But we had another camera to put to the test as well. The M10-R was also introduced following my ISO roundup last year. In that article, I pitted the M10 Monochrom against the M10-P, which while certainly illuminating, required some additional methodology adaptations. See, the M10 Monochrom was, at the time, the first and only 41 megapixel Leica M camera. The M10-P was, and still is, 24 megapixel. Differing resolutions inherently complicate any per-pixel comparisons. And now we can definitively clear the air, as the M10-R and M10 Monochrom share the same underlying 41 megapixel sensor architecture, with one being fitted with a color filter array and the other omitting the CFA, tuned for pure monochrome performance.

Another benefit of the resolutions of all the cameras being so close this time around is that we also have a chance to test the Q2M against the M10M, for those wondering which modern Monochrom would make a better addition to their Leica kit. Alright, on with the test.

Some Caveats

Before we dive in too deep, let’s get the caveats out of the way first. Tests like this are, by definition, pixel-peeping. And I know that many don't consider that a positive thing. Personally, I favor a more holistic approach, but do value the clarity of a well-designed, controlled test.

When evaluating a new camera for a full review, I form my opinions by venturing out and using it for real work. Actual results under various lighting conditions, with a wide variety of subject matter serve as the foundation to my review. I don’t actually start writing a single word until I’ve had ample time to both shoot and process the resulting images, in order to get a clearer picture of the character and capabilities of the camera. If you want to see that type of review, check out the one I did on the Q2 Monocrhom, or on the M10 Monochrom:

But even that’s not the whole story. See, there is far more to judging the strength of a photographic tool than image quality alone. How it feels in hand, the sound of the shutter, the clarity of the viewfinder, the ease and accuracy of focus, interaction with the UI, overall responsiveness, etc. Only after considering the total experience of using a camera, can I truly develop a cogent assessment of it as a photographic tool. I’m a photographer first and foremost. My reviews are always taken from that perspective.  

And while I place heavy emphasis on real-world shooting, there is undeniable value in understanding the critical performance envelope of a camera under ideal test conditions. Knowing, empirically, how the camera will perform when you push it to its limits, allows you as a photographer to work within those parameters comfortably and confidently. More insight and understanding into our tools is never a bad thing. So, let's not hate on the pixel-peeping this time around, ok?

Okay, more caveats.

Testing is difficult. Testing is imperfect. And no single methodology will be ideal. But, I’ll explain my approach and reasoning behind the decisions. Starting off, let's take a look at our contenders for this showdown:

The good news is that resolutions are close, as are the ISO ranges. These are much smaller disparities than we've had to contend with in the past. Sure, there are some variations but we can easily deal with them.

Designing the Test

To maintain the most level playing field possible, I needed to adjust some of my testing approaches. Usually, I test every camera using the same exact lens – the exceptional APO-Summicron-M 50mm f/2 ASPH. Using the same tripod position and same lens with the same focal point eliminates unwanted variation and lets us compare sensor versus sensor, effectively removing the lens from the equation. This time around, things would be slightly more complicated.

The Q2 and Q2 Monochrom do share the same lens, the outstanding 28mm Summilux f/1.7 ASPH, which is permanently bolted onto the front of the camera. If I really wanted to test against the two M cameras, a 50mm clearly wasn't going to work. So, I went with the best 28mm lens in the roster, the Summilux-M 28mm f/1.4 ASPH. To remove the optical differences from the test as much as possible, I stopped down all lenses to f/8, theoretically hitting their diffraction-limited performance maximums, as well as gaining some much needed depth of field for my test subject. Still, this isn't 100% ideal since, at the end of the day, these are two different lenses.

And predictably, I did run into a couple challenges. The first is that setting up a tabletop still life for 28mm is much more difficult than doing so for 50mm. The background needs to be extremely wide behind the subject, the subject itself needs to fill the frame as much as possible, and the camera angle relative to the subject needs to be as close to level as possible to avoid keystoning. Adding a little more complexity was the fact that the minimum focus distance on the Q2 is 0.3m in normal mode and the 28mm Summilux-M is 0.7m. I didn't want to shoot either lens at its minimum distance, again, trying to level the playing field optically. So, I settled on a 1m test distance, the same that I usually use for my 50mm tests. That resulted in a very wide scene which proved compositionally to be…not that great. I simply didn't have enough props to fill the frame, nor was I able to make meaningful use of the top or bottom of the frame. Look, this isn't a prize-winning still life picture, just one setup for the purpose of testing, so please bear that in mind.

Not all 28mm lenses are actually 28mm

One unexpected yet wonderfully fortuitous complication was that the effective focal length of the two 28mm lenses tested here weren't the same. Turns out that the lens on Q2 is either slightly wider than 28mm, that the 28mm Summilux-M is slightly longer than 28mm, or a combination of the two. The convenient result was that the very slight focal length difference almost completed negated the six megapixel discrepancy between the 47MP of the Q2M and the 41MP of the M10M. Happy accident indeed, as no further pixel scaling was necessary in processing or file prep.

Lighting and Technique

Like my last test, I opted to use a hard light source in order to exaggerate the highlights and shadows. A softbox would have made for an easier test subject and more even illumination, but I wanted to make things a little more challenging from a dynamic range perspective. Again, it's not the prettiest because it is just a test. For lighting hardware, we're using the same Intellytech LightCannon F-165 Bi-Color High Output LED Fresnel as last time. Flicker-free and with a CRI of 97+, this is a highly-accurate constant illumination professional-grade cine light source.

Arca-style quick release plates were used on all cameras so that the same camera position could be maintained during testing. This time around I used the beefy Colorado Tripod Company 4-Series Centennial Tripod with Medium Ballhead. The adjustable clamp really came in handy here to accommodate the minor variations between QR plates.

ISO Range

Showing every single ISO value on all cameras wasn't feasible. Not only do the lowest and highest values differ, the Q2 and Q2 Monochrom only have whole ISO values, not thirds like the M cameras. This is slightly problematic as performance differences are typically apparent with small changes towards the upper end of the range. But since half the competitors here are limited to whole stops, that's what I'm showing. I do include the entire range of ISO values in the downloadable full-size files for the M10-R and M10M, and I did use these in determining the ideal maximum ISO values for these cameras.

At the top of the range, I let the M10M and Q2M strut their stuff and show results all the way up to each camera's respective maximum of ISO 100000. And since the M10-R and Q2 don't go as high, I freeze them at their upper limits of ISO 50000. Bear this in mind when looking at the comparison images. While only showing the changes in the M10 Monochrom and Q2 Monochrom from ISO 50000, I do think quantifying the improvement relative to the other cameras is useful.

I decided against underexposing and pushing the exposure in post processing to emulate even higher ISO values. The reality is that while possibly interesting to some, I can't realistically imagine anyone actually doing this in a real shooting scenario.

Crops

For the image crops, I selected three zones. The label of balsamic vinegar bottle was the true focal point for all cameras, and demonstrates high-contrast high-detail. The wood grain of the rolling pin in front of the bottle also provides some nice fine, lower contrast detail. The ridged pasta crop highlights textural details and tonal range, along with the cutting board and cheese knife. And the black beans in the glass Mason jar crop shows dark areas of detail, along with brighter spectral highlights on the metal lid and glass itself. There are other interesting crops that I explored as well, but there are already far too many images here as it is – well over 100 comparison images in total.

Image Processing and Noise Reduction

Ok, let's get this one out of the way. The samples below are not Straight Out Of Camera (SOOC). All the comparison images were processed using basic tone adjustments in the latest version of Lightroom Classic CC. I zeroed out all the Presence tools as this would have unduly colored the results. So, no Texture, Clarity or Dehaze were used on any of the images. I also made no adjustments to exposure, as doing so would have impacted noise performance. Even though the exposure values (shutter speed / aperture / ISO), there was an observed variance in resulting exposure as ISO increased. I left this uncorrected. Likewise, contrast at increasing ISO values also changed from shot to shot. I did not compensate for this effect either.

Basically, each camera had the same set of tonal adjustments for the entire ISO testing range. In essence, I could have improved the higher ISO results further by fine-tuning the exposure and toning settings, but I decided to show the exposure and contrast changes relative to ISO. No test methodology is perfect, but I think this one has worked well in the past. And sticking with what we've done in the prior tests allows for generalized comparisons from one roundup to another, even without all cameras being tested together.

For the color cameras, I applied Lightroom's default Monochrome profile, dialed in basic tone adjustments, then used the Black & White Mix controls to attempt to match the overall look of the native monochrome cameras. The resulting conversions aren't perfect, but certainly very close.

I chose to optimize noise reduction settings as ISO levels increased for each camera. At base ISO, even a small amount of default noise reduction would have diminished detail. And at high ISO, a lack of noise reduction would not have been representative of real-world usage. These are all best-case scenarios under ideal test conditions, so please view them as such.

All files were exported from Lightroom using the highest level of JPG quality (100) with the least compression, with no image resizing and no additional output sharpening. Why didn’t I use TIFF? In my experience, there is no visible difference in a highest quality first-generation JPG and a TIFF. These processed images were then brought into Adobe Photoshop as full-size layers, composited for comparison, then output for web with a JPG level of 12. If nothing else, in preparing for the results, I did manage to create the largest Photoshop file I've ever worked with, at over 35GB in size. Yes, for single file. Thank goodness for Adobe's Large Document Format.

How to Properly View the Comparisons

One final note before we get into the comparisons: these images are output to 2000px on the long side, with 1:1 pixel rendering. Be sure to click on each crop set to view the larger image. When viewed with no onscreen scaling, one pixel on your monitor will display one pixel from the camera. This is complicated somewhat by Retina-type displays that do pixel resampling. Applications like the latest versions of Photoshop and Lightroom have the option of running in non-scaled, 1:1 mode, but the pictures will appear smaller on screen. 

If your monitor resolution is less than 2000px across, like on an iPad or a laptop, be sure to right-click on the image and select Open link in new tab (be sure to select link not image). This will open just the image, allowing you to view it at the correct size once you click to magnify. Or, even better, right-click to Save link as… and view in Photoshop. Unfortunately, with technological innovation comes its own set of challenges. Retina and 4K/5K displays look stunning, especially for text, but are sometimes less than ideal for image comparisons as they employ pixel doubling and no longer show 1:1.

Full Size Images Download

Now, just in case all the following comparisons don't fully satisfy your curiosity and you want to do your own evaluations, I'm leaving a link to download the full resolution exports for each camera at every ISO. The images were output directly from Lightroom as non-resized JPGs, with no output sharpening and saved at a quality level of 100. For all intents and purposes, they are on par quality-wise with TIFF files. Each camera's image set is saved as a zipped folder for your downloading convenience.

B+W ISO Showdown 2021 – Full Size Files

Q2 Monochrom vs Q2

Ok. Enough tech jargon. Let's kick this party off with a head-to-head of the Q2 Monochrom versus the Q2. Apart from their cosmetic differences, the cameras are identical in every way other than one is full color and the other is monochromatic. The CFA has been removed on the Q2M and internal processing has been optimized for B&W imaging. But the underlying sensor architecture is the same.

ISO 100

Jumping in at base ISO (ISO 50 on the Q2 is most likely a PULL setting so we didn't use it), both cameras offer an extraordinary level of detail and nuance. Just stunning results from the 47 megapixel sensor and the phenomenal 28mm Summilux lens. This level of quality is maintained easily on both cameras through ISO 800 as you can see in the following comparisons.

ISO 200

ISO 400

ISO 800

ISO 1600

Quality is still exceptional, with just the faintest amount of noise starting to creep in on the Q2 images. If this is barely detectable at 1:1 pixel size, it most certainly wouldn't be discernable in any normal viewing situation. Q2M images are still completely noise-free.

ISO 3200

At ISO 3200, the Q2 noise is becoming a bit more evident, especially in darker mid-tone areas. The Q2M, by contrast, still looks practically as good as it did at base ISO, and is definitely showing off against its color sibling.

ISO 6400

At ISO 6400 noise is starting to impact fine detail and texture resolution of the Q2, but the camera is still capturing a very pleasing image overall. Noise is visible across the full tonal range now. The Q2M is just starting to exhibit the tiniest amount of tight-grained noise.

ISO 12500

At ISO 12500, visible noise is seriously affecting image quality on the Q2. There is an overall loss of image contrast. Details are getting obscured by noise. The Q2M continues to impress, turning out an impressively clean showing, with only minimal noise. And the noise that is preset isn't hampering fine details.

ISO 25000

While the Q2M produces a very usable image at ISO 25000, still keeping noise well under control, the Q2 is not holding up well here. More contrast and detail loss with a growing haze of noise over the image is obvious.

ISO 50000

Now at the maximum ISO value of the Q2, things are just getting worse for the color camera. This is an almost unusable result that even the most aggressive noise reduction can't fix. White speckles blanket the frame. Now, the Q2M is showing a little weakness here at ISO 50000 as well. While much, much better than its color counterpart, we're starting to see some sacrificing of the details due to increasing noise. Still impressive though.

ISO 100000

As noted above, the Q2 maxes out at ISO 50000, but since the Q2M goes all the way to 100000, I figured I'd match up both cameras' highest ISO results. Even a full stop faster, the Q2M result easily tops the one from the Q2 at ISO 50000. But neither is great.

Ideal Maximums

Here, I wanted to see where the cameras hit their respective ideal maximum ISO values. By my definition, that means the highest ISO values achievable without a significant sacrifice of image quality. And thus we get ISO 25000 on the Q2M and ISO 6400 on the Q2, resulting in a solid and meaningful 2-stop advantage of the Q2M. Sure, you may find that you're willing to push this further, and you certainly can, but that 2-stop advantage will remain for Monochrom.

M10-R vs M10 Monochrom

We've already seen how the M10 performs at this kind of test in my 2020 B&W ISO Showdown, but not as it compares to its color counterpart, the M10-R. That camera wasn't on the Leica roster the last time, so this match-up should be quite interesting. Just like the Q2M versus Q2 comparison above, both of these M cameras feature the same underlying sensor. In this case, the M cameras feature the excellent dual-gain 41 megapixel CMOS chip, one using a CFA for full color and the other in tuned for black and white.

ISO 100 / 160

Starting at the respective base ISO values for each of the M cameras, we're treated to truly exceptional image quality. Amazing detail, texture and tonality. And this level of quality is maintained on both cameras easily up to ISO 3200. Truly, every setting from ISO 100 to ISO 3200 looks virtually identical on the M10-R and M10M. This immediately puts the M10-R performance a notch above the Q2, and almost on par with the Q2M. Not a bad start.

ISO 200

ISO 400

ISO 800

ISO 1600

ISO 3200

I feel we are nitpicking here, but the M10-R is starting to show just the smallest amount of visible noise, while the M10M is still super clean. The noise pattern is very tightly packed and doesn't hurt detail resolution at all. This is extremely impressive given the higher pixel density of the M10-R over the 24 megapixel M10 and M10-P.

ISO 6400

At ISO 6400, noise is just starting to become visible in the M10M image now, with the M10-R not worsening by very much from the ISO 3200 result. Both cameras are performing extremely well.

ISO 12500

At ISO 12500, the M10-R is still keeping noise under control, but the M10 Monochrom clearly has an advantage with better resolution and smoother tonal gradations. In our previous ISO Showdown, this is really where the M10M started to shine against its predecessor, the M Monochrom (Typ 246).

ISO 25000

At ISO 25000, the M10 Monochrom continues to pull away from its color counterpart. The M10-R is showing much more noise and is giving up detail and tonal gradations, but the M10M is still going strong.

ISO 50000

The M10M is definitely usable at ISO 50000, but shows a noticeable jump in noise from ISO 25000. The M10-R, at its maximum ISO value, isn't great here. Lots of noise, some banding in darker areas, and general loss of contrast and detail.

ISO 100000

Just as with the Q2 and Q2M comparisons above, since the M10M extends its ISO range past the M10-R to ISO 100000, I'm showing the respective maximum ISO values here. Unlike the Q2 matchup, I think that the M10 Monochrom at ISO 100000 is merely on par with the M10-R at ISO 50000, not superior. Honestly, neither is fantastic and I'd avoid maxing out either of these cameras.

Ideal Maximums

For the ideal maximum ISO matchup on the M10M and M10-R I used the full range of ISO values, not just whole stops. Both cameras allow for 1/3-stop increments in ISO which is good since noise performance doesn't always change linearly. Here, the ideal maximum of the M10M was indeed at one of these settings. Below you can see that the M10 Monochrom at ISO 32000 matches up nicely with the M10-R at ISO 12500, resulting in a 1 and 1/3-stop improvement in low light ability in favor of the B&W camera. This difference is significant but isn't as sizeable as the 2-stops between the Q2M and Q2.

Q2 Monochrom vs M10 Monochrom

Now that we've seen how each Monochrom version matches up to its color counterpart, it's time to put both B&W heavyweights into the ring for a final face off. Will the M10 Monochrom retain its title as low light champ, or does the new Q2 Monochrom have what it takes to take the crown? Okay, if you've gotten this far, you already know the max performance values for each, but we have to keep the Battle Royal theme going here.

ISO 100 / 160

Obviously, both Monochrom cameras turn out insane image quality at low ISO. For the uninitiated, I've often equated low ISO Monochrom images to those from a large format negative. Except here, on both, this quality level continues all the way up to ISO 6400.

ISO 200

ISO 400

ISO 800

ISO 1600

ISO 3200

ISO 6400

Finally, at ISO 6400 we're seeing a smidgen of noise in both the Q2M and M10M, but nothing significant. Both are turning out incredible image quality here.

ISO 12500

Both Monochrom cameras continue to trade blows here at ISO 12500. Noise increases slightly for both the Q2M and M10M, but there is no clear winner. Again, great results all around and both are besting the previous generation Monochrom cameras.

ISO 25000

We're seeing a similar story at ISO 25000, but the M10M seems to be starting to pull ahead of the Q2M. Just barely though. The results are so close.

ISO 50000

The grudge match continues at ISO 50000, as the Q2 Monochrom now inches out the M10M. Again, just barely. But this is really getting interesting.

ISO 100000

Pushing the same maximum ISO of 100000, neither camera is showing off its best here. But, I think the M10 Monochrom managed to come back from behind to edge out the Q2M at its highest setting.

Ideal Maximums

Here is where things get even more interesting. From their respective peer comparisons, we already know each Monochrom's ideal maximums. And because the M10M allows for 1/3-stop ISO increments, we're able to squeeze just a little more juice out of it, besting the Q2M by a mere 1/3-stop. Setting that aside, with ideal maxes of ISO 25000 and ISO 32000, both the Q2M and M10M are simply insanely capable low light performers.

