Official sample images from the new Leica M published online

LeicaM_ISO3200_50mm_f1

ISO 3200, f/6.8 with 50mm f/1 lens

LeicaM_ISO2500_35mm_f1,4_DNG conversion by Lightroom

ISO 2500, f/4.0 with 35mm f/1.4 lens

LeicaM_ISO2000_R_Macro_60mm_f2,8

ISO 2000, f/2.8 with 60mm f/2.8 lens (with R-adapter)

Leica Camera uploaded some sample images from the new Leica M camera (pre-order options) on their website. You can download the full size JPG and DNG files from this link (under the "performance proof" link). Unless there is a delay, the new M should start shipping at the end of February.

LeicaM_ISO200_50mm_f2APO_InCameraJPG

ISO 200, f/6.8 with 50mm f/2 lens

LeicaM_ISO200_135mm_f3,4

ISO 200, f/3.5 with 135mm f/3.4 lens

LeicaM_ISO400_35mm_f2

ISO 400, f/4 with 135mm f/3.4 lens

LeicaM_PUSH6400_35mm_f2

ISO 6400, f/3.4 with 35mm f/2 lens

This entry was posted in Leica M. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • scott

    I’m at work so don’t have Lightroom to process the DNG files. From the in camera JPEGs: (1) the snowy hill shot: sharpness is not the best, my M9 can do better with the 50mm f/2.0 non-ASPH; (2) the dog shot: color look warmer than the M9 and the CCD-look of the M9 is gone; (3) ISO 6400 on the new M is on par or better than ISO 640 on the M9–that’s a three-stop improvement.

    The overall softness of the pics may be due to the fact that they are in-camera JPEGs and/or Lightroom has no profile for the M Type 240 yet. I will reserve my judgement until Lightroom has the proper profile to process the DNGs.

  • CHD

    Really???? These are ‘officially’ released samples??? Better then what was released before but seriously….this is Leica…..quit being cheap and hire a decent photographer to provide your samples.

  • Peter

    I’m at home and just opened up DNG’s and jpegs in Photoshop CS6, and agree with all the comments above. My M9P + 50mm non asph summicron deliver images which on screen and in print are radically superior to these images in resolution and colour. Only higher ISO images with M240 seem significantly superior to the M9P. I have my name down for the M240 but ultimately it will only be after taking my Leica to my Leica store and shooting a number of images inside and outside the store with both cameras and comparing prints at home will I make a decision.

  • MikeHocks

    The noise from the ISO2500 shot with the 35/1.4 looks like a shot @ 400-640 with the M9.
    Love the tonal range in the snow photo as well.

    • logan

      There’s a ISO3200 DNG on the Leica website. I put it through some plugins that amplify the noise, usually can’t use said plugin on M9 pics at ISO1000+ or the noise becomes pretty distracting. I jacked the plugins way up and hardly saw much noise, it still looked excellent, very sharp. The noise looks less “digital” and more like film grain, in my opinion.

  • M9 rules

    There it goes the fixed 17.4MB .DNG file size :-(

  • M9 rules

    There it goes the fixed 17.4MB .DNG file size :-(

  • cj

    Fuji can provide better sample

    • Robert

      Hate to have to agree here. I can get far better examples with my X-Pro 1. Not saying the M won’t be up to snuff (love M-Series cameras), but Leica would have been smarter to “give” a few cameras to some innovative working pros who already have a fondness for Leica, and then asked them to shoot some various, pre-determined “themed” assignments.

      That’s how I would have done it if I were Leica.

    • Robert

      Hate to have to agree here. I can get far better examples with my X-Pro 1. Not saying the M won’t be up to snuff (love M-Series cameras), but Leica would have been smarter to “give” a few cameras to some innovative working pros who already have a fondness for Leica, and then asked them to shoot some various, pre-determined “themed” assignments.

      That’s how I would have done it if I were Leica.

      • CHD

        Yup….whomever is in marketing at Leica should be fired. 5 mins on 500PX or Flickr and they could have found a dozen photogs who could have produced stunning work…and likely for free just for the opportunity to use the camera.

        With that said, Leica should have spent some money and hired the likes of Zack Arias and people would be singing a different tune about the samples.

    • TylerV85

      If Fuji makes a full frame camera in the near future. Leica is going to seriously have to step up their game to compete. Everything about the X-Pro 1, especially after the new firmware, is better than this. ISO 6400 looks like the new M’s ISO 2500. Disappointing.

    • TylerV85

      If Fuji makes a full frame camera in the near future. Leica is going to seriously have to step up their game to compete. Everything about the X-Pro 1, especially after the new firmware, is better than this. ISO 6400 looks like the new M’s ISO 2500. Disappointing.

