DMR (Update) and M7, 50/1.4 ASPH ... Go to Hollywood.

Had to go to LA for 2 weeks to supervise a TV Commercial shoot. Saw a chance to further

use the DMR/R9 before the next wedding season started. Also took a M7 & new 50/1.4

ASPH. to shoot some B&W on set.

 

In the months since getting the DMR, had a chance to become more familiar with the

characteristics of the sensor, especially processing the DNG RAW files ... plus, added a few

R lenses to the bag.

 

DMR Update:

 

IMO, LEICA MADE A MISTAKE limiting the ISO to 800. At first I would NOT have said this.

But after refining new RAW defaults in ARC that were defined for this camera's

characteristics, instead of using the Canon DSLR defaults, I'm convinced that 1600

would've been a no brainer. ISO 800 shots now look like the ISO 400 shots I processed

when I first started. Exploring the DNG files has provided further evidence that the 16 bit

sensor is indeed a different animal, and has to be learned to get the most from the

increased latitude it provides.

 

The slight cropped frame isn't the same as shooting with other cropped frame cameras

like a Canon 20D. The viewfinder is big and bright (the same as in a regular R9), just the

shooting frame is defined by the DMR replacement screen etched lines. Those used to

shooting with a M will be no stranger to this, and the ability to see outside of what you're

shooting.

 

I was worried that my bad eye sight was the cause of to many missed manual focus shots.

That has improved to the point that I miss few now. I just had to relearn the art of manual

focus after too many years of AF. Plus, I added a +1 diopter in addition to the built-in one

and was able to refine the focus even better ... must have been right on the outer limit of

+ adjustment.

 

As I practice with this camera, I am loving the images from many old favorite lenses:

35/1.4, 80/1.4 and 180/2.8. The images continue to delight, and look more film like than

the Canon's produce, as well as render skin more lifelike.

 

Here's a shot on set as the film director was thinking about the next scene we had to

shoot ... more to come in an hour or so.<div></div>

Pic of the Director of Photography on the TV shoot shot @ ISO 800 + 1/2 stop ...<div></div>

Pic of the talent on set with extra in background. Shot during rehearsal @ ISO 400.<div></div>

Grip Truck @ location shot with 21-35/3.5 ... pretty good distortion control, tiny bit of CA at

far outer left edge, but none in the right side at all.<div></div>

Production company's Line Producer working on location, shot with the new 50/1.4 ASPH.

 

An improvement in subject sharpness over the previous 50/1.4 that I sold, with a bit harsher

Bokeh ... but not as bad as I thought it would be. Not worth the huge amount of difference in

price IMO ... but worth it if it is the only lens with you at the time...<div></div>

Nice to know. The warmer tones are certainly visible in your samples.

Marc,

 

Nice samples. How do you compare the DMR/80 1.4 characteristics with those you might get

with your Canon and the CZ 85 1.4? Or against the dearly departed N Digital and N 85/1.4?

 

Good to see your posts, I hope all is well.

 

Kent

Your posts are always welcome, Marc. Hope to see more of them.

I'm relatively new here Marc but evidently you're someone whom some people on the forum revere, so with all due reverence, perhaps in the hand your prints do indeed prove the things you contend about the DM-R and 50 ASPH. On a monitor, sized for the web, all that they prove is that good photographs are a result of how a photographer uses his equipment, not the equipment he uses.

Great update Marc. I love to see your posts on this subject

Well being a a 2 fisted now DMR guy , I echo Marc's comments to the letter. i have had a comlete Canon system and it is all gone now. I love this leica system for the quality of images that it produces , it really is just that simply. I have been shooting digital for 10 years at least and in my mind there is nothing better when the bottom line counts and that is image. Marc I am not a high ISO guy but would love to learn more of the 800 plus . I get to about 400 and chicken out . LOL

Kent, I've found the C/Y lenses a bit cooler in color rendition to the Leica R counterparts.

While this is easily adjusted in PS, the differences in the sensor characteristics are harder

to correct. See answer to Peter A below.

 

Fair enough Terence. We all have to take one another's word for it concerning performance

characteristics when demonstrating them using tiny Jpgs. As to the other comment, it only

can be said that when shooting on a live set with 30 people in a small room swarming

around you, you take what you can get. You cannot interrupt anything, move anything, go

where you want or stand where you want. It's a jumble, and that's what I was taking pics of

so I can teach young Art Directors about location filming.

 

Here's one of the Director, the 2nd Director (set boss), and the Director of Photography

discussing the next scene action...<div></div>

Peter, I can speak to your inquiry here in brief terms so others interested can consider the

info, and we can follow up in more detail via e-mail if you wish.

 

Since I am shooting with a lot of different digital cameras (Canon 1DsMKII/5D, Leica DMR,

and Hasselblad H2D) ... plus have used the Epson RD-1, Nikon D1-X and Contax ND in the

past, I've found each can be optimized by creating specific RAW defaults in PSCS2 ARC for

them. Once these are created, they can be saved and recalled when processing RAW files

from those cameras.

 

For example, the DNG files from both the H2D and Leica DMR are similar. Makes sense,

since Imacon assisted Leica with the DMR. Both are 16 bit, CCD sensors without Anti-

Ailasing filters. The Canon, as you well know, is a 12 bit CMOS with a filter. Throw in the

different characteristics of the R verses Canon glass and there's enough difference to

warrant different defaults as a starting point in ARC.

