2 thoughts on “Barista, 3 (Nocturne at De Mello).”
Hi Peter,
Another excellent capture of the mood of the moment. I feel like I’ve been there to see this scene with my own eyes. This photograph is close to being superb on many different levels. thanks for sharing
FYI…I’ve spent an hour at the Leica store NYC in SoHo today testing out their M-P M240 vs my newly acquired (used) M9. The verdict is clear to me – based on downloaded DNG’s on my 27” IMac reviewed at home tonight. M9 photos are just better look and feel then the same exact on taken w M240. Like for like, they are crisper, sharper, more accurate color (no yellowish tint), 3-D pop, and look more natural. I am new to Leica and have no preferences one way another. Cost is not part of my consideration – I am focusing on image quality primarily. Just trying to stay impartial. Actually- I love the look and feel of the silver M-p 240. Esp the screen resolution and the ISO specs. Although I am not so sure M9 is that bad up to 1600. 800 is definitely quite good – as good as any recent Canon DSLR. Out my Nikon Df. But the images are kind of soft (don’t have as much ‘pop’ or 3D quality to them). My Canon 5DM4 w 50L has nicer rendering vs the M240 w. either ‘Lux or “Cron 50 (non-APO) I tested w both cameras today. It was not a scientific test of course. But to me the verdict is clear: a CCD sensor in M9 is definitely unique and produces very nice quality results. The CMOS in M240 is a ‘me-too” sensor similar to Canon, and not even the latest one (probably most similar to 5DM2 -I used all of them since the original 5D)
Thanks for writing about your experience Dimitry.
I actually owned the M240 three(!) times (it’s well-documented on this site), so great was my will to make it work for me because I loved the ergonomic improvements over the M9. But each time I ultimately parted with it, because in the one way I wanted it to perform – image quality – it fell short of the M9. I can say the same for any other digital camera I’ve ever tried, including the Nikon D810.
Prosophos 
Hi Peter,
Another excellent capture of the mood of the moment. I feel like I’ve been there to see this scene with my own eyes. This photograph is close to being superb on many different levels. thanks for sharing
FYI…I’ve spent an hour at the Leica store NYC in SoHo today testing out their M-P M240 vs my newly acquired (used) M9. The verdict is clear to me – based on downloaded DNG’s on my 27” IMac reviewed at home tonight. M9 photos are just better look and feel then the same exact on taken w M240. Like for like, they are crisper, sharper, more accurate color (no yellowish tint), 3-D pop, and look more natural. I am new to Leica and have no preferences one way another. Cost is not part of my consideration – I am focusing on image quality primarily. Just trying to stay impartial. Actually- I love the look and feel of the silver M-p 240. Esp the screen resolution and the ISO specs. Although I am not so sure M9 is that bad up to 1600. 800 is definitely quite good – as good as any recent Canon DSLR. Out my Nikon Df. But the images are kind of soft (don’t have as much ‘pop’ or 3D quality to them). My Canon 5DM4 w 50L has nicer rendering vs the M240 w. either ‘Lux or “Cron 50 (non-APO) I tested w both cameras today. It was not a scientific test of course. But to me the verdict is clear: a CCD sensor in M9 is definitely unique and produces very nice quality results. The CMOS in M240 is a ‘me-too” sensor similar to Canon, and not even the latest one (probably most similar to 5DM2 -I used all of them since the original 5D)
Thanks for writing about your experience Dimitry.
I actually owned the M240 three(!) times (it’s well-documented on this site), so great was my will to make it work for me because I loved the ergonomic improvements over the M9. But each time I ultimately parted with it, because in the one way I wanted it to perform – image quality – it fell short of the M9. I can say the same for any other digital camera I’ve ever tried, including the Nikon D810.