process them like that too, in the 1950s". Old lenses, old style?
     
  16. NJH

    NJH Leica Place Regular

    97
    Apr 29, 2013
    Maybe but I shot a roll of Acros a couple of weekends back and was blown away when I got the scans back. It just looks incredible but not dark like a lot of Leica digital B&W so I think its more of a film vs digital thing. BTW I bought myself a 10x pack of the Acros as its my new love and will be the go to film when the sun is shining here. I will post some examples soon as the tonality it can pick out can be mind blowing and the grain is like velvet.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  17. Brian

    Brian Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Apr 3, 2013
    This one is with the M Monochrom, C-Sonnar 50/1.5 at F4, with an Orange filter. Straight export to JPEG.
     

    Attached Files:

    • Like Like x 3
  18. asiafish

    asiafish Leica Place All-Pro

    Aug 9, 2013
    Bakersfield, CA
    Andrew
    Plenty of highlights and "Pop" here!
     
    • Like Like x 1
  19. Brian

    Brian Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Apr 3, 2013
    Just to add about the brightness of the images: I switched off the lenses between the two cameras for the test, I had the IR cut filter for the KMZ only. It not the transmittance of the lenses making a difference, either "built in bias" of the metering of the cameras and/or spectral response. The response of the two sensors is quite different, Kodak changed the dye used. The KAF-18500 boosted the efficiency in the RED band to ~1.5x that of the M8's KAF-10500.