 

So, the DMR files require a different Contrast setting, Saturation setting, Shadow depth

and Brightness setting. Under the "Advanced" tab in ARC, I've also set the noise

suppression slider a bit higher for the DMR because the CCD unfiltered files have more of

it than the filtered CMOS files. There are a lot more subtile adjustments you eventually

feed into each default setting until you are getting what you want easier when processing

in ARC. This is essential for my wedding work because I'm processing hundreds of files at

a crack, and in many cases from all 3 above mentioned cameras.

 

I've mentioned that I'm becoming more impressed with the "apparent" increased dynamic

range of the DMR. While I cannot quantify this scientifically, I can only speak based on

practical experience in difficult lighting scenarios.

 

Here's an example where in similar lighting I've had a bit more difficulty holding the back

lit shadow areas with the 1DsMKII without blowing the hard brights. The shapely subject is

a producer leaving the Santa Monica hotel where I was staying. She was walking over to

see the sunset, and I grabbed a shot from my balcony 'cause the light was interesting ...<div></div>

while 800 is plenty for me I can see the desire to have that extra stop.. a good solution I

found with the 16bit back is that I set the iso to 800 with the camera in A (apeture prefer.)

mode, then by

under exposing with the exposure adj. set to -1.0, I get the equialvent to 1600 iso... I

usually underexpose by at least half a stop with the dmr, it is better to push up the

shadows then have blown out highlights - works for me.

marc, have you tried converting dmr files to bw? I have been very happy with the range

and flexibiliy of the conversions..it requires some workflowtime, but having the option of

color or bw for shots is nice.

Marc, I believe you have had a 5D since they came out. Your comments Re: the DMR are usually in comparison to the 1DS II. Most of the people I know using Canon DSLR's, are using the 5D as their baseline for digital performance. How does the DMR compare to the 5D?

geat thread... most educational!

Is that Jason Lee from the My Name is Earl show?

Marc, I appreciate your insights as I've done for years now, however, it is hard at the same time when all we can reveiw small jpegs on computer screens. as far as they are concerned, apart from the neutral colors displayed, there isn't anything in those images that couldn't be done with consumer DSLR from Nikon, Canon and others.

 

I think it is great that Leica is offering the DMR, and eventually they will get it right, however, I don't see it pursuading new users to come to Leica (attracting current R users that already have an investment in R glass is another matter), which I believe is absolutely critical to the company.

 

I'd like to get a bit more feedback on that 50/1.4 ASPH, if you don't mind.

Patrick, Guy Mancuso who has posted in this thread switched from a Canon digital system to Leica-R because of the DMR.

not trying to knock, trying to understand.

I am suprised at the doubts people have about the leica dmr, it is a professional level

camera

and I as a professional switched from a nikon system to the leica dmr with no previous r or

m equipment.. "they will eventually get it right" - well I think it fits the needs of a small

format digital camera, I think they got it right. will it get better? sure, It's for those who

what great optics, great mechanics, dynamic 16bit dng files, I think the dmr will prove

itself to those

who care and know about such things.

I don't know the sales figures of leica dmr and how well it is selling. I don't have much

faith in the

journalist-photographers in the press/internet and armchair shooters who only read

photograhhy.

It's the folks who use it and know the digital workflow that "get-it".

I'm surprised to hear that you are not seeing much of a difference between the pre-asph LUX and the current ASPH model. Are you mostly shooting it stopped down? The Lux ASPH is supposed to offer Summicron performance in a f1.4 design.

well, I - on the other hand - am surprised by the oh-I'm-a-professional-photographer-and-you'll-never-get-what-I'm-talking-about-attitude one can find on many places.

 

I think there is a fair group of users around here that have used Leica Ms and/or Rs over a number of years - for various reasons - and even though I personally have no intention of getting a Leica R/DMR system - I'm curious as to how/why it is perceived to be a "better" tool. It is a fair question to ask.

 

Frankly, between Guy and yourself, you are the only persons that I've heard so far that have completely dumped their Canon/Nikon/whatever D/SLR systems and gone DMR from scratch, not that I've been actively looking for those type of stories/proofs though.

 

So pray tell, why not help me, a lowly weekend shooter, some insight on why the DMR images are that special? Is it still in the Leica glass? Is it in the 16bit DNG? Have Leica managed to develop better alogrithms than Canon/Nikon? ...

"Guy Mancuso who has posted in this thread switched from a Canon digital system to Leica-R because of the DMR." "I as a professional switched from a nikon system to the leica dmr"

 

For myself, a professional as well, spending lavishly on equipment that returns an improvement in image quality that I can see but my clients cannot, might give me mounds of self-satisfaction in photography but somewhere else in my family's life there would need to be a complementary sacrifice so I must limit the extent to which I indulge my artistic ego. And everyone of my professional colleagues feels similarly. I believe in the world you will find the number of professionals who have "dumped" as it were their Canon or Nikon equipment for Leica R infintessimally small in number though large in elitist posturing. This in no way detracts from what the DMR does well, whatever that might be.

 

"I'm surprised to hear that you are not seeing much of a difference between the pre-asph LUX and the current ASPH model. Are you mostly shooting it stopped down? The Lux ASPH is supposed to offer Summicron performance in a f1.4 design."

 

He didn't say he didn't see much of a difference, he said the difference isn't commensurate with the cost differential. That's the mindset of a professional which I was alluding to.

Terence,

<P>

If you click on their names, Guy Mancuso, Paul Moore and Marc Williams all have links to their professional websites where we can see what kind of photography they do. Can you show us what sort of photography you do? I don't see a link to your website.