Final Thoughts

So, after all that exhaustive testing, what have we discovered? First, Leica has really pushed the performance envelope of its latest generation of cameras. Secondly, there continues to be no doubt that removing the color filter array from the sensor results in a very real and tangible advantage for high ISO shooting. The purpose-built Monochrom isn't just a gimmick. For black and white shooting, a Monochrom is demonstrably superior once you start venturing into the higher ISO ranges.

What surprised me most was just how well the Q2 Monochrom matched up against the M10 Monochrom. Both cameras produced exceptionally clean results up to ISO 6400 with ease. And they continued to trade blows back and forth all the way through ISO 100000. The Q2 Monochrom is priced at $5,995 and includes an exceptional 28mm Summilux lens. Compared to the M10 Monochrom at $8,195 with no lens, and $15,490 with the 28mm Summilux-M ASPH we used for testing, the Q2M is relative bargain. Of course, there are other factors to consider. The Q2M will always be a 28mm focal length camera, where the M10M offers greater flexibility with interchangeable lenses. And of course, while sharing a very similar design aesthetic and unified control interface, at the end of the day, the Q2M is an autofocus EVF camera and the M10M is a manual focus rangefinder.

I think either Monochrom camera makes an ideal addition to a Leica kit. For SL2 shooters, the Q2M might make sore sense as no other lenses are required to get going and the cost of entry is much less. For those who already have an M setup, the M10M can leverage an existing lens collection. Or, a Q2M could offer a very different shooting experience, for about the same cost as an average M lens.

As for the color cameras, both turned out admirable results. If you don't need to venture beyond ISO 6400, either will serve you well. The M10-R has about a 1-stop low light advantage over the Q2, and at least equals the ISO performance of the lower resolution M10-P. Again, the choice of Q2 or M10-R comes back to autofocus EVF all-in-one versus a manual focus interchangeable lens rangefinder. These are very different cameras in use yet offer similar performance when put head-to-head.

Ultimately, my takeaway is that the tools available to us as photographers continues to improve. And with the latest generation of cameras, Leica has provided some truly impressive low light capabilities. The Q2 Monochrom and M10 Monochrom can lay equal claim the title of black and white high ISO champion. Now, just decide which serves your needs better and go shoot.

The post B&W ISO Showdown 2021: Leica Q2 Monochrom / M10 Monochrom / Q2 / M10-R appeared first on Red Dot Forum.

Since publishing that article, there have been some major developments in the Leica world. In 2015 alone, both the Q (Typ 116) and SL (Typ 601) were introduced, each featuring exceptional low-light performance care of their next generation 24-megapixel sensor architecture. Then, in January 2017, the M system got a significant upgrade with the launch of the M10. Included with the myriad overall improvements was a sizable bump to high ISO performance from the M240. And just within the past six months, the SL2 has doubled the resolution from the original SL, while the latest M10 Monochrom now offers up even higher ISO capability, as well as boasting 41 megapixels for the first time in an M camera.

A lot has changed in the last five years. And with so many new options in the Leica lineup, I figured it was high time for a refreshed B&W ISO Showdown in 2020. And fair warning – a copious quantity of images lie ahead. As in, over 100 comparison images.

Thoughts and caveats

Before we dive in too deep, let’s get the caveats out of the way first. Tests like this are, by definition, pixel-peeping. And I know that many don't consider that a positive thing. Personally, I favor a more holistic approach, but do value the clarity of a well-designed, controlled test.

When evaluating a new camera for a full review, I form my opinions by venturing out and using it for real work. Actual results under various lighting conditions, with a wide variety of subject matter serve as the foundation to my review. I don’t actually start writing a single word until I’ve had ample time to both shoot and process the resulting images, in order to get a clearer picture of the character and capabilities of the camera.

But even that’s not the whole story. See, there is far more to judging the strength of a photographic tool than image quality alone. How it feels in hand, the sound of the shutter, the clarity of the viewfinder, the ease and accuracy of focus, interaction with the UI, overall responsiveness, etc. Only after considering the total experience of using a camera, can I truly develop a cogent assessment of it as a photographic tool. I’m a photographer first and foremost. My reviews are always taken from that perspective.  

And while I place heavy emphasis on real-world shooting, there is undeniable value in understanding the critical performance envelope of a camera under ideal test conditions. Knowing, empirically, how the camera will perform when you push it to its limits, allows you as a photographer to work within those parameters comfortably and confidently. More insight and understanding into our tools is never a bad thing. So, let's not hate on the pixel-peeping this time around, ok?

Okay, more caveats.

Testing is difficult. Testing is imperfect. And no single methodology will be ideal. But, I’ll explain my approach and reasoning behind it. Starting off, let's take a look at our contenders for this showdown:

Clearly, there are a fair amount of dissimilarities in our round-up. Three different resolutions. Widely ranging ISO values. Color and monochrome sensors. Thankfully, we can use the same exceptional lens, the APO-Summicron-M 50mm f/2 ASPH, on all cameras. They also all feature live view with focus magnification allowing for critical focus off the sensor. But this is where the similarities end and the testing challenges begin.

ISO Range

Showing every single ISO value on all cameras wasn't feasible. Not only are the lowest and highest values different on all (except for the max of 50000 on the M10-P and SL2), the SL2 only has whole ISO values, not thirds like the M cameras. This is slightly problematic as performance differences are typically apparent with small changes towards the upper end of the range. Thankfully, 1/3 stop moves were insignificant at lower ISO values, so I stuck to whole ISO steps at 6400 and below.

Past ISO 6400 we start to see some meaningful changes with each incremental bump, so I've included all 1/3 stop results all the way up to the M10M's maximum of ISO 100000. Doing so created way more comparison sets, but I think most will appreciate the added granularity. In addition to the lack of 1/3 stops on the SL2, note that there are no discrete steps between ISO 12500 and ISO 25000 on the M246, so for 16000 and 20000 the M246 is still showing the 12500 result. Just be aware when viewing these comparisons.

With regards to the ISO range disparity, I chose to start at a common value of ISO 200, making a small exception for the M246 which competes here at ISO 320, as this is its base ISO. No, 200 isn't base ISO for any of the other cameras, but there is no real quality sacrifice versus the actual base values.

At the top of the range, I let the M10M strut its stuff and show results all the way up to its maximum of ISO 100000. And since none of the other cameras go as high, I freeze them at their respective upper limits. Bear this in mind as well when looking at the comparison images. While only showing the changes in the M10 Monochrom, I do think quantifying the improvement relative to the other cameras is useful.

I decided against underexposing and pushing the exposure in post processing to emulate even higher ISO values. The reality is that while possibly interesting to some, I can't realistically imagine anyone actually doing this in a real shooting scenario.

Resolution

Four cameras, three different resolutions. In our test grouping, we've got 47, 41, 24 and 24 megapixels. For this challenge, I took a two-pronged approach. First, after taking into account the SL2 not fitting into the granular ISO comparisons due to its whole stop ISO limitation, along with its sizable megapixel disparity with all the other cameras here, I omitted it from the all-camera match-up. What you'll see below are 3-way match-ups between all the M cameras. But don't worry. I did include the SL2, just in a separate series below versus the M10 Monochrom, both at full native resolution.

With the SL2 eliminated from the main M camera match-up, we're still left with the M10 Monochrom at 41 megapixels pitted against two 24 megapixel cameras. So, in an attempt to produce the most apples-to-apples comparison, I downsampled the M10M files to 24 megapixels. Why not scale the others up to 41? Well, I vehemently oppose uprezzing beyond native resolution as you can't make something from nothing, and doing so can create additional artifacts. But, reducing size to match up actually makes some sense.

Let's suppose for this test, instead of 100% crops displayed on screen, I made 24 x 36 inch prints. In essence, I would be downscaling the higher resolution image to match the other two. Except we don't think of it that way. Rather, the larger image file benefits by requiring less enlargement. So while at first, reducing the resolution advantage in this case may seem counterintuitive, if we simply consider this a test at a given output size, it actually does make sense.

And if you want to see the full resolution difference on display, I've included that as well. To simplify this additional series, I've matched up the M10 Monochrom against its predecessor the M Monohcrom (Typ 246) and only included one photo per ISO. I did warn you about there being a lot of images. But this way, everyone should be (mostly) satisfied.

Full Size Images Download

Now, just in case all the following comparisons don't fully satisfy your curiosity and you want to do your own evaluations, I'm leaving a link to download the full resolution exports for each camera at (almost) every ISO. The images were output directly from Lightroom as non-resized JPGs, with no output sharpening and saved at a quality level of 100. For all intents and purposes, they are on par quality-wise with TIFF files.

B&W ISO Showdown 2020 – Full Size Files

The Test

With all the reasoning out of the way, time to move onto to the test setup and methodology.

Like my previous B&W ISO Showdown five years ago, I went with an Italian food-themed tabletop setup as it offers a wide variety of detail, texture and tonality. A big thanks to our office manager Rayssa for styling the scene better than I ever could. Unlike the last time around, I opted to use controlled studio lighting rather than window light. The continuous studio light affords far more control with regards to exposure and white balance, as well as 100% consistency from shot to shot. For lighting, I'm using a single Intellytech Light Cannon F-165 Bi-Color LED Fresnel. With a CRI of 97+, this is an extremely accurate, flicker-free professional cine light with full spectrum illumination.

All cameras were mounted on my Gitzo 3-Series tripod and Really Right Stuff BH-55 ball head using Arca-style quick release plates. The same APO-Summicron 50mm f/2 ASPH lens was mounted on all cameras, with the addition of the M-Adapter-L for use on the SL2. Focus for all shots was on the text of the balsamic vinegar bottle and was achieved in live view with focus magnification assist. The aperture was set to f/8 and the cameras were put into Aperture priority mode.

I first set the exposure of the M10 Monochrom as it has the widest ISO range and I needed to be sure that the shutter speed for this highest setting wouldn't exceed 1/4000th of a second, the fastest available shutter speed. Then, all cameras were shot at base ISO, adjusting exposure compensation as needed to match up to the M10M as a reference. Once exposures were squared away, I shot a full ISO series on each camera using the 2-second self timer to avoid any possible vibration. And even after all that, there was still slight framing differences between the cameras.

For the image crops, I selected three zones. The label of balsamic vinegar bottle was the true focal point for all cameras, and demonstrates high-contrast high-detail image areas. The artichoke and pasta highlights textural details. And the tomato can with flat background shows smooth tonal areas. There are other interesting crops that I explored as well, but there are already far too many images here as it is.

Image Processing and Noise Reduction

All the comparison images were processed using basic tone adjustments in the latest version of Lightroom Classic CC. I stayed away from any Presence tools as this would have unduly colored the results. So, no Texture, Clarity or Dehaze was used on any of the images. I also made no adjustments to exposure, as doing so would have impacted noise performance. Any variance in exposure at increasing ISO values was left in. And I didn't modify toning on a per ISO basis. All corrections are per-camera and remain consistent for the entire ISO run.

For the color cameras, I applied Lightroom's default Monochrome profile, dialed in basic tone adjustments, then used the Black & White Mix controls to attempt to match the overall look of the native monochrome cameras. The resulting conversions aren't perfect, but certainly very close.

I chose to optimize noise reduction settings as ISO levels increased for each camera. At base ISO, even a small amount of default noise reduction would have diminished detail. And at high ISO, a lack of noise reduction would not have been representative of real-world usage. These are all best-case scenarios under ideal test conditions, so please view them as such.

All files were exported from Lightroom using the highest level of JPG quality (100) with the least compression, with no image resizing and no additional output sharpening. Why didn’t I use TIFF? In my experience, there is no visible difference in a highest quality JPG and a TIFF. These processed images were then brought into Adobe Photoshop as full-size layers, composited for comparison, then output for web with a JPG level of 11. If nothing else, in preparing for the results, I did manage to create the largest Photoshop file I've ever worked with, at over 31GB in size. Yes, for single file.

How to Properly View the Comparisons

One final note before we get into the comparisons: these images are output to 2000px on the long side, with 1:1 pixel rendering. Be sure to click on each crop set to view the larger image. When viewed with no onscreen scaling, one pixel on your monitor will display one pixel from the camera. This is complicated somewhat by Retina-type displays that do pixel resampling. Applications like the latest versions of Photoshop and Lightroom have the option of running in non-scaled, 1:1 mode, but the pictures will appear smaller on screen. 

If your monitor resolution is less than 2000px across, like on an iPad or a laptop, be sure to right-click on the image and select Open link in new tab (be sure to select link not image). This will open just the image, allowing you to view it at the correct size once you click to magnify. Or, even better, right-click to Save link as… and view in Photoshop. Unfortunately, with technological innovation comes its own set of challenges. Retina and 4K/5K displays look stunning, especially for text, but are sometimes less than ideal for image comparisons as they employ pixel doubling and no longer show 1:1.

M Cameras Compared: M10 Monochrom vs. M Monochrom (Typ 246) vs. M10-P

For this M-System matchup, we're comparing the new M10 Monochrom, the previous generation M Monochrom (Typ 246) and the M10-P, with its color file converted to black and white. As I stated above, the M10 Monochrom's 41 megapixel files have been downsampled to 24 megapixel, matching up to the other two. For more explanation on my reasoning, please see the resolution section above. If you want to see the resolution difference you can scroll past the 3-way comparisons, and I have a native resolution match-up between the M10M and the M246.

ISO 200

To start things off, we've got all the M cameras at low ISO. While the base ISO of the M10M is ISO 160 and the M10-P is ISO 100, the M246 doesn't go below ISO 320. So, 200 for the newer cameras and 320 for the previous Monochrom is a bit of a compromise. And really, there is no visual difference. All are exceptionally good.

ISO 400

At ISO 400, all are still perfect. Detailed, smooth.

ISO 800

Same story at ISO 800. Almost no discernable loss of quality for any of the M cameras.

ISO 1600

Just the tiniest amount of noise is starting to be visible in the background. Interestingly, the M246 is the smoothest here.

ISO 3200

One stop higher and the advantage seems to have shifted to the M10M's favor. Detail resolution and overall crispness looks just a bit better than on the M246, but still, the differences are minor.

ISO 6400

All the M cameras are doing really well here. Both Monochroms are still roughly on par, with the M10M continuing to resolve more detail. The M10-P is just starting to fall off from the other two.

ISO 8000

Let's slow things down a little. Instead of whole stops, we'll evaluate at 1/3 stop increments. The image quality will degrade much quicker now, so it's good to really get a feel for the limits on each camera.

At ISO 8000, noise is tightly packed for all cameras, but more visible on the M10-P. The M10M is very slightly in the lead.

ISO 10000

The M246 appears to overtake the M10M with slightly less noise, but at the expense of some detail. And while the M10-P is picking up incrementally more noise, details are still sharp.

ISO 12500

Almost the same story as ISO 10000, but the M246 seems even better. Could the older M246 actually be besting the newer M10M?

ISO 16000

Unfortunately, the M246 has no 1/3 stop increments between ISO 12500 and 25000, so for 16000, we'll compare the M10M and M10-P to the M246 at ISO 12500.

ISO 20000

Just as in the last match-up, at ISO 20000, we have to compare to the M246 at ISO 12500. The M10M seems to be holding steady, but the M10-P seems to be displaying more noise.

ISO 25000

We've hit the top of the ISO range on the M246, but still have one more stop on the M10-P and two stops more on the M10 Monochrom. From here on out, the max 25000 setting will be displayed for the M246. This will help us see how much improvement the M10 Monochrom actually has.

Now, we're starting to see some really interesting differences in how these cameras perform near or at their limits. The M246, while still exhibiting a very clean image, is doing so at the expense of detail. Image contrast has also dropped, resulting in a dull appearance. The M10-P, on the other hand, is maintaining contrast and detail, but at the expense of more pronounced noise. The M10M takes the best of both, with low noise and amazing detail clarity.

ISO 32000

The M10 Monochrom still looks great at ISO 32000, even compared to the M246 at ISO 25000. The M10-P seems to have more left but is getting very noisy compared to its Monochrom cousins.

ISO 40000

Now, we're finally starting to see the M10M pick up some noise, but detail resolution is still excellent, better than the M246 at ISO 25000. Noise is now quite significant on the M10-P.

ISO 50000

At ISO 50000, we've hit the upper limit on the M10-P. The M246 is a full stop behind at ISO 25000 and the M10M still has another stop in the tank. Really impressive showing by the M10M as the noise:detail ratio seems to hold fairly steady.

ISO 64000

At ISO 64000, we've ventured past the native ISO ranges of both the M10-P and the M246, but the M10M keeps on going strong.

ISO 80000

The M10M image is picking up more noise and losing some midtone and shadow detail, but high frequency info is still retained.

ISO 100000

At 100000, the M10M is at the top of its ISO range, a full stop faster than the M10-P and two stops more than the M246. It's noisy, but the pattern is tightly packed and uniform. There's still usable detail and ISO 100000 looks better than 50000 on the M10-P.

Best of High ISO Settings

For this bonus set, I've combined the three cameras at the ISO values I felt displayed the greatest amount of detail before exhibiting noticeable noise. The M10-P isn't too far behind the M246 at ISO 10000 versus ISO 12500. But the M10M shows its capability at ISO 32000. The M10M does show more noise in the background, but a bit more noise reduction in Lightroom could work very well here.

Basically, what we're seeing is a 1.5 stop advantage of the M10M, but this is a bit of an oversimplification. The M10M maintains similar image quality across an even wider range of ISO values, almost plateauing once hitting ISO 10000.

Native Resolution Comparison: M10M vs M246

If you found flaws in my logic for downsampling the M10 Monochrom, or simply wanted to see the actual resolution increase over the M Monochrom (Typ 246), I've got you covered with this next comparison set. Just for the sake of slightly minimizing the amount of images in one post, I've limited these comparisons just to the central balsamic vinegar bottle and pasta.

Here, I decided to include the respective base ISO results from each of these two Monochrom cameras, ISO 320 for the M246 and ISO 160 for the M10M. Honestly, there is no visual difference from the earlier method.

Having already covered the basic analysis above, I'll simply leave these here for you to draw your own conclusions. Suffice it to say, while both cameras resolve an incredible amount of detail and textural nuance, the M10M's large pixel advantage serves it well here. You can easily see the added detail throughout the whole test range.

