[Leica] IMGS: Tests with MM and M246

[Mark Rabiner]

I think tests most often involve the actual act of taking pictures. When one
tries to be a bit controlled about it and it not shooting the pictures for a
portfolio piece  but it perhaps comparing the result ageist another camera
or lens then it gets called a test.


On 2/11/16 3:24 PM, "Tina Manley" <images at comporium.net> wrote:

> If you want a test done on a tripod there are plenty on the internet.  Here
> is one:
> 
> http://www.reddotforum.com/content/2015/06/bw-iso-showdown-leica-m-monochrom-t
> yp-246-vs-m-monochrom-m9-vs-m-typ-240/
> 
> He concludes that the M246 is much better at very high ISOs, but the MM and
> M240 hold their own at lower ISOs.
> 
> And one of the comments after all of his tests:
> 
> "what does any of this have to do with actually taking pictures. these
> tests are such a waste of time. who cares. just go and shoot. i never
> understood people who spend so much time benchmarking ISO and DOF, etc.
> Just spend more time shooting and less time analyzing."
> 
> Not written by me!
> 
> Tina
> 
> Tina
> 
> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 2:42 PM, John McMaster <john at mcmaster.fr> wrote:
> 
>> They are completely static subjects.....
>> 
>> john
>> ________________________________________
>> 
>> They are to me.
>> 
>> Tina
>> 
>> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 2:29 PM, John McMaster <john at mcmaster.fr> wrote:
>> 
>>> Waste of time then, they are your cameras but what you show are not
>>> worthwhile tests ;-)
>>> 
>>> john
>>> 
>>> ________________________________________
>>> 
>>> As I have said before, I do not do controlled tests on tripods.  I do
>> real
>>> life tests the way I would use the cameras.  Tripod tests would be of no
>>> use to me since I never use a tripod.  I hold the camera or prop it on
>> the
>>> nearest post.  It works for me, maybe not for others.
>>> 
>>> Tina
>>> 
>>> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 1:43 PM, John McMaster <john at mcmaster.fr> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Not on a tripod so hard to compare (viewpoint changes), look for
>> tonality
>>>> differences at 320-1600asa as the 246 is better at +5000asa
>>>> 
>>>> john
>>>> 
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> 
>>>> PESO:
>>>> 
>>>> I did some tests with the Noctilux and Summilux on the MM and M246.  I
>>>> have a hard time telling the files apart.  I did notice that neither
>>> camera
>>>> records the aperture correctly because all of the photos were either
>> shot
>>>> wide open or at F/8 and they were not recorded that way.  I also shot
>>> some
>>>> with both cameras at ISO 6400 but that was not recorded either. The
>> M246
>>>> files are about half the size of the MM files.  These are the ones shot
>>>> with the 50/1.4:
>>>> 
>>>> http://www.pbase.com/tinamanley/image/162551679
>>>> 
>>>> and hit next until the end.  These have absolutely nothing done to them
>>>> except importing into LR as raw files and exporting to pBase as jpegs.
>>> I'll
>>>> post the Noctilux ones later.
>>>> 
>>>> Tina
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> Tina Manley
>>>> www.tinamanley.com
>>>> http://tina-manley.artistwebsites.com/
>>>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>> 
> 
> 




-- 
Mark William Rabiner
Photographer
http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/