  • davethevet

    Horrible banding in the sky of the iso 6400 “push”.

    The M9 promo photos were a lot better, these aren’t very inspiring.

    If I can nail focus with the evf and peaking, I want one.

  • davethevet

    Horrible banding in the sky of the iso 6400 “push”.

    The M9 promo photos were a lot better, these aren’t very inspiring.

    If I can nail focus with the evf and peaking, I want one.

    • http://genotypewritings.blogspot.com/ genotypewriter

      I don’t know why you were even looking at that image :)

      Also the banding is everywhere in that shot… the bricks hide it well.

  • Hmmmm

    Import the bread DNG in Lightroom, convert it to B&W then upscale Clarity to 100. Check out at 100% zoom the black background. Do you get a constelation of white spots? What are those? At ISO200…

    • Right

      Yes! I see it. What’s that???

  • Hmmmm

    Import the bread DNG in Lightroom, convert it to B&W then upscale Clarity to 100. Check out at 100% zoom the black background. Do you get a constelation of white spots? What are those? At ISO200…

    • Right

      Yes! I see it. What’s that???

  • Nobody Special

    I’ve said before that online sample images can, or could have been taken with any professional camera. I don’t mean that as slight to the new M. But it has to be assumed that the M will be at least as good but should be better the M9 anyway.

    Leica could use a better set of images to highlight what it’s trying to show. A real landscape image, a nice B&W contrast shot, a in close city-scape – some images that make you want to look at them and relate to what one may aspire to; other than owning one of their cameras. Then again, I have to play hard-ball with them – they aren’t owned by photographers but by millionaire’s and billionaire’s – which might have an influence on what they consider as important marketing keys to use.

    • http://genotypewritings.blogspot.com/ genotypewriter

      “A real landscape image, a nice B&W contrast shot, a in close city-scape”

      There are more suitable cameras for each of those scenes than a Leica M. The M series is now about portability and prestige… in fact, some snapshots taken at a fancy event that’s dimly-lit would make for some ideal samples. You know I’m not kidding when I say that…

      • Nobody Special

        I agree. As to the low light capability, I actually found my F5 to be nearly as good as my M6ttl (my least favorite Leica), really, really close. Close enough to make the difference a non-factor. I also menat that Leica’s method of marketing does nothing to interest me in the CAMERA. In that promo video for the Nex-7, it gives me what I need to know.
        Leica really has lost whatever marketing it had some where in the past. You are correct about the prestige and the portability – but – it’s not a stretch to say that soon enough there will be a FF compact like a Nex that also take adapted lenses. I’m still of the oppinion that over time, Leica will fade unless they can become relevant, and the prestige market will be the only market left for them.

  • KRoberts

    This isn’t the first time I see samples from manufacturers that don’t show the real quaility of their new camera. We still have to wait before we start to judge. And to all of you that tell us that you can produce better images with your own cameras or with other cameras: Good for you, but not that interesting for the rest of the global population!

  • KRoberts

    This isn’t the first time I see samples from manufacturers that don’t show the real quaility of their new camera. We still have to wait before we start to judge. And to all of you that tell us that you can produce better images with your own cameras or with other cameras: Good for you, but not that interesting for the rest of the global population!

  • Nobody Special

    http://www.lucarossini.it/portfolio/into-alaska-nex-6-sony/
    There, that is how you PROMOTE a new camera. I just came across this promo video from Sony. This is how, or the type of info I want to see about a camera. Not a ‘street’, or fashion photographer, but when a camera is in the field and faces a multitude of subjects during any given day. In a compact body no less.
    Now, Leica’s greatest new M supposedly can do video well enough to bother with, and the body can use R legacy glass.
    I’m not saying the Nex 6 is on par with the M. BUT, this is the type of thing I want to know if it can or can’t do. But maybe Leica should watch this and see what might work for them… Because, if the Nex 7 is alot better than the
    Nex 6, and IF the Zeiss or Sony, or Leica, etc., glass can produce 16×20 inch prints that have an above average amount of clarity and quality then really, as a Leica user, I have to really think about staying or investing any more with Leica.

  • OneCut

    Am I the only one baffled by the odd f/stop apertures logged here?

  • OneCut

    Am I the only one baffled by the odd f/stop apertures logged here?

  • Camaman

    DL links are down

    It says “Guru Meditation:”

    Looks like there is some Leica guru meditating on their staff.