Base ISO (160 vs. 320)

ISO 400

ISO 800

ISO 1600

ISO 3200

ISO 6400

ISO 8000

ISO 10000

ISO 12500

ISO 16000 vs. 12500

ISO 20000 vs. 12500

ISO 25000

ISO 32000 vs 25000

ISO 40000 vs. 25000

ISO 50000 vs. 25000

ISO 64000 vs. 25000

ISO 80000 vs. 25000

ISO 100000 vs. 25000

Native Resolution Comparison: M10M vs SL2

For our final comparison, I've matched up the 47 megapixel SL2 with the 41 megapixel M10 Monochrom. Both are displayed at their native resolution at 100%. As I outlined in the introduction, the SL2 images were converted to black and white using Lightroom's default Adobe Monochrome profile, with minimal Basic Tone edits and small tweaks in the Black & White Mix palette to better approximate the tonal response of the M10M.

What surprises me the most here is just how much of an obvious resolution jump we see just with six additional megapixels. I would have figured the real-world difference to be less noticeable.

ISO 200

Both the M10 Monochrom and the SL2 offer up incredible resolution and textural detail at low ISO. For pure detail the SL2 has the edge here as we would expect given the pixel advantage.

ISO 400

As expected, not much changes at ISO 400. Interestingly, the M10M is completely noise-free, while the SL2 shows very tightly patterned noise. This takes away nothing from the image, and I suppose I could have used more aggressive noise reduction for the SL2, but shows the advantage of no per-channel gain for the M10 Monochrom.

ISO 800

At ISO 800, we see very similar results to ISO 400. Both cameras continue to produce largely noise-free images with outstanding detail.

ISO 1600

At ISO 1600, the M10M continues to be perfect. The SL2 is starting to lose just a bit of fine detail. Also, of note is that the SL2 exposure seems to be getting darker and less contrasty. This trend will continue as the ISO increases. My guess is that the dynamic range is starting to suffer and this is the visible result. If I had chosen to adjust tone settings on a per-image basis rather than per-camera, some of this could have been compensated for.

ISO 3200

Performance at ISO 3200 is very similar to ISO 1600. Both cameras look excellent.

ISO 6400

While the M10M continues trucking along at ISO 6400, the SL2 is starting to show a slight decrease in overall image quality. A bit more noise, a little less detail and a small drop in dynamic range all contribute here. ISO 6400 is still completely usable on the SL2, just not as good as staying below ISO 3200.

ISO 8000 vs. 6400

Because the SL2 only has whole ISO steps, we're going to lock it in at ISO 6400 while ticking up another third for theM10M. And no surprise here. The M10M looks better at ISO 8000 than the SL2 does at ISO 6400.

ISO 10000 vs. 6400

At ISO 10000 the M10M is producing equivalent image quality to the SL2 at ISO 6400. And as we'll see after jumping to ISO 12500, this will be the best case for the SL2.

ISO 12500

Now, with the SL2 bumped up to ISO 12500, the M10M pulls ahead significantly. The M10M still looks roughly the same as ISO 10000, but the SL2 is showing noticeable degradation.

ISO 16000 vs. 12500

At ISO 16000 and 20000, the M10M is much better than the SL2 at ISO 12500.

ISO 20000 vs. 12500

ISO 25000

At one stop from its maximum ISO setting, the SL2 is no match for the M10M. The quality difference observed at ISO 12500 – 20000 is even more pronounced here. While I'd consider the results at 25000 to be borderline usable on the SL2, the M10M still looks great.

ISO 32000 vs. 25000

ISO 40000 vs. 25000

ISO 50000

Now at the upper limit of the the SL2, results at ISO 50,000 are fairly unusable. There is an overwhelming amount of noise, even with aggressive noise reduction. Detail is sacrificed both due to noise, noise reduction and lack of dynamic range. Meanwhile, the M10M continues to put up a decent image.

ISO 64000 vs. 50000

ISO 80000 vs. 50000

ISO 100000 vs. 50000

Even when maxed out at ISO 100000, the M10M still produces a better image than the SL2 does at ISO 50000.

Best of High ISO Settings

For this last comparison, I've put what I consider the highest ISO setting from each camera that represents the best balance of light sensitivity, detail resolution and acceptable noise. For the M10M, as in the roundup of M cameras, ISO 32000 looks phenomenal and gives up very little regarding image quality. In order to visually match up to the M10M, the SL2 puts up a decent, if not super-impressive ISO 6400. With discrete 1/3 stop increments, we probably could have gotten more, but ISO 12500 was simply too much sacrifice for my tastes. The net result is a 2.3 stop advantage for the M10M over the color flagship.

Final Thoughts

My number one takeaway: The M10 Monochrom is absolutely incredible in its ability to balance detail resolution with noise suppression, offering low light capability unimaginable just a few years ago. With that out of the way, let's take a quick look at how the M10 Monochrom matches up against the M contenders and the SL2.

Tackling the M lineup first, the M246 at five years old, puts up an admirable fight against the much newer M10-P and M10 Monochom. And if all you need is solid ISO 12500, the M246 still represents an amazing value in 2020. The M10-P, for its part, did even better than I imagined. Sure, really clean results top out around ISO 10000, but the camera can push past there in a pinch. As noise increases, sharpness and detail are largely maintained. Ultimately, the M10M posts around a 1.5 stop advantage over both the M Monochrom (Typ 246) and the M10-P at their best case settings, but can extend that lead to over 2 stops as ISO continues to increase.

The results from the SL2 were somewhat unexpected. As the current technology flagship for Leica, I was hoping for a little better showing from the SL2. With an optimal top end of ISO 6400, the SL2 can still claim the resolution and detail crown at the low-to-mid range of ISO values, but suffers from noise and reduced dynamic range at ISO 12500 and above. The net result is a 2.5 stop improvement in high ISO of the M10M over the SL2.

That being said, having used the SL2 extensively for the last several months, I never felt limited by its ISO range. And because of the effective sensor-based image stabilization, I rarely need to go past ISO 6400. Given that it offers double the resolution the of the M10, I'm willing to make that tradeoff in order to maximize image quality for my landscape photography and gain access to the exceptional SL lenses.

The M10 Monochrom, on the other hand, has allowed me to shoot at 1/500th of a second, under almost any lighting condition, taking a completely different approach to eliminating camera shake. With the M10 Monochrom, you simply don't need to ever worry about ISO.

Hopefully, you found the results here helpful in understanding the black and white capabilities of all these excellent photographic tools. Ultimately, any of them will work extremely well for real-world photography. Whether you prioritize the unparalleled low light prowess of the M10 Monochrom, the value of the M Monochrom (Typ 246), the flexibility of a color M with the M10-P, or the technically advanced feature set and ultimate resolution of the SL2, will be up to you as a photographer and what works best for your photography.

The post B&W ISO Showdown 2020: Leica M10 Monochrom vs. M Monochrom (Typ 246) vs. M10-P vs. SL2 appeared first on Red Dot Forum.

Leica M cameras are my jam. The sound of the shutter. The way the aperture ring clicks on M lenses. The comfort in my subjects’ eyes at not having a massive lens pointed in their faces. And, I haven’t been able to get enough of that feeling since the moment I shot off my first frame with an M camera all those years ago.

Leica CL with 21mm Super-Elmar-M ASPH
1/125th @ f/5.6, ISO 100

Looking for something smaller

Lately though, convenience has been tempting me and I’ve been wanting something smaller, lighter, and more compact. I even flirted with a couple of notable APS-C mirrorless cameras over the last couple of years and adapted my M glass to said cameras. But the results often disappointed. See, I’ve been spoiled by the quality, color, contrast, and sharpness you get when you pair M glass with a Leica sensor. Other mirrorless cameras' sensors aren't optimized for the high angle of incidence of Leica M lenses, so you'll often get color shifts and smeary, dark corners.

Leica CL with 21mm Super-Elmar-M ASPH
1/60th @ f/3.4, ISO 100

Leica CL with 21mm Super-Elmar-M ASPH
1/40th @ f/3.4, ISO 8000

Enter the Leica CL.

Rocking a classic and ergonomic body design, along with a solid line-up of top-quality autofocus TL lenses, the Leica CL caught my attention from the get-go. But not because of the lenses. For me, it was all about the way the camera felt in my hands. I knew from the moment that the CL came out that I wanted to pair it with a 35 ‘Cron M lens. And with the Leica M-Adapter-L, doing so is a piece of cake. Just pop the adapter on the camera, throw on an M lens and with a 6-bit reader, the camera knows what lens you have mounted. Lens profiles are automatically applied and the focal length shows up in the metadata.

Originally the M-Adapter L was called the M-Adapter T. They are the same adapter.

Leica CL with 21mm Super-Elmar-M ASPH
1/400th @ f/8, ISO 100

Leica CL with 21mm Super-Elmar-M ASPH
1/40th @ f/3.4, ISO 400

New City, New Camera

Recently, my wife and I moved from Miami, FL to Atlanta, GA. I decided to document my first few weeks here with the CL, and I really wanted to see how it performed with M glass. So, I started thinking about what lenses to try out. The 35mm Summicron was a given, of course. Adding two other of my favorite M lenses, the 21mm Super-Elmar-M ASPH and the 75mm APO-Summicron-M ASPH, completed the setup. These are the three lenses I would typically carry with me when shooting a wedding or other event with the M.

Leica CL with 21mm Super-Elmar-M ASPH
1/40th @ f/3.4, ISO 100

Leica CL with 75mm APO Summicron-M ASPH
1/160th @ f/4, ISO 400

I took the CL with me almost everywhere. Pool days, date nights, city trips. Nothing was out of the question. Surprisingly, I found myself shooting the 21mm more than the other two lenses. With the 1.5x conversion factor, the 21mm offered me a focal length I didn’t know I needed in my life. An equivalent of 31.5mm, it served as a wide 35 and a tight 28.

Leica CL with 21mm Super-Elmar-M ASPH
1/320th @ f/8, ISO 100

Leica CL with 21mm Super-Elmar-M ASPH
1/40th @ f/3.4, ISO 800

Leica CL with 21mm Super-Elmar-M ASPH
1/200th @ f/11, ISO 100

But, the biggest limitation of the lens became apparent very quickly. At a modest f/3.4 max aperture, the lens isn’t particularly fast. To its credit, though, the CL performed beautifully at higher ISO values and compensated somewhat for the slow aperture of the what became my go-to focal length.

Leica CL with 21mm Super-Elmar-M ASPH
1/40th @ f/3.4, ISO 8000

Whenever the Super-Elmar wasn’t mounted on the camera, I reached for the 35mm Summicron, a lens that I can shoot with my eyes closed. All I had to do was take a couple of steps back to compensate for the 1.5x magnification of the APS-C sensor and I was right back in the groove. Even as a 35 shooter, I didn’t find the 50mm equivalent too much to get used to.

Leica CL with 35mm Summicron-M ASPH
1/100 @ f/2.8, ISO 100

Leica CL with 35mm Summicron-M ASPH
1/400 @ f/2, ISO 100

Leica CL with 21mm Super-Elmar-M ASPH
1/40 @ f/3.4, ISO 1250

Leica CL with 35mm Summicron-M ASPH
1/60 @ f/2, ISO 200

Leica CL with 35mm Summicron-M ASPH
1/60 @ f/2, ISO 800

Leica CL with 35mm Summicron-M ASPH
1/60 @ f/2, ISO 12500

Unfortunately, the 75mm didn’t get too much use. I would only pull it out for portraits or quieter still life moments. I don’t really like longer lenses for shooting everyday life and the 75 on the CL turned into a 100 equivalent. But when I did use it, I absolutely loved the way the 75 APO rendered on the CL sensor. Colors popped, and the images were just tack-sharp. Gorgeous.

Leica CL with 75mm APO Summicron-M ASPH
1/160th @ f/2, ISO 4000

Leica CL with 75mm APO Summicron-M ASPH
1/160th @ f/2, ISO 800

Leica CL with 75mm APO Summicron-M ASPH
1/160th @ f/5.6, ISO 200

The Hybrid Experience

Using M lenses on the CL gave me the hybrid experience I love about Leica digital photography. Marrying classic and modern has always been one of my favorite approaches to shooting. Dialing in focus using the tab and feeling the lens barrel turn with silky precision. Adjusting my f-stop with the clicks of the detents on the aperture ring dropping like subtle lock tumblers.

Leica CL with 75mm APO Summicron-M ASPH
1/160th @ f/2, ISO 1600

The experience of the M lenses was familiar, welcoming. But what made it even better was being able to easily zoom to 100% within the viewfinder to guarantee my subject was in perfect focus. I still consider myself young at 31, but my eyes aren’t what they used to be. Besides helping me judge focus, the real-time exposure preview in the CL’s large electronic viewfinder gave me the freedom to experiment with light in different settings. The whole process became effortless with a little practice.

Leica CL with 35mm Summicron-M ASPH
1/160th @ f/2.8, ISO 100

Conclusion

I honestly don’t see myself ever giving up on, or letting go of, a Leica M camera. There’s nothing in the world that compares to it. But there was something about using Leica M lenses on the CL that was comfortable, familiar. The camera felt like a Leica, and for me, that’s crucial.

Leica CL with 75mm APO Summicron-M ASPH
1/160th @ f/2, ISO 400

Will the CL ever replace the Leica M as my primary camera? Probably not. But I would happily use it as a second body in any M kit. It gives the lenses I already use a different life at 1.5x magnification, and I can easily see myself taking the CL on weekend trips. If you’re like me, and just love the character you can only get out of M glass but want something a little lighter and smaller to carry around every day, the CL absolutely fits the bill.

Leica CL with 21mm Super-Elmar-M ASPH
1/40th @ f/3.4, ISO 200

The post Using M Lenses on the Leica CL: <br />New City, New Camera, Familiar Glass appeared first on Red Dot Forum.

While the original Leica S2 DSLR-sized medium format digital could be a useful walk-around camera in good light, it fell short when the sun set. This was always my cue to pull out the M with a fast 35mm f/1.4 Summilux mounted on the front. For many photographers, this perception that medium format digital cameras aren’t cut out for low light shooting persists.

Thankfully, with advances in sensor technology, we’ve come a long way from CCD chips incapable of delivering clean results past a meager ISO 800. Indeed, the 37.5 MP CMOS sensor at the heart of the S (Typ 007) is a far cry from its CCD predecessor. But, even with a better sensor, could the S be useful for hand-held nighttime shooting and pull double-duty?

The sensor is only part of the equation. M lenses, especially Summiluxes and Noctiluxes, are designed to soak up every last drop of light. S lenses, while fast for medium format, still only clock in at f/2.5 or f/2.8, two full stops slower. That constraint forces you to use slower shutter speeds and/or higher ISO settings to compensate. If I was to try using an S like an M, would slower lenses be the limiting factor? Or, would the added potential for more mirror and shutter vibration with a 60% larger-than-full-frame sensor area be its downfall? At least on paper, the deck seemed stacked against the S for sure.

Putting the Camera to the Test

I decided to put the camera to the test, taking the S007 out for a night on the town in South Beach. But, before hitting the road for actual shooting, I wanted to get a feel for what kind of experience I was likely in for. So, I shot some simple test shots.

Leica S (Typ 007) with 45mm Elmarit-S
1/30th @ f/2.8, ISO 6400, handheld

Alright, this wasn't exactly the result I was expecting from my very first test shot. At the time, my dog was yanking on his leash, which I had looped around my right arm – the one trying to steady the camera for a slow shutter speed of just 1/30th of a second. I used rear button AF to lock onto the sign, then squeezed off a frame wide-open on the Elmarit-S 45mm f/2.8 ASPH. And…. Wow. I was blown away. Here's a 100% crop from the above shot. Yes, there is some noise, but it's almost all luminance noise, resulting in a not-so-offensive film-like look.

Leica S (Typ 007) with 45mm Elmarit-S
1/30th @ f/2.8, ISO 6400, handheld
100% crop

What about pushing past ISO 6400 and seeing what ISO 12,500 could do for me? I adjusted the ISO and snapped off another. Again, way better than I was expecting. The ability to retain color information and keep noise to a minimum was astonishing.

Leica S (Typ 007) with 45mm Elmarit-S
1/30th @ f/2.8, ISO 12,500, handheld

And another. This one back to ISO 6400, seeing what kind of detail I could get at infinity wide-open. The answer: all of if. Even at slow shutter speeds.

Leica S (Typ 007) with 45mm Elmarit-S
1/30th @ f/2.8, ISO 6400, handheld

After the success of three handheld 1/30th of second shots in a row, I figured I'd push the limit and see if I could get away with 1/15th. Nailed it.

Leica S (Typ 007) with 45mm Elmarit-S
1/15th @ f/2.8, ISO 6400, handheld

And a 100% crop of that shot. Again, some noise, but still plenty of detail and surprisingly sharp for 1/15th of a second handheld medium format with no image stabilization or mirror lock-up. This was a straight-up handheld grab shot and a testament to the well damped mirror and shutter mechanism of the S007.

Leica S (Typ 007) with 45mm Elmarit-S
1/15th @ f/2.8, ISO 6400, handheld
100% crop

After taking a look over the backyard tests, and discovering a new level of confidence in the S007 for night photography, I grabbed the S camera, 45mm f/2.8 Elmarit-S ASPH, 70mm f/2.5 Summarit-S ASPH and 120mm f/2.5 APO-Macro-Summarit, and headed for the neon lights of South Beach.

Leica S (Typ 007) with 45mm Elmarit-S
1/90th @ f/4, ISO 3200, handheld

Challenges for Night Photography

The classic challenge of night photography is performing a balancing act on three fronts:

1. Keeping ISO low in order to minimize noise and maximize image quality
2. Keeping shutter speeds high to avoid camera shake, freeze action and produce sharp images
3. Stopping down when needed to achieve usable depth of field

Of course, if you prioritize any one of these, the others directly suffer as a result. Lower your ISO and you'll end up with a slow shutter speed or an aperture without enough depth of field. So, you might have a very clean, yet out-of-focus and blurry image. Conversely, focus on a fast shutter speed and you'll need a higher ISO. Sharp, but noisy. It's a zero sum game.

Leica S (Typ 007) with 45mm Elmarit-S
1/1500th @ f/2.8, ISO 1600, handheld

Which is why we, photographers, cheat. Throw the camera on a tripod and, suddenly, all the restrictions go out the window. Low ISO, slow shutter speed, stopped down. Bam! Maximum image quality in low light. Alternatively, some photographers use additional lighting, or move subjects into areas with better lighting.

