Leica DMR: Update: further Impressions:

In addition to having already shot 2 weddings with the DMR, I brought it with me to LA as I

work on a Commercial TV shoot. I was free yesterday, so went to Catalina Island for a day

of pure tourist shooting. Very overcast in the morning and a lot brighter in the afternoon.

 

New insights: battery last a long time even with constant LCD with histogram review set

for 5 seconds. Shot over 250+ images before the battery warned of being low. But it never

quit before I left the Island with five SD 1 gig cards full. Leica thoughtfully provides both a

wall charger and a car charger with the DMR. Good if you're vacationing by car, or, like me

traveling from the Church to the Reception and can top off the battery. I've ordered a

second battery, but it'll be awhile before I get it I'll wager.

 

Next insight is that the camera does quite well at ISO 400 and 800. They are the ISOs I set

most of the time. Noise is an issue IF you underexpose too much ... but that's true for the

Canon 1DsMKII also. I still am of the opinion that the DMR exhibits a greater dynamic

range than my 1DsMKII, allowing me more latitude on the exposures with the DMR ( less

tendency to slightly underexposing to preserve the highlights. I also like the histogram on

the DMR which is a light overlay on the full LCD image.

 

The two R lenses I took to Catalina were the 28-90/2.8-4.5 and a 500/8 R Mirror. I also

have a 35/1.4, 50/1.4 and the new 90/2 with me ... but I just kept it simple for the

Catalina trip. I used ISO 800 a lot with the 500 mirror to increase the shutter speed (The

500 mirror is the equivalent of almost a 700mm on the DMR due to the 3.7X lens factor).

 

Next test is to try the 35/1.4 in low light and boost the ISO to 1600.<div></div>

Another Catalina shot:<div></div>

hi marc,

having never used a digi slr nor transferred over, can you tell me what those blocks are in the sky in pic #1 and the harsh black outline on the tower? i will soon be dabbling with a dslr and i'm assuming there's a new learning curve compared to my method now of canning and importing my negs into ps.

cheers

m

I like your first picture.

I wait for your next test. I am very interested in the DMR performance at ISO1600.

Marc, you are the king of the "early adopters." I doubt that I'll ever own most of the cameras that you have tried, but I enjoy reading your reports.

I'm getting so used to shooting with a 15 that the crop factor would make me nuts! Of course some of you think I'm nuts already.

 

Keep up the reports, Marc. When the digital M comes out I just might go for it.

Thanks for the update Marc, and thanks for posting on this forum despite some of the shenanigans that go on from time to time : ) I envy your position being able to amortize this equipment. As a hobbyist I'd have to be rich to risk that much money on a company with such a shaky financial situation's maiden venture into high-end digital. For me, the cost of digital means I will probably have to commit to one system and stick with it and it'll have to be a company that there's a good chance will be around for the long haul. I made the decision to sell my R8 and R lenses and give up the idea of ever getting a DMR based mostly on those economic factors, and it will probably be the same factors that will preclude me ever getting a digital M Leica. Still, it's nice to see that Leica is capable of finding high-quality outsourcing when they really want to.

You think it has better dynamic range than the 1Ds2?! That would make it very interesting indeed...

Ben, I don't think cost is an issue. The 1Ds1 lost about $125/month the first two years, I figure the 1Ds2 loses about $150 worst case. Even as a second-line stringer for a local community newspaper that pays $35/photo, that's only 4 shots per month to pay for it. Or about 8 rolls of E6 -- film + quality processing. (Not including B+W here, since it's cheap as dirt but far more time consuming.) Even the most novice hobbyist who shoots just to pay for the gear should have no trouble amortizing the cost.

 

And I suspect the DMR will depreciate even less, being in such short supply and not on a regular 2-year upgrade cycle. A nice used R8 is zero loss, an R9 of course loses 30% as soon as you've rang it up (but you get passport coverage in return), and the lenses are IMO a lifetime investment.