  • Tuananh

    VERY DISAPPOINTED!! As an M2, M8 and M9 owner, I was very optimistic about the new M, but if the sample images continue not to render the unique Leica colors and characteristics then I will definitely remove myself from the wait-list. Maybe Leica shouldn’t have spent so much of its efforts on adding video, LiveView, and even GPS to their M system….they should have put more of that energy foremost into creating a camera that was historically built for people who worshiped image quality above all other gimmicks. Perhaps it was cursed from the beginning when they removed the numerical sequence from the M, maybe they lost a little bit of that Leica magic when they lost that perfect “10”. A few more weeks and we will all find out if the “elves” still have any magic left to share. Good luck, Leica!

  • Tuananh

    VERY DISAPPOINTED!! As an M2, M8 and M9 owner, I was very optimistic about the new M, but if the sample images continue not to render the unique Leica colors and characteristics then I will definitely remove myself from the wait-list. Maybe Leica shouldn’t have spent so much of its efforts on adding video, LiveView, and even GPS to their M system….they should have put more of that energy foremost into creating a camera that was historically built for people who worshiped image quality above all other gimmicks. Perhaps it was cursed from the beginning when they removed the numerical sequence from the M, maybe they lost a little bit of that Leica magic when they lost that perfect “10”. A few more weeks and we will all find out if the “elves” still have any magic left to share. Good luck, Leica!

  • ademjefferson

    I think in many ways this will be a better camera than the M9. Better iso, fps, buffer, weatherproofing, video, focus peaking. I also think from iso 400 & down the M9 will take sexier photos. CCD sensors will always be superior in low iso compared to coms. Looks like I going to have to have both. Knew I should of kept my M9. oh well just going to have to buy it again.

  • http://genotypewritings.blogspot.com/ genotypewriter

    The technique used in pretty much every shot they’ve given in DNG (I didn’t check the rest) is very poor. Most of the time it comes down to a bad choice of aperture or shutter speed. We all know what people say about typical Leica buyers but why can’t Leica even pay some photographers who can operate a camera properly? I know… it’s because shooting someone’s ugly apartment building from the roadside at night with ISO3200 and the camera pointed upwards is art.

  • leica-I-Said

    Mediocrity at it’s best, not the Leica files necessarily, but the imagery … but then again, I am only interested in the files from a technical stand. (but you would think Leica would put it out there for us, the first time out with such a highly anticipated camera)

    ISO 6400 is definitely beyond what the M9 could conjure up, but there does seem to be some banding, although my MKIII has it too and it doesn’t really negatively impact most of my commercial work. It’s hard to compare Leica’s 6400 with anything else because you really need to shoot the same scene/conditions in order to get the true nature of the pixels … it does look more film like in grain though, and that’s a good thing.

    Even if this is the best ISO performance, I still would consider it a winner, for the most part.

    It is amazing how unsharp, and poorly processed the files are though. I am assuming it has to do with technique on behalf of the shooters … amateur night at the “O.K. Corral”!

  • lefse

    God, most of you people need to calm down.
    These are samples – showing different aspects of technical image quality, not pieces of art.
    Notice that lenses are stopped down to where their MTF-charts show optimum performance.

    – Low light performance (that most of you geeks live for) seems to be radically improved.
    – The weird pink tinge in skin tones that people mistake for the Leica look, is finally gone.
    – Accutance and contrast look more like a Portra emulsion. Definitely an improvement, and far more pleasing to my eye. A bit like Canons new Log Gamma for the C300/C500.

    No more CCD? Good riddance! That was a 7 year old sensor (same as M8, jut bigger). This complaining reminds me of all the idiots who cried when Apple dropped PowerPC, and went with Intel. Comical.

    • http://genotypewritings.blogspot.com/ genotypewriter

      “- Accutance and contrast look more like a Portra emulsion. Definitely an improvement, and far more pleasing to my eye. A bit like Canons new Log Gamma for the C300/C500.”

      What a load of bs! People like you make film shooters sound like a bunch of hipster loonies… when not all of them are :P To start with, which Portra are you talking about and on which format? Portra 800 pushed two stops on 135? ROFL.

      Accutance of film depends on the format. To say a digital FF sensor matches 35mm film for accutance is an insult to the sensor. Also there’s no one contrast to digital files. You can make it whatever you like. Seeing how you don’t understand that, I don’t know why you’re even talking about “Canon Log Gamma”

      “The weird pink tinge in skin tones that people mistake for the Leica look, is finally gone.”

      Leica was known for its “glow”. The pink skin thing was in Fuji Super CCD SR sensors. Google “fuji s5 pink skin”… you’re mixing your CCDs up, my friend.

  • Les

    I don’t think you lot realize what these samples are for.
    They are not meant to be pretty pictures. If that’s all you want, you don’t need a camera. You just need a museum pass, or a library card, or some spare time to surf.

    They’re test shots, to show what the camera will do under typical circumstances. Good for judging sharpness, dynamic range, noise, etc, but not good for judging aesthetics.