For nighttime street photography, generally speaking, these cheats don't work. While a tripod can work for a cityscape, it doesn't do much for moving subjects. And using flash in a situation like that not only ruins the mood of the shot, but draws unnecessary attention and can even be considered downright rude. As mentioned previously, the last workaround is to use a super-fast lens, but that sacrifices number 3. Shallow DOF can work great for night photos with lovely, colorful bokeh, but sometimes you want something different, with a full scene in focus.

Leica S (Typ 007) with 45mm Elmarit-S
1/60th @ f/2.8, ISO 1600, handheld

Leica S (Typ 007) with 45mm Elmarit-S
1/90th @ f/4, ISO 3200, handheld

Therefore, we welcome the march of digital progress and increasingly more capable sensors. Here, the CMOS chip in the S007 is able to provide sufficient sensitivity and low enough noise in order to allow shutter speed and aperture combinations that get the job done.

Even more remarkable to me is that I am consistently able to use shutter speeds that conventional wisdom would say are too slow for medium format digital. This is one area where the S007 shines.

Leica S (Typ 007) with 70mm Summarit-S
1/90th @ f/2.5, ISO 6400, handheld

I'll freely admit that the Leica M10 with a 35 Lux would be far better suited for night photography. But, man, did the S007 put up a nice showing. While I tried to use all three lenses during my test, the 45 became the clear favorite. A 35 equivalent on the S, the focal length just feels right for walk-around photography. As such, the 45 has become my most used lens in the S System, taking the place the 70 held for a number of years, before the 45 was an option.

Leica S (Typ 007) with 45mm Elmarit-S
1/750th @ f/2.8, ISO 1600, handheld

Leica S (Typ 007) with 45mm Elmarit-S
1/350th @ f/2.8, ISO 3200, handheld

And because I could get some decent shutter speeds, I even found opportunities to break out the 120 Macro, one of my favorites for shooting details and short telephoto. Of course, the idea of using a telephoto lens on a medium format camera, at night, handheld, still took some getting used to. Longer focal lengths are even more challenging to hold steady, so are not usually the first lens you go for with this type of shooting.

Leica S (Typ 007) with 120mm APO-Macro-Summarit-S
1/500th @ f/2.5, ISO 6400, handheld

Leica S (Typ 007) with 120mm APO-Macro-Summarit-S
1/125th @ f/3.4, ISO 1600, handheld

ISO Performance

For most of my field trip to SoBe, I found that ISO 1600 and 3200 offered up sufficient speed given the plentiful neon lighting in most scenarios. As is usually the case, by staying at a lower ISO, the files retain more dynamic range and malleability in post. That being said, I was quite satisfied with ISO 6400. Even with some crazy lighting like this wash of blue and purple, and a bright orange car, the image was easily workable in Lightroom.

Leica S (Typ 007) with 45mm Elmarit-S
1/60th @ f/2.8, ISO 6400, handheld

In fact, I'd say that the S007 outperforms the M (Typ 240) by about a stop in this regard, at least with regards to straight ISO performance. As I mentioned above, a super-fast M lens changes the calculus. But, apples-to-apples, the sensor in the S delivers better low light results than the M240. Frankly, this isn't surprising. The 37.5 MP sensor inside the S (Typ 007) is a refined and improved version of the 24 MP MAX CMOS sensor first used in the M (Typ 240).

Both the M10 and SL have gone even further with sensor technology. The M10 at ISO 10,000, or even ISO 12,500, looks a lot like the S007 at ISO 6400. The share a similar fingerprint, with excellent color representation even in challenging, artificial and limited-spectrum light.

Leica S (Typ 007) with 120mm APO-Macro-Summarit-S
1/250th @ f/3.4, ISO 3200, handheld

Final Thoughts

Overall, I'd call this little experiment a success. The S007 was up to a task it wasn't really designed for, acting more like an M than an S. I was pleased with the results and had a good time playing around. I shot some images in challenging light and at night in NYC when I first tested the S007, giving me a basic idea of the camera's capabilities. Specifically revisiting nighttime photography proved to be even more eye-opening than my first go-around. This is especially true given the sheer number of images I've logged on the S007 following that test. For just about every landscape outing since, the S has been my baby. It simply performs under all conditions and delivers maximum image quality in the great outdoors.

So, will I grab the S the next time I'm out wandering at night? Probably not. The M10 or SL or Q are a better fit for this kind of photography. Smaller, lighter, less conspicuous. But, what if I am already on assignment shooting with the S, and the chance for some night photography comes up? In the past, I would have just dismissed the idea and not even tried. Now, after seeing what the camera is capable of, I wouldn't hesitate to jump right in and start shooting with the S. This test forced me to reconsider pigeonholing camera systems and appreciate just how flexible each one really is, often beyond its intended use. And that's the case with the S007.

Leica S (Typ 007) with 70mm Summarit-S
1/180th @ f/2.8 ISO 1600, handheld

The post Night Shooting with the Leica S (Typ 007) appeared first on Red Dot Forum.

The 28mm Summaron features the same optical design of the original, but with updated mechanics, modern-day lens coatings and a 6-bit coded M bayonet mount. Yet, it still looks like something from a bygone era. Awesome.

Protruding less than 2cm, a mere 3/4 inch, from the front of the camera, this is now officially the smallest M lens in the lineup. It’s tiny, but focusing is easy enough with the ridged cylindrical focus knob. In the hand, the brass and glass feel dense, although once mounted, you can barely tell you have a lens on the camera.

I’m a die-hard 35 guy. A 35 Lux or Cron lives on my M. But since the Q came out, I’ve found myself shooting more and more with 28. So, I grabbed the 28mm Summaron and headed to Little Havana for a day of shooting. A lens like this doesn’t warrant scientific testing or pixel peeping. After all, it was originally designed in the mid 1950s. It isn’t going to match up to lenses like the 28mm Summilux-M ASPH, but that’s not why you get a lens like this. On the other hand, the Summaron isn’t just for decoration either. The lens actually is a solid performer, worthy of the Leica name.

So, rather than a strictly defined “test”, I was more interested in the resulting look of the images and how it felt to use for my normal street shooting. On both fronts, I wasn’t disappointed.

Check out the video below for the full scoop and tons of sample images. As always, for best quality be sure to maximize the video and select 4K for viewing resolution. 

Be sure to subscribe to our Red Dot Forum YouTube channel for more videos like this.

The post Shooting the “New” Leica 28mm Summaron-M in Little Havana appeared first on Red Dot Forum.

In order to make this a fair test, we chose some of our favorite M lenses to cover the same focal length as the 24-90 zoom. Seriously, these M lenses are no joke. The fact that the zoom can hold more than hold its own against some of Leica's finest fixed focal lengths says a lot about the 24-90mm Vario-Elmarit-SL.

• 24mm Elmar-M ASPH
• 35mm Summilux-M ASPH
• 50mm APO-Summicron ASPH
• 90mm APO-Summicron ASPH

Basically, the M lenses, with their small size and fast aperture offered great options for shooting inside where lighting and space was limited. The 24-90 excelled on the street, as it gave the maximum flexibility in a single package. Autofocus, near macro ability and not having to change lenses all proved to be huge advantages for the zoom. Check out the video for my thoughts while out shooting, lots of sample images and to get a taste of Miami!

We're going to be making more videos like this. Be sure to check out our YouTube channel, throw us a like and subscribe by clicking the big button right here.

Subscribe to RDF YouTube

The post 24-90 Zoom vs. M Lenses on the Leica SL (Typ 601) appeared first on Red Dot Forum.

Leica M6 with Summicron-M 35mm ASPH, CineStill 50D

Cinema film stock has been used in 35mm cameras since the birth of the portable 35mm camera. Around the turn of the century, Oskar Barnack, head of R&D at Leitz, wanted to make a portable camera that used 35mm cinema film and that was capable of producing high quality negatives for enlargement. And so in 1913 the Leica (Leitz Camera) was born.

Leica M6 with Summicron-M 35mm ASPH, CineStill 800T

100 years later, with that same spirit, The Brothers Wright, Founders of Cinestill Inc. decided to bring color cinema stock into the household. “Original beta testing for this newly available film began in late 2012, but the concept and original development tests began years before, when we first started shooting the amazing Kodak Vision 3 500T 5219 for our own photography… Compelled by our love for analogue photography, and never one to back down from a challenge, we came to the conclusion that we had to find a way to make it usable in standard 135 canisters with standard developing.”

Leica M6 with Summicron-M 35mm ASPH, CineStill 50D

Since then, CineStill has built up its repertoire with a daylight balanced ISO 50 film, a tungsten balanced ISO 800, and the seemingly never-in-stock ISO 200 black & white film.

Leica M6 with Summicron-M 35mm ASPH, CineStill 50D

CineStill 50D produces some of the warmest colors I’ve ever seen on film.  The skin tones are creamy. The balance and exposure latitude are really impressive.  While I waited for my rolls to arrive I endlessly looked at images online to mentally prepare myself. I loaded a roll into my Leica M6, and with light meter in tow, I set out to see what I could capture.

Leica M6 with Summicron-M 35mm ASPH, CineStill 50D

There’s only one word I could use to describe CineStill 50D… Wow.  This film outperformed itself in any kind of lighting I threw at it.  Shadows, tungsten, fluorescent, direct sunlight, golden hour. It captured every lighting situation beautifully! And while I’m a grain enthusiast, the lack of visible grain from the CineStill 50D is stunning.

Leica M6 with Summicron-M 35mm ASPH, CineStill 50D

In order to correctly process the cinema stock in C-41 chemistry, CineStill removes the hardening rem-jet layer from the film through a chemical process before loading it into its packaged rolls of 36.  This leaves it very vulnerable to some halation, which manifests as a pinkish or orange shift in color around bright lights. The effect isn’t necessarily unpleasant, for me anyways.

A little halation in the highlights.
Leica M6 with Summicron-M 35mm ASPH, CineStill 50D

After seeing the results from the CineStill 50D I was more than excited to load up the 800T.  I wanted to shoot it in its element, where it would thrive. Right as the last bit of daylight was fading away, I went to Lincoln Road (an outdoor shopping area in Miami Beach) and started walking. I shot in every type of artificial light I could find, saving a couple of frames to see how daylight would affect it.

A little halation in the highlights.
Leica M6 with Summicron-M 35mm ASPH, CineStill 800T

I gotta warn you guys, I’m usually not a fan of 800 speed film, but CineStill once again made me a believer. Just like it’s daylight balanced counterpart, it performed spectacularly in all lighting situations. The grain structure is definitely more pronounced than that of the 50D and the colors are very much on the cooler side.

Leica M6 with Summicron-M 35mm ASPH, CineStill 800T

The one thing that blew me away about the 800T was the sense that each frame looked like a still out of a 1980’s movie, more so than with the 50D in my personal opinion.

Leica M6 with Summicron-M 35mm ASPH, CineStill 800T

A little halation in the highlights.
Leica M6 with Summicron-M 35mm ASPH, CineStill 800T

Overall, I was sincerely impressed and beyond happy with CineStill. The films have been a hit and I now know why.  CineStill has found a formula that works and I’m stoked to see what the future has in store. Both of these film stocks are definitely a great addition to any analog photographer’s arsenal.

Leica M6 with Summicron-M 35mm ASPH, CineStill 800T

The 50D and 800T both offer a unique signature image that are unparalleled especially when paired with Leica’s legendary optics.  The future is looking bright for analog photography and companies like CineStill are leading the way.

Leica M6 with Summicron-M 35mm ASPH, CineStill 800T

Leica M6 with Summilux-M 50mm ASPH, CineStill 50D

The post CineStill films and the resurgence of analog photography appeared first on Red Dot Forum.

This is primarily a field test report. You are can read my full in-depth review of the Leica S (Typ 007) here. 

Planning

With only a little more than a week to go, I starting putting together a strategy. Hotels wouldn't work due to the shooting hours and unpredictable schedule. I didn't want to bother with a tent as setup and breakdown would be a pain and take extra time. I needed a 4×4 to traverse the F roads that would take me into the more remote locations, so the camper vans that are so popular in Iceland wouldn't work. My best option seemed to be to find a 4×4 SUV that I could sleep in comfortably. After a bit of research, I found that the Land Rover LR4 had second and third row seating that folded completely flat and created a 6 foot long area behind the front seats. At 5'10”, it should fit me. Instead of counting on finding restaurants along the way, which I already had heard was challenging, I opted to bring all my food with me. I stocked up on dehydrated camping meals, nuts, dried fruit, protein bars, instant oats and some homemade granola. I got an ultralight camping stove, some backpacking cookware and titanium sporks. While I wouldn't be backpacking for days on end, I still needed to stay under weight limits on my bags and I had to pack two weeks of food, along with my bed pad, sleeping bag, clothes, tripods, and everything I'd need for some serious shooting. And, traveling solo, I wouldn't be able to split the load for shared items.

I looked over a couple of eBooks on shooting in Iceland and ordered the International Photographer's map of Iceland to try to figure out how to tackle this country.

My plan was to make the loop around Iceland’s Ring Road, also known as Route 1. I set my sights on taking the clockwise route, which would take me through the Snæfellsnes Peninsula, then up through the Westfjords, over the northern coast, into Mývatn, down past the magnificent waterfalls of the Northeast, traversing the East Fjords, hitting the southern sights, venturing up into Landmannalaugar in the Highlands, then making my way back to Reykjavik to depart home. I figured nine days would be enough.

Original plan

As it turns out, plans change. Iceland is so incredibly photo-rich that there was no way, at my pace, that I would ever complete the loop in that timeframe. After I was two days in and still only in the Snæfellsnes Peninsula, I bailed on the original plan. I changed direction and headed southeast, doing my best to capture some of the southern sites. I never made it past Höfn in the east, leaving almost one complete half of the island unexplored and unphotographed. I’m not too bent out of shape about this. A photo trip like this isn’t a race to the finish line, with quick iPhone selfies along the way. My goal was to get great images while testing out the capability and ruggedness of the S007. If I had gone a different way, if I had spent less time in each location, or if I had simply skipped some locations, then I wouldn’t have gotten the pictures at the times I did. I’m at peace with my decisions and the outcome of the adventure.

To give you an idea of just how photogenic Iceland is, and how little it takes to get me to stop for pictures, I didn’t even make it 1 km from the rental car pickup at the airport before pulling over to grab a couple pictures in the small town of Keflavik. From that moment on, I should have known my grand plan of making the loop was bound to fail.

I pulled over a lot.

Being so close the Arctic Circle, the days in Iceland are extremely long in July. Sunset is around 11:30pm with the sunrise close at its heals at 3:00am. The period in between isn’t exactly night, either. It’s more like the hour before a perfect sunrise, where the glow of the sun just below the horizon starts gently illuminating the night sky with a deep blue hue.

Leica S (Typ 007) with Elmarit-S 45mm, 6 sec @ f/11, ISO 100, Tripod

Everything you might have heard about the harsh Iceland weather is true and then some, even in the “mild” summer. While average temperatures were right around 45°F, when the wind picks up and pummels you with that wet cold air at 40 MPH, it chills you to the bone. Dressing appropriately for Iceland is critical. Eventually, everything gets completely wet. And yet, with all the water, all the time, the only item that I didn’t worry about was the S. I took special pride in seeing Nikon and Canon users tucking away their pro DSLRs into zip top bags, struggling to keep their cameras dry and protected from the elements, all while I continued to tough it out with the S in torrential downpours. When walking around in the rain, I had a few concerned hikers and campers alert me to the fact that I had a camera at my side, hanging off my shoulder, soaked. I assured them that the camera could withstand far more wetness than I could and not to worry.

A little water? No problem.

Water and filters or front elements are another story. While I had no qualms about the camera getting sprayed or soaked, keeping my front-facing glass droplet-free was another matter entirely. I kept four lens cloths at the ready in various pockets to wipe away water before taking a shot. In some cases, I had to give up as all my lens cloths were saturated and just served to smear water and haze all over the filters or front of the lens. One errant droplet on a wide angle lens stopped down ruins an otherwise nice image. Worse, smeared haziness looks like you're shooting through pea soup. This was my biggest challenge and one that had no easy workarounds.

Water droplets on the front of my Schneider filters

For lenses, I figured I might as well bring as many as I could fit. I probably could have gotten by with the 30-90 zoom, a 24 and 180, but my obsessive nature wouldn't let me take the chance on any possible equipment failure. I'd rather have several prime lenses in the same range just in case one went belly up or, you know, fell into a glacial stream. So, I ended up with six lenses. I also got good exercise carrying them around in my backpack.

That's a lot of S lenses.

The plan was set in motion. I got my flights booked and my Land Rover reserved. I had a week to get all of my supplies, pack and try to figure out a rough shooting schedule.

Day 1 – Orienting to Iceland, stocking up, Eldborg and first shooting in Snæfellsnes  – Saturday

Flying into Keflavik airport is a bit like landing on another planet. Flat, desolate and covered in black volcanic rocks, the landscape isn’t exactly inviting. The airport terminal at 8am when we landed was just as deserted as the view out of the airplane windows. Along with the rest of the weary passengers arriving from JFK, I made my way through passport control and into a different world.

Leica S (Typ 007) with Super-Elmar-S 24mm, 1/180th @ f/11, ISO 100

I had a small list of items I needed to get my trip going. First, I got a prepaid SIM card for my unlocked phone at the Duty Free shop. Not the electronics and phone store upstairs in the food court. That would be silly, right? I found a similar situation when I attempted later to find butane camping fuel at a camping supply/outdoor store. For all those going to Iceland, I'll save you some time. You can only purchase butane canisters at gas stations.

Leica S (Typ 007) with Elmarit-S 45mm, 1/350th @ f/11, ISO 100

A nice attendant from Geysir, my car rental company, greeted me after baggage claim. She led me out into the blustery and cool parking lot where the shuttle bus awaited us. As the only passenger I loaded my bags and jumped in the front seat. The diesel started up and American pop music filled the chilly interior of the van. As we backed up, I asked how long to get to the rental car office. “Just across the parking lot, “ she pointed. Less than a minute later, we pulled up to the office and I got sorted out inside. Warnings about road conditions, flying gravel, volcanic ash, dust storm damage and rules about driving off-road were everywhere. I got a GPS unit and a comprehensive insurance policy that covered just about anything that could happen, short of driving off a cliff.  But, I supposed, at that point, I'd have bigger problems than car insurance.