I don't have a degree in accounting or math but I don't see what comparing it to film cost has to do with it, with any dSLR film cost is zero. The difference between a DMR+used R8 or a 1DS-II, and a 20D is about $7000. If I got paid for taking photos and could deduct the camera from income, there might be a tax advantage, but not enough to wash. Only if I shot so much that I would literally wear out five 20Ds in the time it took me to wear out a DMR/R8 or 1DS-II would they break even.

Interesting,Mark. Just for the fun of it a photo from a Fuji S3.<div></div>

Ben Z wrote: <I>I don't have a degree in accounting or math but I don't see what comparing it to film cost has to do with it, with any dSLR film cost is zero</I>

<P>

Ben, the life-cycle cost is what matters. With a DSLR the vast majority of the life-cycle cost is in depreciation. With a film camera the film and processing can be a very big part of the life-cycle cost so it's entirely appropriate to include the cost of consumables in the analysis.

I understand it's important when comparing the cost of sticking with film vs switching to digital. I don't understand what it has to do with comparing one dSLR to another. Assuming every dSLR will eventually depreciate to zilch thanks to perceived obsolescence, it seems to me to make even less sense for anyone to buy any more expensive of a dSLR than they absolutely must for the features they need, and I think even the manufacturers have that one figured out. Except for the full-frame chip the 1D-II and 1DS-II are virtually twins yet the latter is nearly double the price of the former. "So" says Canon "You want to use your wide-angle lenses, eh? OK, that'll be another four grand."

Ben Z, the 20D, D70 and the like are comparable to cheap grocery-store film. The expensive DSLR cameras are comparable to professional films. Take your pick.

Great technical shots, Marc. My DMR is due in September and I

cannot wait.

Does the camera come with SD cards and if so, which type? Is it

"sealed" the way the Canons are? I suspect a no to the last

question and have asked Luigi Crescenzi to design a leather

half-case for the R8/DMR.

Finally, I recently took an intro to dslr at ICP and found it most

enlightening. Do you download after every 50 shots or so onto a

computer or a "digital wallet" like the Epson?

How accurate, for wont of a better word, is the viewfinder? Can

you buy a plastic cover for it?

I am very excited and thank you in advance.

Regards,

Albert

"Ben Z, the 20D, D70 and the like are comparable to cheap grocery-store film. The expensive DSLR cameras are comparable to professional films. Take your pick."

 

Bull.

 

The IDSII is like 645 professional film.

 

The 20D is like 35mm Pro film.

Hi marc,

 

do u have any samples of the DMR at ISO 800 in low light conditions?

Good eye Matt. Those are jpeg artifacts from down-sizing from a 20 inch file to 511 pixels

then sharpening a bit. I should have sized down first, sharpened, then reduced for web.

 

Here's an ISO 1600 shot I did today while dealing with pre-production stuff at the

production company.<div></div>

Detail of above...<div></div>

Marc,

No Noise Ninja or the like on the 1600 ISO shot above? Nice look to the detail. Wow.

 

Thanks for posting.

Some noise suppression in the background of the detail (using despeckle after sharpening

the down-sized jpg. None on the face.

Boon, I will when I shoot something in super low light. The 1600 shot above was in pretty

low light... but I know what you are looking for.

 

I do not think you can underexpose much at 800 or 1600, and you need the color temp

close, or you'll get noise. This camera tops out at 800 with a push to 1600, so there's not

much at that end of the range. The 1DsMKII can go further, which is why for me this Leica

isn't a replacement for the 1DsMKII. But I am pretty pleased so far, especially for a majority

of existing light work @ 400 that I've been using it for ... good color and dynamic range

without much fuss.<div></div>

Marc Bergman wrote: <I>"Bull.

<P>

The IDSII is like 645 professional film.

<P>

The 20D is like 35mm Pro film."</I>

<P>

Marc, the exact analogy isn't what's important. What I was trying

to point out to Ben Z is that there are different grades of DSLR

cameras, just as there are different grades of films and film

cameras: consumer films and professional films, Rebel and 1v,

D70 and D2X, etc.

Marc, very impressive shots. How does the R cope with the 1.37x crop factor? Are there wide angle lenses designed to accomodate this?

<i>Detail of above...</i><p>

Wow, that's really very good... That should print quite well I think.