Finally some nice window light today for a few test shots with the new system. Honey was my willing (but perplexed) model.
I’ll post an 100% crop from this image, later today.
Very curious what your new system is. 🙂
Realizing this is just a web-sized image, I’m curious what all of you think of the image quality (tonality, sharpness, colour)?
MF CCD ?
I was going to guess a digital back to the RZ67!
Good guess, as it’s something I’ve considered.
Fuji X-T1 with Fujinon xf 23mm 1.4 wide open?
Image quality is excellent.
The desaturated colors remind me nikon. Still believe this is from a nikon df.
You guys never cease to amaze me…
I would say Sony A7/r with Zeiss 55mm 1.8.
Thanks Dominic, for the guess. Solid one at that…
I’m going to go out on a limb and guess the lens is the 40 Nokton. The image is just soft enough to make me think that. So is this going to be an April’s Fool Day joke after all?
…and if that’s the case I’m also going to say this was made with your M9
Soft? Hmmm… The point of focus is on the eye nearest to the light. I’ll post an 100% crop soon.
If the overall image looks soft, it’s because there’s a lot of stuff on the web that has been artificially sharpened to the point of eye trauma… It’s one of many things that annoy me…Along with over-cooked processing.
No, I think the eyes are sharp…it’s just the overall image. Something about it just reminds me of your other pictures with the Nokton. I could be so far off that I embarrass myself, but then again it won’t be the first time and I doubt it will be the last. Just ask my kids :))
It would be an awesome April Fool’s joke though… Hmmmm….
Oh, how about this…your M3 and scanned film? Your scanner is a CCD, right? 😉
I can tell you for sure it’s not from my M3… 🙂
The fact that there is such a wide range of opinions, from Phase One medium format to Olympus micro two thirds makes you wonder if we all have been influenced too much by marketing. I mean try 30,000+ difference in price between those two. I read a article where the author said in 2014 there really isn’t much difference in IQ between all the makers of top end cameras. Which backs up your opinion of why really did Leica bother to get into the already crowded CMOS market and lose there unique IQ with the CCD.
I find the higher end set-ups justify their existence by:
In every other way though, you are correct: the marketing has hoodwinked most of us.
Not that tech stuff doesn’t interest me, I just can’t get past the beautiful photograph of a beautiful dog. Bien fait.
Thanks Jon. I promise that as soon as this silliness ends, it’ll be back to normal.
Ok I did not expect it, but 99% it is Nikon Df. The lens is difficult to find, hopefully it is the Zeiss Otus 55/1.4.
You’re sure it’s the Df… I wonder why.
Because of the colours and because when I looked at the exif I saw the capture Nx… I also thought that because you complained about the low light in the winter, that you will go for a solution that has great high ISO…
Anyway, it is fun to try to think what system it can be, but from such a small image it is difficult to assess IQ.
So I cheated by looking at the EXIF data… Df or D4?
If I told you that the final step in editing all of my images, including my M9 images, has always been done with Capture NX2, would that change things? 🙂
Serves you right for cheating! I didn’t say this was going to be that obvious… 🙂
It is a gorgeous shot. So its obvious that your eye AND NOT the camera that is most important.
Thank you Cory. The M9 allowed me to get my photographs more easily than any other system. This, to me, was the big advantage… Now, I’ve at least found a system that allows me to approximate the M9 and Leica lens image quality, but I’ve lost the usability. However, I’ve gained reliability.
This looks just the same to me as your Leica M9 stuff. Could easily be an EM1.
The fact it could be a host of camera’s really illustrates why for me ergonomics the is the key.
Rendering and files are important….to a point!
I just can’t see you using a camera which relies too much on “modern ergonomics” and “menus”. Could be wrong of course but you’ve been down this road before. But you have two cameras now where those ergonomic meanderings are fulfilled.
So before you reveal I’ll put forward my formal guess…..
Nikon D4s (yep…believe it or not I’m actually thinking you’ve jumped into the big end of town 35mm world again) and as for lense…why not add on the Otus. But…that is a big piece of kit!! However if portrait photography is where your thoughts live then it’s a nice piece of gear!
This is nothing to do with FF vs. M4/3 in terms of my guess…..more to do with the lens and what to attach it to! And if you are using the Otus then it’ll be a body which can do it justice ergonomically and FF.
I hope Peter you don’t mind me replying to Andy, but what a humbling statement (The fact it could be a host of cameras) it is amazing that we have not got a clue I think Fuji X-T1 Andy thinks D4 know one can tell FF or M4/3 I love this post.
I’ll join the fun. M8 with vc40mm?
I’m going to reveal that it’s not the M8… but, boy, do I miss that camera…
Peter, although I use a variety of systems for different puposes, I now always seem to come back to three of them. The M9 for its CCD and look and advantages of rangefinder system….The Pentax 645D when I also want that CCD look and need big files for large format prints and commercial projects and lastly the Nikon DF. The Df, for a CMOS camera gives images a lovely pleasing look, the high ISO performance the other two cameras don’t have and thus lovely low existing light work, and a very reliable and medium sized go anywhere system that’s can be at home in a wide variety of applications. So my guess is a Nikon Df. By the way, lovely image.
Dave, the CCD rendering is clearly something special. The M9 and 645D share an image output look that I covet. For what it’s worth, I believe matching these cameras with the Df is a sound strategy.
It would be really nice if you could post a bit bigger images. Not only in regards to this little mystique about what system you used here changing from Leica M9, but also generally. It is too often, that it is really not possible to see stuff you’re talking about in your images – due to very limited web-size of your images. Just my opinion…
Keep up the good work.
As for this image – it is really not to say – it could be almost anything.
BR / Alex
Unfortunately, I’ve had my images lifted and used without my permission. This is the largest I’m willing to post.
I will say, however, that it often is possible to see the things I’m discussing, even at this size. I can spot lack of tonality, or sharpness, or burned highlights, for example, in images of this size.
Now, for those of you who view my images on your iPhone, you’re on your own… 🙂
And yes, this image could be almost anything, but you can eliminate many of the guesses based on this image. If you include my follow-up post showing the magnification, then you can eliminate several more guesses.
Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:
You are commenting using your WordPress.com account.
( Log Out /
You are commenting using your Google account.
( Log Out /
You are commenting using your Twitter account.
( Log Out /
You are commenting using your Facebook account.
( Log Out /
Connecting to %s
Notify me of new comments via email.
Notify me of new posts via email.