Leica S (Typ 007) with Elmarit-S 45mm, 1/125th @ f/11, ISO 100

After changing out of my street clothes and into my outdoor gear, I was certainly more comfortable and got to prepping my home for the next week and a half, a Land Rover Discovery LR4, the venerable Disco. With the rear seats folded down behind the driver’s side, I made a bed from a self-inflating Therm-A-Rest mattress pad and a 20°F (-7°C) The North Face Cat's Meow mummy bag. My two rolling duffels, one with clothes and gear, the other with food and supplies for almost two weeks, got stacked on the other side. I did a full camera gear check, and converted my Kata Bumblebee camera backpack from international flight mode to ready-to-shoot mode, removing chargers, laptop, extra cables and whatnot, while arranging lenses and filters for easier access. The bag got its own seat, in the second row on the passenger side.

Next up was a supply run for the things I couldn’t travel with. I got the GPS set up in English with a proper British voice and headed to the grocery store.

Leica S (Typ 007) with Summarit-S 70mm, 1/125th @ f/11, ISO 100

We are very spoiled by grocery stores in the US, where we can get anything we want almost any time of year, inexpensively. Our cereal aisle alone has hundreds of choices. Iceland is different. Very few things grow there. Everything must be flown in from somewhere else. So, when looking for fresh fruits and vegetables to supplement my dried food stores, options were a little limited. I also didn’t plan on using a cold box of any kind, so everything had to be somewhat shelf-stable. I got apples, pears, melons, potatoes, some onions and a lot of 2L bottles of water.

Now, I just needed to find butane fuel for my camping stove and fluid for my Zippo lighter (although I would later learn a trick that I didn’t actually need any lighter fluid, just the spark). Foolishly, I drove to the aforementioned camping supply store and walked around looking like a lost hiker. Mostly, they sold regular and sporty clothing, not much outdoor wear, which I was donning from head to toe.

A little Googling in the car and I found that the nearest N1 gas station would have me covered. I bought two 500g butane canisters, a bottle of Zippo fluid, an extra BBQ lighter and hit the road to the first campground, located north of Reykjavik. A lot of travelers will spend their first day and night in Reykjavik, but I wanted to maximize shooting every minute I was there and the road was calling.

Leica S (Typ 007) with APO-Elmar-S 180mm, 1/750th @ f/8, ISO 100

The first thing you notice driving in Iceland is that everyone is going very slow. Not because of cultural differences, but because the speed limit on the main highway is 90 KPH, or about 50 MPH. In South Florida, this is the speed we drive on city roads, with most people driving 70-80 MPH on the highway. So, yeah, it felt really slow, especially as the large distances started to sink in.

Leica S (Typ 007) with APO-Elmar-S 180mm, 1/750th @ f/8, ISO 100

By the time I reached the campground in Eldborg, it was mid afternoon and I was exhausted. I hadn’t really slept or had a proper meal since New York, stealing just a couple hours of cramped shut eye on the short red-eye flight over. It was time to test out my sleep in the car concept, right after I got some food going.  Like much of Iceland, the campground was very cold and very windy, and only felt more so being tired and hungry.

Leica S (Typ 007) with Elmarit-S 45mm, 1/90th @ f/11, ISO 100

After firing up the stove, pouring some boiling water into the zip-top silver bag and waiting the instructed 12 minutes, I was rewarded with a hot, satisfying meal. I felt like primitive man, having just discovered fire. With fire and water, I could go anywhere and stay well-fed at a moment’s notice. After satisfying my food requirement, I successfully passed the sleep test as well, clocking a couple hours of slumber. When I awoke, it was still light, and time to get out and start shooting.

Leica S (Typ 007) with APO-Elmar-S 180mm, 1/350th @ f/9.5, ISO 400

I got back on the main road and headed west, deeper into the Snæfellsnes Peninsula, stopping along the road whenever a scene presented itself. I didn't see many cars, maybe one every five minutes. This was fine by me. Around 8 pm, the light started getting nice and golden, and stayed that way until the sun finally set around 11:30 pm.

Leica S (Typ 007) with Elmarit-S 30mm, 1/6th @ f/13, ISO 100, 4 stop soft GND, Tripod

My plan was to take advantage of the late evening and early morning light by staying awake during these times and sleeping in the daytime. After the sun set, clouds were still clearly visible in the sky and there was an eerie blue glow across the landscape, sucking away much of the natural colors we see in full daylight. It was interesting, for sure, but perhaps not as magical as I had thought it might be.

Leica S (Typ 007) with Elmarit-S 30mm, 1.5 sec @ f/13, ISO 100

I made it to 2am that first day, shooting along the way, then succumbed to exhaustion and near freezing temperatures in a tiny pull off next to a lava field just shy of Arnarstapi. That spot, at the foot of Snjafell, towards the southwest tip of the Snæfellsnes, proved to be one of the most bone-chillingly cold nights during my adventure. The wind was just tearing across the mostly flat lava fields and cut right through me.

Leica S (Typ 007) with Elmarit-S 45mm, 6 sec @ f/11, ISO 100

I didn't have any trouble climbing in my sleeping bag, fully clothed and drifting off amidst the roar of the wind outside and the car buffeting with each strong gust. Morning wasn't too much better, especially with the blustery weather wreaking havoc on my attempts to get a flame going. But after a few tries and maneuvering my cooking setup to the leeward side of my vehicle, I was rewarded with a large bowl of steaming hot oatmeal with fruit and walnuts. I was feeling like I was ready to take on Iceland again. Lesson learned: Everything seems better after a hot meal. I'd come to count on this time and time again over the coming days.

Cooking up oatmeal next to the Rover

Leica S (Typ 007) with Elmarit-S 45mm, 6 sec @ f/11, ISO 100

Day 2 – Hellissandur, Kirkjufell, Run in with locals and the law – Sunday

Leica S (Typ 007) with Elmarit-S 45mm, 1/125th @ f/5.6, ISO 200

I started west and came upon a little off road track which took me all the way to an abandoned house, close to the southern cliffs. Naturally, it started to rain, as I wandered around, exploring and shooting.

Leica S (Typ 007) with Elmarit-S 45mm, 1/90th @ f/11, ISO 100

Leica S (Typ 007) with APO_Elmar-S 180mm, 1/750th @ /5.6, ISO 200

By the time I arrived at Snaefellsjokull National Park, the rain was in full force and the sunlit skies of the previous day were gone, replaced by a uniform gray storminess. I decided against a hike down to the Hellnar Arch as the conditions were just not worth the trek.

Leica S (Typ 007) with APO-Elmar-S 180mm, 1/750th @ f/4, ISO 200

In fact, after just a few brief and unproductive photo stops, I gave up and headed up to the town of Hellissandur to take a rest at a campground. I'd grab some grub and a shower, download pictures and hope for the sun to break through. All seemed to go according to plan, as the sun started to peak through, just as I was getting back on the road. I had barely passed the city limit when I spotted a little church nestled among a huge field of purple lupines.

Leica S (Typ 007) with Elmarit-S 45mm, 1/250th @ f/11, ISO 200

Leica S (Typ 007) with APO-Elmar-S 180mm, 1/1000th @ f/8, ISO 200

I took some shots and met my first Icelandic horses. They are really quite friendly and happy to have their picture taken.

Leica S (Typ 007) with Elmarit-S 45mm, 1/500th @ f/5.6, ISO 200

And of course, I had to stop in the quaint little fishing village to take advantage of the sun breaking through the clouds. I love the textures, patterns and colors that come with maritime culture. Before arriving at the harbor, I encountered a seaside field with a large flock of birds circling. Hopping out of the car, my hopes of any pictures were quickly dashed as some feathered dive bombers started making runs at me. Clearly, this flock was not having any of my photographic antics. Luckily, I heeded their warning shots and retreated to my SUV.

Leica S (Typ 007) with APO-Elmar-S 180mm, 1/750th @ f/8, ISO 200

Leica S (Typ 007) with APO-Elmar-S 180mm, 1/350th @ f/11, ISO 200

Leica S (Typ 007) with APO-Macro-Summarit-S 120mm, 1/180th @ f/5.6, ISO 200

But, my ultimate goal was to end up at Kirkjufell, and shoot until the sun set at what I had heard was one of the best photo spots in western Iceland. The only problem was that I got a little lost. This was due in large part to my stubborn GPS, which I think had it out for me. First, it led me up someone's private driveway (more like a grassy track). As I was stopped on this off-road track, debating whether to proceed on through a huge ditch in front of me or back up, a nice-looking lady parked her car on the road about 50m ahead of me, on the other side of the ditch, and got out. I figured she was going to ask if I was lost and offer assistance. As I rolled down my window to ask for directions, she marched closer, and I quickly realized I had figured wrong. She started waving and gesturing at me, yelling for me to “Get out!” and “Just go! Leave! NOW!” Not exactly the response I was looking for. She stood there, scowling at me, looking as if she was going to push my car off her driveway herself if I didn't get it in gear fast enough. I put my reverse off-road skills to the test and got out of there as quickly as I could, while thinking about that insurance I might have to use if I didn't stay on the double track.

Wrong turn

Back on the paved road, I gave the GPS another shot. Bad decision. Ten minutes later, I was staring at some scary looking signs flanking a gate. I may not have understood everything, but the bold letters spelling P-R-I-S-O-N were pretty clear. While I got out my map and tried to figure out how I ended up so far off course, a prison guard/officer pulled up in a patrol car behind me and approached my driver's window. Fortunately, he was much more understanding and told me to go back to Rt 1. The irony of the whole situation is that if I had gone just another hundred meters up the road before making that first wrong turn, I would have seen the parking lot for the falls. What's life without a little adventure, right?

Leica S (Typ 007) with Elmarit-S 30mm, 3 sec @ f/13, ISO 100, 6 stop IRND, Tripod

When I did finally arrive, I had plenty of time to fully explore both tiers of the waterfall, and from both sides (there is a small bridge at the top of the falls). Even though I spent a few hours there, it was totally worth it.

Leica S (Typ 007) with Super-Elmar-S 24mm, 1 sec @ f/11, ISO 100, Tripod

Around 1 am, I made the decision to make a beeline for the southern sights and abandon my initial plan. I'd be giving up the Westfjords and wasting time backtracking, but I couldn't risk missing out on the target-rich shooting grounds of the south. I drove as far as I could get before pulling over and taking a power nap behind the wheel. Yes, the car was off. After an hour or two, I drove the remaining hour to a small campground in Arkanes, just north of Reykjavik.

Leica S (Typ 007) with Elmarit-S 45mm, 32 sec @ f/11, ISO 100

Day 3 – Gullfoss and Seljalandsfoss, The best campground – Monday

Gullfoss is one of the most recognizable waterfalls in Iceland. It's huge and triangular and most impressive. All the tourists on tour busses would agree too. So. Many. People. After a couple days with virtually no humans, the mob scene at Gullfoss was slightly overwhelming. Still, the falls were amazing and I spent a couple hours exploring the expansive site to try out all the angles.

Leica S (Typ 007) with Elmarit-S 45mm, 1/1000th @ f/9.5, ISO 200

As typical, the nice weather when I arrived quickly turned foul. I was excited to observe a full arch rainbow cross over the falls amidst the downpour, but quite disheartened seeing the hazy mess caused by water all over my front element which rendered the entire series completely unusable. It was just dumb luck that the wind was blowing right at me, horizontally, of course. No amount of lens cleaning would work in that constant onslaught of droplets. You wipe one and fifteen reappear moments later.

Leica S (Typ 007) with Elmarit-S 45mm, 1/12th @ f/11, ISO 200, 4 stop IRND, Tripod

The weather let up slightly and I whipped up a quick meal in the parking lot. Time to get back on the road. I was heading to another legendary location, Seljalandsfoss. My objective was to arrive in time for sunset and get behind the falls for the classic shot. The kilometers dragged on as I saw incredible light all around me. I arrived just in time to catch almost complete cloud cover all the way down to the horizon. There was no sunset anymore. Ever the optimist, I grabbed my gear and darted up the path to get behind the falls, cleverly leaving my rain pants in the truck. This was, by far, the wettest environment I faced in Iceland. Fine mist blew from all directions, creating an almost impossible shooting situation. I quixotically attempted to deal with the water using my assortment of microfiber lens cloths, which didn't work. Rather than help the situation, I just succeeded in smearing hazy grossness on my filters and lens.

Leica S (Typ 007) with Super-Elmar-S 24mm, 0.7 sec @ f/11, ISO 100, 4 stop IRND, Tripod

After realizing I had four thoroughly soaked lens cloths that were doing no good, I threw in the cloth as it were. They weren't the only thing that was soaked. My pants got the worst I think, as they were completely wet through and starting to stick to my legs. My gloves felt like I was using them to SCUBA dive and were visibly dripping. Beads of water ran down my forearms as I worked the camera. Even my waterproof boots were starting to feel damp inside, although it might just have been water running down my ankles. I felt defeated. The waterfall beat me. At the time, I didn't think I even got a decent shot. And, why the heck didn't I wear my rain pants?!

Leica S (Typ 007) with Super-Elmar-S 24mm, 4 sec @ f/11, ISO 100, 6 stop IRND, Tripod

The upside was that I didn't have to venture too far to find a place to dry out and get some sleep. There was a campground right next to falls, which turned out to be one of my favorite of the trip. Up until that point, all of the campgrounds consisted of a parking area and a couple of converted metal shipping containers, which held pre-fab bathrooms. Unheated bathrooms. With puddles of water on the floor. This place had a nice little kitchen area with burners, running water, a few tables. And, it was heated and had power outlets. I sat inside, downloaded photos and dried out in the glorious warmth.

Day 4 – Skogafoss, Navy plane, Kirkjufjara – Tuesday

The next morning I started my habit of chatting with fellow campers at breakfast. I talked with a German family from Berlin who had just started their trip and a Polish couple who were at the tail end of a two week journey. We all enjoyed our meal in the comfort of the heated kitchen.

Leica S (Typ 007) with Super-Elmar-S 24mm, 1/3 sec @ f/11, ISO 100

I heard that there was a cool little waterfall hidden in a canyon behind the campground. So, before trying to tackle my nemesis for Round 2, I decided to give it a go. And, I remembered my rain pants. Making my way through the miniature canyon, I carefully walked in a shallow creek flowing from the falls until the walls opened up to a small clearing where sunlight beamed down and illuminated the white flowing water. Worth the two minute hike from the campground. I quickly set up and shot the cascade, even jumping on top of the boulder to take a self portrait using the 12 second self timer.

Leica S (Typ 007) with Super-Elmar-S 24mm, 1/12sec @ f/13, ISO 100, Tripod (12 sec self timer)

Approaching Seljalandsfoss in my SUV, I decided to just keep going. Maybe it was the shame of the previous night, or maybe it was the hordes of tourists piling off of busses standing in any potential shot I could imagine, but I reasoned that it just wasn't worth the time, effort or wetness. So, I proceeded on to Skogafoss, another whistle stop on the tourist route, but a pretty waterfall that could be easily accessed, nonetheless. En route, I pulled off the road and made friends with some more Icelandic horses, who wanted nothing more than me to pet them. Or, maybe they figured I had food. Either way, they were friendly and more than willing to pose for me.

Leica S (Typ 007) with Elmarit-S 45mm, 1/250th @ f/11, ISO 400

Skogafoss was another beautiful location overrun with an army of meandering tourists, completely oblivious to anyone attempting to take pictures. I was actually starting to get irritated, as I stood in the river up to my ankles, balancing on some larger river stones, waiting for a brief window of opportunity to get a human-free shot of the falls. Just as the area around the base started to clear out, like clockwork, a new group would slowly saunter up, stopping every few steps to take selfies. I started thinking that maybe the more remote spots that required hours of hiking up steep terrain might be a better bet. I did eventually get my shot, loaded back up and made my escape.

Leica S (Typ 007) with Elmarit-S 30mm, 1/45th @ f/11, ISO 100, Tripod

Just up the road, luscious purple lupines were in full bloom, blanketing the landscape for miles on end. Yes, I stopped. I even got out of the car and tromped through the fields.

Leica S (Typ 007) with Elmarit-S 30mm, 1/90th @ f/13, ISO 200, 4 stop soft GND, Tripod

Next up was a downed DC-3 US Navy plane that crashed in the 1970's. I know that a lot of people have photographed it, but I didn’t care. I still wanted to take my crack at the plane. Like some of the best spots in Iceland, there is not much signage, just GPS coordinates, so I plugged the numbers in and found a tiny gate on the side of the main road, which led to a marked off-road 4km gravel track towards the ocean. A few other photographers were already working the scene, but it wasn't a big deal to work around them. I tried some different angles, mostly with the 45, then tossed the 24 on for some interiors.

Leica S (Typ 007) with Elmarit-S 45mm, 1/180th @ f/11, ISO 200

Leica S (Typ 007) with Super-Elmar-S 24mm, 1/60th @ f/8, ISO 200 (with some extensive shadow recovery in LR)

The S007 really got to show off its dynamic range here. Totally shadowed interior with brightly lit views out the windows. In post, the almost black interior came to life with a little (okay, a lot) of shadow recovery, while preserving the scene out the window openings. Before heading back to the main road, I took the Land Rover down to the black sand beach and got a unique view of the plane, alone in the vast landscape.

Leica S (Typ 007) with APO-Elmar-S 180mm, 1/250th @ f/11, ISO 100

From there is was off to the famed Kirkjufjara beach. The weather decided to turn nasty. Big surprise. But, it made for some active waves. I trudged down to the beach, passing signs warning of my imminent demise from falling rocks, strong currents and drowning. Awesome.

The beach was amazing. There was no sand, just smooth black rocks that looked very much like river stones.

Leica S (Typ 007) with APO-Macro-Summarit-S 120mm, 1/3 sec @ f/8, ISO 100, Tripod

I attempted to photograph the waves crashing on the beach. The 120 was serviceable for this task although I found that pre-focusing was the best approach. I selected a point where the waves would start to break and waited for the right moment. As I watched a particularly strong series of waves hit the beach, one continued advancing past the wet-dry divide. And, I kept watching as it got closer and closer and eventually right up to my feet, then continued to rise up to my shins. There was a sheer cliff wall behind me and no escape. I feebly attempted to hop up to avoid the inevitable, before landing right back in the swell and feeling the icy cold rush of water instantly filling my boots. Ugh. I took nature's subtle hint and moved farther down the cliff where the beach widened considerably.

Leica S (Typ 007) with APO-Macro-Summarit-S 120mm, 1/750th @ f/4, ISO 400

I got back to shooting, but then had a troubling thought as I noticed that the way I came in along the narrow stretch of beach where I got swamped was the only way back out. What if the tide was coming in, not going out? I grabbed for my phone to check the tidal situation, only to come up empty handed. I had left it charging in the Rover. This wasn't looking good. No picture is worth the potential of getting marooned with no communication, no food or water, and sopping wet feet while getting pelted with raindrops propelled by gale-force gusts. I went back to the car for safety and dry shoes.

Leica S (Typ 007) with Elmarit-S 45mm, 1/60th @ f/6.8, ISO 200, Tripod

The silver lining was that right next to the parking lot was a little puffin nesting area. I mounted the 180 and inched my way as close as I could get without scaring the little birds off, snapping a few decent shots in the process.

Leica S (Typ 007) with APO-Elmar-S 180mm, 1/500th @ f/3.5, ISO 800

I spent the night in a campground right in the middle of Vik, which was an interesting experience. The lights didn't work in the indoor common area and I really doubt there was any heat ever. So, I sat there eating my dinner, bundled up, watching my breath illuminated by candlelight, editing images on the MBP, while raindrops provided a soundtrack on the uninsulated wood roof above.

Day 5 – Vik, F208, Arriving at Basecamp – Wednesday

Leica S (Typ 007) with APO-Elmar-S 180mm, 1/1000th @ f/5.6, ISO 200

The following morning was a fun one. I topped up the tank and ventured onto the famed F208, the southern F road approach to Landmannalaugar. The roughly 30 mile trip should take about two hours to traverse. Of course, that's a non-photographer estimate. It took me the better part of six hours, as I stopped to take in and capture the amazing sights. Besides the great shooting along the way, the F208 was some of the most fun I've had on four wheels, anywhere.

Leica S (Typ 007) with Elmarit-S 30mm, 1/350th @ f/9.5, ISO 100

Leica S (Typ 007) with APO-Macro-S 120mm, 1/500th @ f/4, ISO 200

The Land Rover crushed those trails. I was hitting mud ruts at 70 KPH with a big ‘ol smile on my face. And when I had to ford the roughly dozen river crossings, I'd just hit the button on the dash that activated the air suspension to get a few more inches of clearance. With automatic traction control, a dynamically locking differential and the torque of the turbo diesel, it didn't feel much different than driving on dry land.

Leica S (Typ 007) with Elmarit-S 45mm, 1/350th @ f/11, ISO 100

Coming in to Basecamp, it seems like they saved the deepest crossing for last. I imagine it's like a rite of passage. Literally. You can't drive into camp without traversing a small river. Kids gather on the sides filming videos with their phones. Turns out that it's actually a bit of local entertainment.

Leica S (Typ 007) with Elmarit-S 45mm, 1/125th @ f/11, ISO 100

Situated in an open valley with colorful mountains on all sides, Basecamp itself is like a little bustling city, with a bit of a frontier outpost feel to it. Driving in, you immediately notice some of the most serious off-road vehicles you've ever seen flanking both sides of the “road”. After finding a decently level spot (sliding to one side at night isn't fun) to park the Disco, I grabbed the S with 45 and set about getting the lay of the land.  On the other side of the road, past a chain barrier to keep the trucks out, a sprawling sea of tents of every possible shape and size took up most of camp, everything from a single claustrophobic bivy sack to an expedition tent with full table settings and heaters befit for Napoleon staging his next offensive, and everything in between.

Leica S (Typ 007) with Elmarit-S 30mm, 1/500th @ f/4, ISO 400

Standing at the end of the parking area, were two olive grab painted school busses, converted to a trading post meets convenience store, called the Mountain Mall. What a great place. I popped in and got some fresh bananas, some tea bags and a new container of oats to replenish my stores. I also upgraded my headgear with a thick ribbed wool cap from 66 Degrees North, the famed Icelandic extreme clothing company.

Leica S (typ 007) with Elmarit-S 45mm, 1/180th @ f/8, ISO 200

Once past the tents there were several wooden structures, the search and rescue station, ranger house, information desk, bathrooms and The Hut, along with a semi-enclosed shelter with tables for cooking and eating. I arrived around dinner time and the place was hopping, with every possible table and sitting surface occupied, camp stoves cooking away, fire pits ablaze. I made some mac n' cheese while chatting up a nice fellow from Hamburg.

Leica S (Typ 007) with Elmarit-S 45mm, 1/60th @ f/6.8, ISO 400

On the other edge of camp, past the parking area, was a levy, which I climbed to watch the sunset lighting up the mountains. After a short walk on top of the levy, past the edge of camp, I came to a makeshift horse corral of some stakes and wire. While making some hairy friends, two girls were taking iPhone snaps of each other. Of course, I offered to take their picture in front of the horses so they could have one together. One of them asked if I'd like one of myself. I said sure, handed off the camera and hoped for the best. She did a nice job.

Leica S (Typ 007) with Elmarit-S 45mm, 1/350th @ f/3.4, ISO 400

My photographer's name was Kate and she and her friend had come from Ireland to do a five day backpacking trip. But, they were waylaid. An unexpected snowstorm came through a couple days earlier and dumped 1.5 meters of powder right in the middle of their intended path. In July. Trail markings were no longer visible and the sleeping huts were closed. They planned to wait and see what the park rangers were going to advise. I wished her good luck and set about my nightly ritual of charging and downloading.

Leica S (Typ 007) with APO-Macro-Summarit-S 120mm, 1/250th @ f/8, ISO 100

Day 6 – Landmannalaugar, Dip in the hot pot – Thursday

So the plan was to get up early, take a short 6 km hike, then be back to camp in time to get out of the Highlands by nighttime. Again, times given for hikes don't account for the meanderings and lollygagging of photographers. The hike itself was nice, winding through lava fields, great clear views of the mountains, around an active geothermal vent and back along a river valley. Unlike every day up until that point, the sun came out in full force, the wind calmed and it got hot. Well, at least it felt hot when hiking with 40 lbs of camera gear and a few extra layers. I got down to just my wool zip top and stowed my jacket and shell.

Leica S (Typ 007) with Elmarit-S 30mm, 1/500th @ f/8, ISO 100

Leica S (Typ 007) with APO-Elmar-S 180mm, 1/250th @ f/11, ISO 100

At around the halfway point, I decided to take a little break, have a snack and enjoy the view without the camera. A few bites into my protein bar, I felt something all too familiar. A droplet. Then another. And another. The wind picked up and the sun went into hiding as the temperature quickly plummeted 20 degrees before I could even put my half-eaten bar back in my bag and don my extra layers. It rained all the way back to Basecamp. My poor backpack was see-through again, but I was sure glad to have taken proper attire with me. No matter how nice it looks in Iceland, nasty weather is just a moment away, especially in the Highlands.

Leica S (Typ 007) with Super-Elmar-S 24mm, 1/250th @ f/11, ISO 100

Leica S (Typ 007) with APO-Macro-Summarit-S 120mm, 1/250th @ f/5.6, ISO 200

As I rolled back into Basecamp, the usual hustle and bustle was on, just wetter. I walked up to the search and rescue hut to find the guys in good spirits having a little barbeque and enjoying their life raft hot tub, filled with geothermally heated spring water. While capturing scenes of camp life, one of the guys' dog decided to make friends with me. She was wet and matted, and smelled, well, like wet dog. I was sure that I wasn't in much better shape, having hiked and shot for the previous three hours in a rainstorm. She dropped a black, mostly round lava rock at my feet.

Leica S (Typ 007) with Elmarit-S 45mm, 1/350th @ f/6.8, ISO 400

We played fetch. I asked the owner, “how far can she see the rock? They all look the same.” He shot back a response, laughing “How far can you throw? She's got you now. There's no escape now!” That was one determined dog, but just as my arm felt like it was going to fall off from chucking that rock all over camp, she got curious with the kids in the hot tub. Then, the poor dog got hurled into the water by her loving owner. Everyone thought this was hilarious.

Leica S (Typ 007) with Elmarit-S 45mm, 1/750th @ f/6.8, ISO 400

The S&R guys were great. They told me the deal with the license plates nailed to their hut. “Those are from all the cars we've rescued around here.” I was thankful to have had the Rover and not need their help, although there was always the return trip. And, apparently, that day was a good one. They didn't have to rescue anyone, even in the bad weather. So, spirits were high. The guys were also nice enough to give me some aluminum foil so I could cook up my potatoes. In the cold and wet, steaming hot fire roasted potatoes was about the best thing I could imagine.

Leica S (Typ 007) with Elmarit-S 45mm, 1/350th @ f/6.8, ISO 400

I went to the truck, deposited all my gear except for the camera with a 45, grabbed my cooking stuff and bag of potatoes, stuffed the folded foil into my pocket and went to find some hot coals. Except in the rain, no one was cooking on coals like the night before. I finally found one pit with some heat. A father and son from Denmark were trying to get their dinner of rice and tikka masala going, but weren't having much luck. There just wasn’t enough heat and every raindrop just cooled the coals further. Considering I had my foil-wrapped spuds roasting in the coals and wouldn't be needing it, I offered them my stove. Theirs had been confiscated at airport security because of butane residue.

Leica S (Typ 007) with Elmarit-S 45mm, 1/350th @ f/4.8, ISO 400

I had saved their dinner, so they invited me to join them. I grabbed my potatoes, smashed them a bit with my spork, added in salt, pepper, garlic and oregano (doesn't everyone carry spices in their camping supplies?), and we made our way to the covered picnic area. It all felt very homey. There I was, sitting with this super nice family, a husband and wife, their two daughters and two sons, one of whom I had already chatted with. They offered me some of their boxed red wine in a cup, which I was told was “mostly clean.” I gladly accepted. Dinner was great, and I realized that everything tastes better in Iceland, especially after a week of freeze-dried camping meals. The potatoes were some of the best I had ever had. Even the box wine was delicious.

Leica S (Typ 007) with APO-Elmar-S 180mm, 1/125th @ f/8, ISO 100, Tripod

There was still a chance of getting on the road before nightfall. That was, until the energetic matriarch decreed that with full bellies, it was time to go into the hot pot. She turned her gaze towards me and said, matter-of-factly, “you're coming too.” I had my doubts about this. I live in Miami and usually won't go swimming unless the air temperature is in the 80s. “Come on! We go in, all together.” She added, pumping her fist in the air proudly, “like real Vikings!!” How could I refuse? I changed into my trunks and flip flops in the car, braced myself against the brisk evening air and walked the decked path through the cold, soggy marsh to the hot springs. The goosebumps subsided once I eased into the sumptuously warm water. I settled in, right near the fresh flow of the hot spring. It felt incredible to be engulfed in warmth.

Leica S (Typ 007) with Elmarit-S 45mm, 1/180th @ f/11, ISO 200

As I was relaxing, a British fellow next to me asked me what I was doing in Iceland. I told him I was a photographer and was just there to travel around and take pictures. You? “Oh, I'm a photographer, too.” Cool. He explained that he was on a workshop that had been backpacking through the mountains. A local professional landscape photographer in Miami, Paul Macellini, had told me about a guy from England who leads these extreme backpacking photo trips where they hike like 10-15 miles a day and carry just the bare essentials. His name is Alex Nail. “Yeah, that's me. I'm Alex.” Small world, right? I had just been studying this guy's gear list and packing recommendations for my own Iceland trip maybe a week earlier and there I was, in the middle of nowhere, sharing a hot soak with the same dude. From there, we were fast friends. I met his workshop participants, also bathing in the hot pot and talked photography, Iceland, and more. Around 11pm, and just getting dried off, I realized that I would be spending another night in Basecamp. It was worth it.

Leica S (Typ 007) with Elmarit-S 45mm, 1/60th @ f/ 11, ISO 200

Day 7 – Back on F208, Arriving at Jökulsárlón – Friday

The following morning, I was preparing my standard oatmeal in the picnic area. My Irish friend Kate called out, so I joined her. Turns out she was still stuck in Basecamp and had decided to just make the best of it. I was intrigued to hear more about Ireland, and she wanted to know more about the USA. We finished breakfast while comparing cultural notes and giving travel suggestions. After washing my dishes, I headed back to pack up the truck and get on the road. She would be going out for some day hiking. Before parting ways, though, I asked if I could take a quick portrait, to which she agreed. I really liked the environmental feel that the 45 gave.

Leica S (Typ 007) with Elmarit-S 45mm, 1/1500th @ f/4, ISO 200

The F208 was just as fun heading out as it was coming in, but this time, I didn't stop. I needed to get to Jökulsárlón, a location described on my map as “One of the most photogenic spots in the world.” This was home to two stunning locations, the glacial lagoon and the ice beach.

Yep, that's the road. Welcome to Iceland.

Leica S (Typ 007) with Elmarit-S 45mm, 1/500th @ f/8, ISO 200

I arrived at the ice lagoon in time for sunset. The only problem is there was no sun. No sky, even. Everything was enveloped in a thick fog. I ran into some hikers pitching a tent for the night. They said that by Sunday, the hazy weather should clear and there should be some actual sunsets again. It was Friday. I was leaving early Monday morning. Some simple calendar math told me I wasn't going to be shooting any more sunsets while I was in Iceland.

Leica S (Typ 007) with APO-Elmar-S 180mm, 1/60th @ f/8, ISO 200, Tripod

As it turned out, the overcast weather turned out to be a great opportunity to get some unique images of the lagoon. While it was really quite cold, nearing freezing, I was totally comfortable. There was no rain and better yet, no wind whatsoever. The air was eerily still. The only sounds were the slight gurgling noises of the icebergs floating gently in the lagoon and the faint cracking and creaking of ice. Every so often, a thundering boom and crash would break the silence. This was the glacier calving in the distance, retreating a little more and creating a new iceberg. The other thing that struck me was the smell, which I can't really place, except to call it an iceberg odor. Not unpleasant, just something I'd not experienced before. I wondered if all the little trapped bubbles of thousands of year-old air escaping from the melting glacier contributed to this.

Leica S (Typ 007) with Super-Elmar-S 24mm, 1/4 sec @ f/8, ISO 400, Tripod

I got to photographing. The 180 was going to have to take the reigns for most of the shooting as the icebergs were far from the shoreline where I started out. I used a tripod, but quickly noticed that long exposures weren't going to be possible. Even though the surface of the lagoon was like a mirror, there must have been underlying currents. The icebergs were constantly in motion. Smaller pieces of ice closer to shore zipped by without nary a ripple.

Leica S (Typ 007) with APO-Macro-Summarit-S 120mm, 1/60th @ f/4, ISO 200, Tripod

Walking along the beach, I headed towards the glacier. As I got further along, a greater concentration of ice was scattered about, closer to shore. I swapped out the 180 for some wide glass and tried to work quickly. My subjects were in constant motion. I also gave the 120 a shot, taking some macro detail macro shots.

Leica S (Typ 007) with APO-Macro-Summarit-S 120mm, 12 sec @ f/8, ISO 100, Tripod

I was the only human on that beach, with the exception of the one couple who pitched camp at the other end of the lagoon. It was a pleasant change to have the entire place to myself. I took my time, working different compositions. And, if the sun set, I couldn't tell. The only indication of the time was that the light level dropped slightly and became very blue. I continued shooting, making my way back to the car park, where I'd decided to camp for the night. I did my usual download and charge and was amped up for the morning. I was right where I wanted to be.

Leica S (Typ 007) with APO-Macro-Summarit-S 120mm, 0.5 sec @ f/4, ISO 400, Tripod

Day 8 –Jökulsárlón, Stokksness, Höfn – Saturday

No commute that morning. Already having a fairly good idea of the what the lagoon would have in store for me, I wanted to scout out the beach. There were indeed large and small chunks of ice strewn about the beach, just like in the pictures. Alright, it wasn't just a winter thing. First, I wanted to take advantage of the different lighting conditions to get another perspective of the lagoon, so I braved the jammed packed parking lot at the little visitor center.

Leica S (Typ 007) with APO-Macro-Summarit-S 120mm, 1/1500th @ f/3.4, ISO 200

It's amazing how much of a different character the ice takes on with different illumination. The water wasn't as still, nor was it quiet, as it had been all by my lonesome the previous night. Between a bustling parking lot, the amphibious boat tours, Zodiaks weaving between the icebergs and kids tossing rocks into the water, let's just say it wasn't as peaceful. Beautiful, yes, but not serene by any stretch. I just shot handheld while strolling down the shore. The pinkish sky contrasted nicely with the blue-green water and different colors of the icebergs.

Leica S (Typ 007) with APO-Elmar-S 180mm, 1/750th @ f/6.8, ISO 200

Leica S (Typ 007) with APO-Elmar-S 180mm, 1/750th @ f/6.8, ISO 200

From there, it was back to the ice beach. I donned my neoprene stockingfoot waders, which I hauled all the way just for this one shoot, and tromped to the surf in search of glistening ice. All the lovely little shards and globes from just a couple hours prior were gone, taken by the sea. The beach was empty. Ever the optimist, I figured there must be something further down the beach, so I walked. And walked. And walked a little more. Eventually, my trekking paid off. I found some lovely beached bergs waiting to be photographed.

Leica S (Typ 007) with Super-Elmar-S 24mm, 1/250th @ f/8, ISO 100

It was quite liberating, especially after the episode in Vik, to be able to galavant around in the surf, impervious in my waterproof gear. Granted, my feet were a little chilly, standing in the 35°F water. To take shots of the waves crashing over the icebergs, I would set up and wait for the right wave, the big ones, that would look the most impressive. When one would come along, I'd fire off a sequence then brace for impact. Just as the wave totally engulfed the ice chunks, it did the same to me moments later. With my back turned, I did my best not to get knocked over. I had my hard shell on over the waders, so there was really no way I was going to get wet, and other than my face, I didn't. The S007 didn't complain about a little saltwater. So, we kept going. I'm glad I brought the waders even though they took up a good portion of my duffel.

Leica S (Typ 007) with Elmarit-S 45mm, 1/750th @ f/6.8, ISO 200

I was fascinated how each iceberg was so unique and different from all the others, especially considering they all originated from the same glacier just a short distance away. The seawater gently melting them away shined up their glassy, frozen surfaces. I changed out for the 120 Macro once more and tried to capture the icy nuances before me.

Leica S (Typ 007) with APO-Macro-Summarit-S 120mm, 1/500th @ f/6.8, ISO 200

Leica S (Typ 007) with APO-Macro-Summarit-S 120mm, 1/500th @ f/6.8, ISO 200

Leica S (Typ 007) with APO-Macro-Summarit-S 120mm, 1/500th @ f/6.8, ISO 200

After my arctic water bathing experience, I explored the fishing town of Höfn, which I reasoned was fairly large, as it had three gas stations, some hotels, restaurants, and two grocery stores. After being in the boondocks for a week, a town with 2,000 residents was practically a metropolis.

Leica S (Typ 007) with APO-Macro-Summarit-S 120mm, 1/500th @ f/4.8, ISO 200

Leica S (Typ 007) with APO-Macro-Summarit-S 120mm, 1/250th @ f/5.6, ISO 200

From there it was off to Stokksnes to see if I could find a decent sunset location. Again, there was no sunset, but I did enjoy the views there. I just had to accept that that was my last chance at a beautiful Icelandic explosion of the color in the sky (sunset). I parked at a campground heading into town, made my dinner and looked at images. It seemed the trip was coming to a close.

Leica S (Typ 007) with Elmarit-S 45mm, 1/180th @ f/4, ISO 400

Leica S (Typ 007) with APO-Macro-Summarit-S 120mm, 1/180th @ f/2.8, ISO 400

Day 9 – Heading back to Reykjavik – Sunday

When I awoke, I was surprised by two things. First, it was sunny out. As in, I could actually see a giant glowing fireball in the sky. Second, it was getting pretty darned hot in my sleeping bag. Opening the car door, I was greeted with the most perfect morning. No rain. 55°F. No heavy jacket required.

Everyone at camp was having a leisurely breakfast, enjoying the gorgeous weather. One hiker told me this was the first morning she had seen the sun unobscured in weeks. I guess that couple at the ice lagoon was right. The light was going to be magical…just in time for me to leave. It's a photographer's curse, I swear.

Leica S (Typ 007) with APO-Macro-Summarit-S 120mm, 1/4000th @ f/4, ISO 200

Knowing that I couldn't carry any of the fresh food I had picked up when I arrived in Iceland back to the US, I set about either sharing it or giving it away. I cut up a cantaloupe and shared it with some of my tablemates. At the next table, I donated a bag of fresh walnuts I had brought from the farmer's market at home, lending some cinnamon to their porridge and found takers for some onions, cherry tomatoes and pears that I hadn't eaten.You'd think I was giving away gold bars. Everyone was so appreciative, tentative even, about taking fresh food. “Are you sure you don't need it?” I felt like they could use this stuff more than me for the following 24 hours I'd be in Iceland. And it was good travel Karma.

Leica S (Typ 007) with APO-Macro-Summarit-S 120mm, 1/500th @ f/4, ISO 200

In exchange, I did ask if I could shoot some portraits, but there certainly wasn't any strict quid pro quo going on. David (one of the only names I actually remembered, sadly) was underway on a much more difficult challenge than I had embarked on. The Seattle resident was running the entire ring road, pushing all of his supplies in a Bob jogging stroller he got off of Craigslist. By that Sunday morning, he was ten days into his journey that had started in Reykjavik. I actually saw him jogging on the road the night before, in the rain. At the time, I wondered what kind of father runs with a baby in that kind of weather, but figured everything is relative in Iceland. I shared how I saw him and he cracked up. “Yeah,” he said through laughing, “everyone thinks I'm pushing a baby. Some people have even stopped to ask if I need any help.”

Leica S (Typ 007) with APO-Macro-Summarit-S 120mm, 1/1000th @ f/4, ISO 200

At my table I had a nice chat with two travelers, a young man from France and Celine, a student from Geneva. He had been in Iceland for a few months, tending sheep on a farm in exchange for food and a room. This allowed him to travel around and take some excursions. He was especially proud of his traditionally-patterned Icelandic sweater, which was hand knit by the family he worked for. Back home in France, his own family had kept sheep so this was old hat.

Leica S (Typ 007) with APO-Macro-Summarit-S 120mm, 1/350th @ f/4, ISO 100

The young student from Switzerland had been backpacking for a month, spending all of her time in the northeast and East Fjords. She was flying back home one day after me and was starting to worry about how she'd get back to Reykjavik in time. I offered her a ride all the way, but warned her that I stopped to take pictures. A lot. Excitedly, Celine broke down her tent and packed her ruck. I realized, too, that I needed to break down my setup too to make room for her stuff in the back of the Land Rover.

Leica (Typ 007) with Elmarit-S 45mm, 1/350th @ f/11, ISO 200

Leica S (Typ 007) with APO-Elmar-S 180mm, 1/500th @ f/11, ISO 200

Soon, we were striking back west. And, the skies were just perfect. I asked Celine if she had seen the ice beach during her travels. She hadn't even heard of such a place. This was just not acceptable, so I stopped at the lagoon and ice beach so she could experience them before heading back home. We pulled off to the side of the road whenever either one of us saw a photo op. It was good to have a copilot for the all-day ride back.

Leica S (Typ 007) wtih APO-Elmar-S 180mm, 1/1000th @ f/8, ISO 100

Leica S (Typ 007) with APO-Macro-Summarit-S 120mm, 1/750th @ f/11, ISO 100

As the hours passed, we ended up driving into what was turning into the most amazing golden light. As we got closer to Reykjavik, we were both hit by the shock of urban civilization. There were so many cars, people and buildings. After so long away from all the hustle and bustle, an uneasiness set in. I'm no stranger to cities or traffic. There are about five million people living in South Florida and I feel right at home in New York, Boston or Chicago. But the peace, serenity and small community of global travelers dynamic was just so comforting, even amidst the harsh environment of Iceland, or perhaps even more so because of it.

Leica S (Typ 007) with Elmarit-S 45mm, 1/180th @ f/4, ISO 800

I dropped Celine at her hostel and walked to the center of Reykjavik to grab a falafel. Real food tasted awesome. From there, it was back to Keflavik to return the car and check into a hotel for the night. No sleeping in the car. Of course, I got sidetracked by the stunning sunset that was starting to play out and zigzagged through the narrow city streets to get to the harbor with my camera for a few last images.

Leica S (Typ 007) with APO-Macro-Summarit-S 120mm, 1/1000th @ f/4, ISO 400

Day 10 – Flying home  – Monday

As I emptied the Land Rover in the rental car parking lot, stuffing my life for the previous week and a half into two duffel bags, the most gorgeous all-night sunset blazed across the horizon. From my time there, I hadn't seen that kind of color during the night. As I stood, gazing at the incredible sight of the orange and blue streaks slicing across the night sky at 1 in the morning, a bit of sadness set in. I'd be leaving Iceland in a matter of hours.

Leica S (Typ 007) with APO-Macro-Summarit-S 120mm, 1/250th @ f/2.8, ISO 400

I was looking forward to the hotel room I had booked, adjacent to the airport though. The thought of a real bed and a real shower in a heated room alleviated some of my sorrow. As it worked out, I'd only have a few hours to recoup and rest before checking in to head home, but I made the most of it. I think I stood in the warm water for at least 30 minutes. No coins to feed or waiting for half the campground to use one shower stall. Feeling clean and warm, laying down on the soft pillow and comforter on the lush bed was heaven. Too bad the wake up call from the front desk came so soon.

As I gathered my bags, the sunrise that had eluded me during my stay was staring at me from my fourth story window. Next time. I was heading home.

Looking back

The grueling conditions in Iceland put everything to the test and showed me very quickly what I could count on and what I couldn't. The Leica S (Typ 007) withstood my constant punishment of water, water and more water. It held up to rain, waterfall mist and saltwater spray from crashing waves. I didn’t baby it whatsoever. No bags or covers. I carried it around no matter the situation. It never complained. It refused to function at anything less than 100%. And, I had no issues using the camera in such wet, cold conditions. All the controls on the camera can be operated with gloves, even soaking wet, freezing ones. Or, with numb bare fingers when I realized that gloves saturated with frigid water probably did more harm than good and removed them.

My Gitzo tripods withstood my usual abuse, only sacrificing a rubber foot to the Icelandic wilderness. Luckily, I brought two, a 2-Series Mountaineer and a 3-Series Systematic, just in case of failure. The rubber feet are interchangeable between the two, so I was able to swap these out depending on the shooting situation. For heads, I used my standard Gitzo GH3780 center ball and an Arca Swiss D4, each about 50% of the time. The D4 was a little added experiment and was loaned to me by a friend to try out. Both worked well.

Arca-Swiss D4

The previously waterproof Ecco hiking boots that I've counted on for years became a lot less waterproof after getting filled with freezing seawater. I meant to buy and take silica packs with me. You know, the ones that come in everything and tell you not to eat them. In spite of looking everywhere, I was never able to locate any in Iceland. These would have made quick work of drying out the inside of my boots. Instead, I tried blasting the foot well heater in the car and placed the boots under the vent. Luckily, I had the foresight to pack backup trail shoes. Not waterproof, by any stretch, but dry.

Mostly waterproof

My North Face hiking pants gave up on trying to block water from soaking through. Next time, I'll invest in a pair of solid Gore-Tex hiking pants. Merino wool baselayers and socks kept me as comfortable as could be expected given the damp conditions. Having only discovered wool just a few years ago (give me a break, I grew up in Miami), I swear by it. Smartwool, Icebreaker and Ibex line my gear drawer and join me on any outdoor adventure. My Arc'Teryx Atom insulating layers and Beta shell were standouts, keeping my core warm and dry. Arc'Teryx is like the Leica of the outdoor gear world, with impeccable finish, nothing extraneous and offering the highest performance. I can see why they have such a loyal following. My Beta AR shell felt like a suit of armor, protecting me from the elements without ever wavering.

Shooting at Kirkjufellsfoss

Sometimes it's the little things that count, especially things you are counting on for survival. The Optimus Crux stove was awesome. At less than 3 oz (70g), it cranked out more than 10,000 BTU, boiling a cup of water in about one minute, and getting me that much closer to a hot meal. This tiny little guy became my savior.

After F208

Then, of course, was the Land Rover. The LR4 was more than just my transportation. It was my home, my kitchen, my fortress. Being able to drive anywhere without worry allowed me to get shots that I wouldn't have been able to otherwise. I drove on black sand beaches, through muddy mountain tracks, across rivers, and more. The Disco took every last bit of punishment doled out and kept on going strong. Each night, I would use the diesel engine as a generator, charging up my S batteries for the next day of shooting while I downloaded and did a quick edit on the MacBook Pro. This would have been challenging without access to power whenever I needed it.

A little selfie action at Landmannalaugar

Because I was driving and shooting, I stopped constantly. After checking behind me and seeing that the nearest car was barely a speck on the distant horizon, I'd jam the brakes, hit the hazards, roll the window down and squeeze off a few frames before putting the Disco back into gear and moving on. I kept an alternate focal length in the center console for quick lens changes. If there were more cars around, I'd pull off on the side of the road, which was often approaching a 45 degree grade in some spots. Only once did I think the truck might actually tip over. That one wasn't much fun. For particularly good shots, I got out of the car.

Disco on the black sand beach near Vik

All in all, Iceland was incredible. The weather and light didn't always cooperate, but still made for a fantastic shooting environment. SUV camping worked out well and I didn't starve. And, while this was primarily a shoot-till-you-drop photo trip, I enjoyed meeting people along the way, encountering and chatting with far more than I highlighted here. The camaraderie was great and many times made Icelandic campgrounds feel like a United Nations retreat. We were all there for similar reasons, be they personal challenges, taking pictures, or just experiencing such a unique place. I can't wait to go back, see some of my favorite locations in different light and make it all the way around the ring road. Now, it's just a matter of deciding whether to lead a workshop or take the family on a camping trip.

Love the warning signs

Be sure to check out my full in-depth review of the Leica S (Typ 007). More sample images and technical details of the camera await.

If you are interested in purchasing a Leica S (Typ 007), please consider supporting this site by doing so at Leica Store Miami. Thanks!

The post My photographic adventure through Iceland with the Leica S (Typ 007) appeared first on Red Dot Forum.

These kinds of tests are never easy or clear-cut and there were some obvious challenges. I’ll address these and how I decided to handle them.

The Leica M Monochrom (Typ 246)

M Monochrom (Typ 246) vs. M Monochrom (M9)

There is a resolution difference between the earlier M9-based M Monochrom, which I'll refer to as the M9M, at 18MP, and the new M Monochrom (Typ 246), which I'll call the MM246, at 24MP. Others might have uprezzed the M9M up to match the MM246, but I feel this can actually have a detrimental effect on image quality as we'd be doing some non-integer scaling. Such scaling can create a loss of per-pixel acuity. Also, if you have read my thoughts on uprezzing before, you might recall that I'm not a huge fan, even when printing big. My preference is almost always to output files at native size and let the printer driver handle the scaling. So, I decided to leave each one in its native size. You’ll see the resolution difference in the comparisons. Please keep it in mind when making your own evaluations.

M (Typ 240) vs. M Monochrom (Typ 246)

The M240 is a color camera and color images converted to B&W don’t always translate to a monochrome capture, but I think you’ll find that my B&W conversion, the default one in Lightroom with some small tweaks, did a pretty decent job of matching the overall look of the MM246.

The M240 also tops out at ISO 3200 for its normal range, and up to ISO 6400 in the PUSH range. You'll notice as you look at comparisons higher than ISO 5000, I've used ISO 6400 on the M240. I could have deliberately underexposed once I hit the ISO wall on the M240 and pushed in LR to achieve higher “equivalent” ISOs, but I felt that most users would stay within the confines of the operating range. The same is true for the M9M, where the range stops at ISO 10000. For ISO 12500 and 25000, I used the ISO 10000 export.

The Test Setup

My goal was to provide a broad range of tonality and textures in my test setup. I also wanted something a little nicer than crayons and figurines, so I settled on a creating a food still life. Admittedly, I don't have much practice arranging or photographing tabletop compositions, so this image won't be gracing the cover of a major food magazine anytime soon. Additionally, the food setup had the distinct disadvantage of wilting when using fresh veggies like I did here. So, re-shoots were out of the question. On the plus side,we have lots of natural textures that can give a better idea of organic subjects like the ones you'd find shooting outside.

The scene is set up in our conference room. The overhead fluorescent lighting was turned off. All the light for the scene is coming in through windows in front of the set up. The windows themselves have the vertical blinds mostly closed. The idea was to create even and diffuse illumination, not affected by moving clouds. Luckily, the sky was totally overcast, yet fairly bright during the duration of my test shooting, so this never ended up being a concern.

The cameras were all shot from the same position on a Gitzo tripod using Really Right Stuff bottom plates. This allowed me to use the same quick release clamp for minimal movement between cameras. The same lens, the astonishingly good 50mm APO-Summicron, was used on each camera with the focus set at the exact same distance, with all exposures taken at f/11 to maximize depth of field while avoiding diffraction. To eliminate any camera vibration, I used a self timer for all shots.

Processing the Files

Following the photo shoot, I processed the files in Adobe Lightroom 6. Minimal corrections were applied in order to match the images to one another. The results are not “out-of-camera” nor should they be in my opinion. In fact, I adjusted noise reduction and varied sharpening settings on all the higher ISO images from each of the three cameras. My goal in this test was to see how fully optimized images from each of the three cameras compared at each ISO in the range. I didn't really care what they would have looked like without noise reduction, because I would always apply at least some NR for high ISO images. Similarly, I always apply base level sharpening to all files. The real question for me was how the files matched up for real world usage, so that is how the test was geared.

Sample sharpening and noise reduction settings used

All files were exported from LR using the highest level of JPG quality (100) with the least compression, with no image resizing. Why didn't I use TIFF? In my experience, there is no visible difference in a highest quality JPG and a TIFF, and perhaps more importantly, the Photoshop file I used to composite all of these images together was already bursting at the seams, weighing in at close to 5GB. Yes, for a single file. I shudder to think how large the file would have been had I used TIFFs.

I picked out three sections to evaluate the images. The first is the parsley. There is tons of textural information and the crop is comprised mostly of darker tones and shadows. The second is the balsamic vinegar bottle, spring onions and carrots. The label has nice sharp print with the almost black bottle representing the very darkest part of the image. The root vegetables give us a broad tonal range and different types of textures. The last crop is of the dried pasta and white tablecloth. These are some of the lightest midtones, again with lots of textural information. The tomatoes and wooden bowl offer some smooth areas to look at for tonal transitions. I actually had a difficult time picking out sections, as there are quite a few other cropped areas that I thought were fascinating with regards to the differences shown and/or details revealed.

Here are the full frame captures for each camera, as well as what the scene looked like in full color:

LEICA M MONOCHROM (Typ 246) Full Image

LEICA M (Typ 240) Full Image (original color)

LEICA M (Typ 240) Full Image (B&W conversion)

I did notice a very slight shift lower on the M9M image after I was done shooting the test sequences. My guess is that the M9 RRS plate is a little shorter than the one for the M240/MM246. Both M24x cameras matched up almost identically. For our purposes, and considering the megapixel difference, this doesn't have any impact on the test.

M9 Monochrom Full Image

How to Properly View the Comparisons

One final note before we get into the comparisons: these images are output to 2000px on the long side, with 1:1 pixel rendering. Be sure to click on each crop set to view the larger image. When viewed with no onscreen scaling, one pixel on your monitor will display one pixel from the camera. This is complicated somewhat by Retina-type displays that do pixel resampling. Applications like latest versions of Photoshop and Lightroom have the option of running in non-scaled, 1:1 mode, but the pictures will appear smaller on screen. If your monitor resolution is less than 2000px across, like on an iPad or a laptop, be sure to right-click on the image and select Open link in new tab (be sure to select link not image). This will open just the image and you can view it at the correct size once you click to magnify. Or, even better, right-click to Save link as… and view in Photoshop. Unfortunately, with technological innovation comes its own set of challenges. Retina and 4K/5K displays look stunning, especially for text, but are sometimes less than ideal for image comparisons as they employ pixel doubling and no longer show 1:1.

The Comparisons

For our first comparison, let's take a look at all cameras at base ISO. I didn't bother using the PULL 100 setting on the M240 as this is actually worse quality-wise relative to ISO 200. Both Monochrom cameras have a base ISO of 320. Here we are looking at the peak quality offered by all three cameras. And, they are all quite excellent, especially using the 50mm APO.

For the next set, all three cameras are all dialed in at ISO 320. Again, quality is exceptional, although you can see a little more detail in the MM246 relative to the M240 shot here. This behavior will continue all through the rest of the image comparisons, which is to be expected. The M9M, for its part, is turning out loads of detail, even though the MM246 is trumping it in terms of pixels.

ISO 640 tells the same story. All three cameras continue to turn out great quality, with the MM246 producing just a little better detail.

At ISO 1250 the MM246 is showing less noise and more detail, but the differences remain subtle.

At ISO 2500, we're now seeing some real differences in the files. The M240 is losing a little tonal separation and the M9M is getting a little flat with light noise in the darker tones. The MM246 is both cleaner and more detailed, and holding more contrast.

At ISO 5000, the MM246 is just starting to display some visible noise, but it isn't taking away from picture detail. Take a look a the tablecloth texture right in front of the pasta, as well as the parsley to see this. Both the M240 and M9M have a lot more noise, which is causing the images to flatten out.

For the ISO 10000 image, remember that the M240 will only go up to ISO 6400, so that is what you see below. The 1/3 of a stop increase on the M240 doesn't look too much worse than it did at ISO 5000. This setting is certainly usable, especially when converting to B&W. The M9M doesn't fare quite so well at the top of its range, though. Even with considerable noise reduction and sharpening efforts on my part, the white speckled noise pattern overruns the image and gives an impression of haziness. On the M9M, I'd stick to ISO 5000 or 6400, but I'd have no qualms whatsoever using the MM246 at ISO 10000.

Only 1/3 of a stop higher than ISO 10000, ISO 12500 is significant only in that it is the top of the normal range of the MM246. Neither the M240 nor the M9M can go this high, so each is displayed with its respective highest setting of ISO 6400 and ISO 10000. Even though the MM246 is a a full stop higher than the M240 at ISO 6400, it still looks better here, as well as continuing to best the M9M at ISO 10000.

Finally, at ISO 25000, which is a PUSH setting on the MM246, the image shows some serious deterioration. It's worth noting though, that at ISO 25000, the MM246 still looks better than ISO 10000 on the M9M and only slightly worse than the M240 at ISO 6400.

Observations and Wrapping Up

So, there you have it. I fully expected that the MM246 would put up a good show. What I didn't account for was just how well the M240 fared in this experiment. When converted to B&W, it is actually not too far behind its B&W brother, the MM246, and matched up extremely well versus the M9M. I saw far more of a difference between the M9M and its color progenitor, the M9, when I originally tested them against one another. But as good as the M240 is, the MM246 is noticeably better for low light shooting and offers a much higher ISO range, as well as crisper files throughout the entire range.

To its credit, the M9M, while no longer the high ISO champ, still outputs amazingly sharp images with a great look. And even though a little more noise was creeping in starting around ISO 2500, the noise pattern of the M9M is a little more film-like than that of the M240 and has less image smearing. It is only when getting right up to ISO 10000 that things take a serious turn for the worse for the original M Monochrom. I can attest to having  no shortage of nice looking images in real world shooting up to ISO 6400, but it's clear that the latest M Monochrom offers about two stops better performance with a resolution bump to boot.

The new Leica M Monochrom (Typ 246) was the clear victor here, but the deck was stacked heavily in its favor. Its CMOS sensor handles noise better than the CCD found in the M9M and with no color filter array (CFA), the Monochrom was guaranteed to outperform the M240 using the same sensor with a CFA.

The bottom line is this: I had no complaints with using ISO 8000, 10000, and 12500 in my real world shooting while working on my review of the MM246. This test just reinforces my confidence in this amazing camera.

The post B&W ISO Showdown: Leica M Monochrom (Typ 246) vs. M Monochrom (M9) vs. M (Typ 240) appeared first on Red Dot Forum.

The Experiment

To recap, I was testing the theory that images from a Leica CCD-based camera have a unique and instantly identifiable look and feel to the images. Many who hold this belief feel that this look cannot be achieved with a CMOS-based camera, regardless of post-processing efforts.

To conduct the test, I ventured out with both an M9 and an M240 while I was visiting San Francisco with my family for a couple of days at the end of February. After taking an image with one camera, I’d quickly swap lenses to shoot roughly the same picture with the other body using the same lens and equivalent settings.

Part 1: Head-to-Head Comparisons

For Part 1, I first processed the M9 files to look like what I’d expect M9 images to look like using my preset and personal preference. I then used the M9 images as a reference to adjust the corresponding M240 files and tried to achieve a rough match. Rather than use all the tools at my disposal to create an exact match, I opted instead to impose some limits. In the spirit of the experiment, I wanted to see if a match could be achieved without using any localized adjustments. No masking. No selections. No adjustment or gradient brushes. Instead, I used only overall image slider adjustments in Adobe Lightroom. After all, this test was not about how good my post processing skills are when given any and all tools and unlimited time. I wanted it to be realistic so that almost anyone with moderate Lightroom skills could produce the same results as I did. The pairs were then posted without metadata and were randomized in the order displayed.

Part 1: The Results

The results were certainly interesting. On the direct comparisons in Part 1, only 7 out of 19 (36%) match-ups were correctly identified. This is pretty telling. I received feedback from some users that they started taking the test and just gave up halfway through as they couldn’t see any significant differences and felt they were merely guessing. This is visible in the voting numbers, with almost 800 votes for the first set and about 450 for the last set (as of this writing).

There were some surprises for me, though. I was amazed that so many were able to accurately identify the M9 images in the Streetcar and Apartment sets. Roughly two thirds of the voters picked correctly on these. On the flip side, I was equally stunned that so many guessed incorrectly on two images which I felt were bound to be easier to pick due to their color ranges: Red Cards and Lombard Street. Most other pairs of images came in very close to 50/50. Keep in mind that this test wasn’t to determine which camera was more capable. It was to merely test the “CCD look” theory. The conditions purposely favored the M9, as the comparisons featured images taken in good quality, directional natural light with vibrant colors, and defined contrast. These kinds of punchy images at low ISO almost always look great from the M9.

Here are the raw voting results as of March 6, 2015:

Thumbnail	Which one was M9?	Votes	M9	M240	Margin	Correct?
	Streetcar – 1	796	60.7%	39.3%	21.4%	Yes
	Fishing Dock -1	735	56.1%	43.9%	12.2%	Yes
	Life Preserver – 1	703	56.3%	43.7%	12.6%	Yes
	Fishing Boat Bows – 2	670	47.6%	52.4%	-4.8%	No
	Bay Boat Tour – 2	620	46.5%	53.5%	-7.0%	No
	Sailboats in front of Alcatraz – 1	563	46.7%	53.3%	-6.6%	No
	Magenta Tulips – 1	557	49.2%	50.8%	-1.6%	No
	Steps – 2	533	47.5%	52.5%	-5.0%	No
	Pier 39 – 1	518	54.2%	45.8%	8.4%	Yes
	Church Windows – 2	505	49.9%	50.1%	-0.2%	No
	Scarves – 1	489	52.6%	47.4%	5.2%	Yes
	Red Cards in Bin – 2	460	43.0%	57.0%	-14.0%	No
	Slippers – 2	450	45.8%	54.2%	-8.4%	No
	Skyscraper – 1	443	46.5%	53.5%	-7.0%	No
	Modern Building – 2	438	47.5%	52.5%	-5.0%	No
	Gate – 2	430	48.8%	51.2%	-2.4%	No
	Apartments – 1	418	62.7%	37.3%	25.4%	Yes
	Walkway with Purple Flowers – 2	437	51.9%	48.1%	3.8%	Yes
	Lombard Street – 2	458	42.4%	57.6%	-15.2%	No

Part 2: Single Images

For Part 2, I wanted to take a slightly different approach. I was on vacation and as such, didn’t shoot soley for the sake of making image comparison sets. At a certain point, this kind of shooting gets fairly tedious. Once I knew I had enough material for the test, I just focused on having fun taking pictures like I would normally do in a great shooting locale like San Francisco on a gorgeous day.

For these single images, I processed with respective presets for each camera and my personal taste, picked some of my favorites and posted individual photos. The challenge this time was to correctly identify which camera was used to produce each image. And because, for me, the head-to-head test was over, I allowed myself to seek out a broader range of subjects and more candid scenarios that didn’t only suit the M9. Shots were taken at night, at high ISO, and indoors under artificial lighting. As indicated by the votes on the images, most people erred on the side of picking the M240 for these types of shots. And even with these obvious examples, only 55% of the images were correctly identified. I will say, though, that swings in preferences were much more pronounced than in the head-to-head comparisons of Part 1.

M240 with 24mm Elmar

Part 2: The Results

I didn’t set out to make this a segment full of trick questions, but unfortunately, I only had two images from the M9 during my free shooting time that I felt were worthwhile to post. Why? Well, frankly, the M240 was more fun to shoot with, so that’s what I used for 90% of my shooting even though I carried both cameras with me. It’s faster. I can use the EVF for precise composition. The LCD screen allows more accurate review. And, ironically, the CMOS sensor fares far better in poor and mixed light and is vastly superior for high ISO shooting. So, if you voted/guessed that every image was taken with the M240 you’d have scored way, way above the average.

Here are the raw voting results, again from March 6, 2015:

Admittedly, many of the M240 images do indeed look like they were taken with the M9. This wasn’t because I was trying to play games or fool anyone. The files ended up this way because I liked the way they looked. Remember, on these images I didn’t have a known aim point. Processing, for me, as I imagine for many other photographers, is highly personal and subjective. Very, very few areas of photography benefit from “accurate” color or tone. Almost all disciplines of our fair art form take liberties to represent our own unique visions. Even before digital, we used filters to alter color or contrast, shot various film types with no two emulsions offering the same visual fingerprint, employed different chemistry to achieve a specific look, and messed around in the darkroom for hours to create our desired finished vision. I make no apologies for editing my images to suit my tastes. And, furthermore, I think that the pursuit of a mythical “accurate” or “neutral” result out of camera with no processing doesn’t jive with the most basic tenets of photography, be it film or digital. This quixotic quest, while appearing reasonable and noble, doesn’t make better photographs.  But I digress.

M240 with 35mm Summilux

Looking at the results from Part 2, images like Washington Square Park, Roll Your Own, Modern House on Lombard and City View Out of Round Window fooled around two thirds of voters. Other images that are well-suited to the M240, like Julie on Cable Car, which was taken at ISO 1000 shooting into a heavily-backlit scene seemed a bit more obvious with almost 70% picking that one accurately. From my experience, an M9 would not have been so graceful here.  Likewise, most people picked the M240 for the submarine interior shots, which were handheld at ISO 1600, except for Red Light Gauges, which was taken at ISO 2500. Shots where I left the files more open and airy, rather than pulling down the darker midtones like Coit Tower Looking Up, were also correctly identified as M240.

The reality is that I am quite fond of images that I’ve taken with both the M9 and the M240. I never really took to direct comparisons as I wasn’t displeased with the different look offered by the M240. In my particular workflow, I apply my own homegrown import presets based on camera model when I bring my DNG files into Lightroom. I have presets for S, M9, M240, M Monochrom, X Vario, T and D-Lux. If you don’t already use presets, I urge you to incorporate these into your own workflow. By applying baseline corrections and settings that you’d use anyway, you’ll save considerable time when processing a large number of files. And, perhaps more important to me, is that I am able to get a better idea of an image’s worth as the untouched files already have a look that I like and expect.  This makes selection and editing a more streamlined process.

M240 with 24mm Elmar

No such thing as out of camera

In spite of what you may have heard, there is no such thing as “out-of-camera.” It doesn’t exist. A sensor is a collection of monochrome pixels. The Bayer filter, or color filter array (CFA), over the sensor allows the camera to see color. But, only 1/3 of the color information is actually being captured. The rest is interpolated. This process of interpolation is called demosaicing, whereby a coherent full-color image is generated from the individually colored pixels. The software opening the RAW file performs the interpolation and renders colors based on input profiles and the type of algorithm used, along with any “secret sauce” the software might put in. For Leica M files, Lightroom has two different built-in profiles (Embedded and Adobe Standard), or you can make your own. You can also change the rendering process version (2012, 2010, 2003) and see different results.

So much is done to manipulate the file before you ever open it in Lightroom or ACR or Capture One or Aperture. Pretending that what the program shows you by default is somehow virginal or unmolested is the stuff of fantasy. Does it benefit the photographer when the default image shown in Lightroom is close to the look they want without much editing? Of course, and this is a testament to the program’s algorithms and camera profile. But, it isn’t everything. Users can make their own camera profiles and their own presets to change the default “out-of-camera” behavior.

Personally, I don’t take much stock in tests talking about or showing out-of-camera results with no post processing of any kind (although there is always much processing performed before this by the software), just as I never took to judging negatives off the processing line, without first making prints with my own set of corrections.

Lessons Learned

I learned quite a lot about both the M9 and M240 during this test. I was pleasantly surprised to rediscover the M9. The camera can indeed produce some really stunning images under the right conditions. To its credit and, in line with what CCD supporters say, the color palette produced by default in Lightroom (after my preset application) is extremely pleasing in most cases. Images have a bite and saturation that is very attractive. Deep blues, thick midtones and punchy highlights add to the M9’s inherent per-pixel sharpness. In daylight shooting with good, directional light and a scene with saturated colors, the M9 is truly hard to beat. Even though the camera is going on six years old, it still produces images that keep pace with the best. Its weakness, due to its CCD sensor, is low light performance. If your shooting needs don’t dictate the need for ISO 3200 and you've got some fast M glass to boot, well, by all means, the M9 can still work its magic for you.

The M240, for its part, puts out smoother, more nuanced files that hold more dynamic range, a gentler highlight roll-off and cleaner shadow information. Blowing highlights on the M240 can be done without ruining the entire image as there is a certain glow and transition, rather than a clipped, sharp edge look as in the M9. Shooting strongly backlit subjects or even directly into bright light sources is a fun and fruitful experience, not a painful one, especially when paired with highly flare-resistant lenses like the 35mm f/1.4 Summilux-M ASPH FLE.

Mixed light sources and blown highlights on M240

Under less-than-ideal scenarios in artificial or low light, the M240 wins hands-down. It handles mixed light sources better, although its AWB seems to be slightly on the warm side under most scenarios. A WB Adjust feature on the camera could easily solve this tendency. Shadow noise is well-controlled at higher ISO settings, as is overall image tonality.

In post processing, the M240 files can withstand much more modification without breaking down. They have more highlight and shadow recoverability and more malleability overall. This test, at the very least, demonstrated the relative ease in which the M240 files could be made to mimic M9 images. This isn’t to say that you have to make M240 images into M9 ones, just that you can, if this is the look you prefer.

What exactly did I have to do to the M240 to make them look like M9 ones?

Much of the variance between the two files relates to the openness/lightness of the M240 images. Drop the overall exposure about a stop, pull the blacks down while opening shadows a bit, bump the whites while pulling in the highlights and you are getting close. I also noticed that M9 images tended to have warmer highlights with neutral/cool shadows. To achieve this, I warmed up the white balance and counteracted the warm shadows by using the Split Toning tool to cool the shadows off a bit using no more than 7% saturation. The blues on the M9 images also have a certain deeply saturated look. To hit these tones, I used the HSL tool to increase saturation, drop luminosity and very slightly push the hue towards cyan on the blue channel. There is nothing wrong with the more pure blues of the M240, but to emulate the Kodachrome-like blues of the M9 takes mere seconds, if that's your speed. For images with deep reds and purples, a little hue modification on the red, purple and magenta channels did the trick, but such changes are only necessary if you are really trying to get a close match. Doing so isn’t needed to fix any deficiency.

To put it simply, I feel that the biggest differences in the two files could be erased with more shadow contrast, running the exposure darker and applying a slightly different white balance.

I ended up making a preset that worked on most files, with only minor tweaking required past that. I also needed to adjust the white balance to match as both cameras were shot with AWB. Personally, I find that merely adjusting WB by eye, rather than using the eyedropper is more effective. Again, the most accurate result isn’t always the most pleasing one.

M240 file as it opens in Lightroom with no user corrections

M240 image with preset applied, WB adjusted, exposure pulled down and blue channel tweaked

Why did I post the images in sRGB?

There were some concerns that I used sRGB to display the image comparisons. The reality is that almost all people participating in this test used either a MacBook Pro or iMac with Retina screen. These screens are calibrated to provide 99% sRGB with some level of accuracy. Yes, I’m sure some viewers are using NEC Spectraview and Eizo monitors with AdobeRGB (1998) color gamut, but these would be the exception, not the rule. Posting the images in AdobeRGB (1998) might have caused color inaccuracies for most users and resulted in very little additional color information. Most printing is severely gamut limited as well, with CMYK offset printing offering far less than sRGB. Photographic printing techniques using laser or LED illumination are closer to sRGB, but still shy of this gamut. Some inkjet printer/paper combinations offer a gamut closer to AdobeRGB (1998) but again, this is isn’t necessarily how most are viewing or displaying work. My working space wasn’t sRGB, which definitely would have restricted the available colors from the files. Rather, the output space was sRGB while the working space within Adobe Lightroom was ProPhoto RGB.

Remember the original hypothesis being tested was to see whether there was a clearly identifiable difference between the images produced by the CCD-based M9 and the CMOS-based M240. If the “CCD-ness” is so obvious, being displayed in sRGB would hardly affect the outcome.

M9 or M240? Exactly.

Final Thoughts

For me, and I imagine for many others who couldn’t tell a definitive difference between either the head-to-head match-ups in Part 1 or the individual shots in Part 2, the results of the experiment are fairly clear. To restate: the hypothesis being tested was to see if the CCD look is real, unmistakable and couldn’t be emulated in post processing. To this end, I think I have at least demonstrated that with just a small amount of global adjustments in Lightroom, M240 files could make for some convincing M9 shots. And while I will give credit to the M9 for the great images it is capable of capturing, the M240 is still a better overall system. I would advise against forsaking the usability and image quality benefits of the newer generation CMOS-based camera based on the conviction that the CCD-based M9 offers superior color rendering. As I already mentioned above, the M9 can turn out gorgeous images. This was never up for debate. In fact, for those that absolutely, positively, just adore the look of CCD, and hold the results of this test as even greater evidence of its superiority, then there is good news. Used M9s can be had for around $3,000 and Leica still offers a CCD-based camera brand new, the Leica M-E for $4,995.

But, I do believe that much of the public perceived shortcomings of the M240 look come from its inherent higher dynamic range, the resulting flatter default files, and some users not taking full advantage of both the malleability of the M240 DNG files and the flexibility afforded them in Lightroom. We live in a wonderful time for photography. Our tools in the field and in the digital darkroom are better and more elastic than they've ever been. As photographers, our vision is only limited by our own creativity. Perhaps it's time to put the CCD vs. CMOS debate to rest and just go out and shoot.

Thanks again to everyone who participated in this little experiment.

The post The Great Debate: CCD vs. CMOS – Part 3 appeared first on Red Dot Forum.