    I do agree that they should have included some low-light/mixed-light event photography. That’s a big market for Leica.

  • Les

    I don’t think you lot realize what these samples are for.
    They are not meant to be pretty pictures. If that’s all you want, you don’t need a camera. You just need a museum pass, or a library card, or some spare time to surf.

    They’re test shots, to show what the camera will do under typical circumstances. Good for judging sharpness, dynamic range, noise, etc, but not good for judging aesthetics.

    I do agree that they should have included some low-light/mixed-light event photography. That’s a big market for Leica.

    • Martin Herrera

      Although I get your point, if I compare to how they announced the Leica MM, the reportage they commissioned Magnum and the kind of sample images they produced there is no point of comparison. In my opinion, these images although do work to test performance, they are a disservice to the brand the the high end positioning Leica has taken. I have the sense they commissioned Magnum via Jean Gaumy, and since what came back was not ‘top notch’, they were left with little alternative. My thoughts.

  • i0nium

    In fact, I never hope that M can have good image quality due to the use of CMOS, so I don’t actually feel disappointed. I will try to get myself an M9-P this summer.
    Well, according to the sample images, the new M is just so-so. It is a good camera, but not even a qualified Leica. Uh-oh.

  • CDH

    I think the photos look superb, especially the results from the high ISOs. Very natural. However, it is becoming increasingly clear that the “Leica look” per the M8/M9 is gone. It seems that Leica have to a degree attempted to simulate that look but in order to utilise the other advantages of the CMOS they’re limited in how true they can be to that look. People will just have to decide what they value utmost and choose the ME/MM or the M based on that.

  • Jonathan Slack

    H There everyone
    I’ve read most of the posts carefully and all of them superficially. I think there are a couple of points worth mentioning.
    First of all these are not publicity shots – they are DNG and jpg samples straight from the camera – unprocessed. There have been, and will be photographs by lots of other photographers in the near future. These aren’t designed to show off the photographer either, but to give some examples of what files look like from the camera. It’s uncomfortable as a photographer, as, like everyone else, I’m used to presenting finished images, not digital negatives. Added to which these are not necessarily photos I’d have chosen.
    Whether you like my photography or not is hardly the point – and certainly not the reason the images were chosen – which was to display either high ISO, open aperture sharpness etc. etc.
    The larger dynamic range of the new M has the inevitable effect of making the unprocessed files a little flat – but of course it gives you much greater scope for post processing, and my experience with these files is that they are exceptionally malleable and will take a huge amount of PP . . . . the samples are designed to allow you to do that.
    Of course, you don’t have to like the images (it’s not the point) but rather than downloading an image and zooming straight in to 100% to check for moire (which is less than the M9 by the way). Why not try making something of them – if you think they’re bad, then take it as a challenge
    all the best
    Jonathan Slack

    • vonZinger

      Excellent retort Jonathan, thanks! … and completely to the point.

    • vonZinger

      Excellent retort Jonathan, thanks! … and completely to the point.

    • http://Flickr.com/inthemist InTheMist

      I’m a Nikon shooter but respect the traditional way you Leica shooters work. These are so much better SOOC samples than what have been leaked so far.
      Personally, I get tightness in my chest when someone demands to see my raw files. At least Nikon has some JPEG modes to add more pop which I would have done in the same situation (SOOC requirement).
      All I can say is the photographer has guts, and they’re not bad for unprocessed DNG files!

    • http://Flickr.com/inthemist InTheMist

      I’m a Nikon shooter but respect the traditional way you Leica shooters work. These are so much better SOOC samples than what have been leaked so far.
      Personally, I get tightness in my chest when someone demands to see my raw files. At least Nikon has some JPEG modes to add more pop which I would have done in the same situation (SOOC requirement).
      All I can say is the photographer has guts, and they’re not bad for unprocessed DNG files!

  • Sum1

    I examined the Performance Proofs on the Leica site (though some
    wouldn’t download), and became pretty convinced not to purchase the M. I say “pretty convinced” since I’m still open to be proven wrong, but so
    far, M’s performance is certainly not stellar, not unique, not 13K+ worthy.

    Take for example the image of the girl with the dog. There are burnt spots
    on her forehead and nose. The M’s dynamic range is so poor it couldn’t
    handle that? WTF? Or take the image of the building – the 6400 ISO while
    not bad, is unimpressive and feels overly digital. That’s not what one
    would expect from a 13K+ camera, and the top Canon/Nikons fare even better under those conditions. The colors aren’t unique either – Canon/Nikon seem to produce even better colors. The peacock shot, when viewed at full size, isn’t sharp at all.

    Aside for the size (and prestige), why would anyone spend so much on a camera that doesn’t deliver? Poor dynamic range, digital feeling, unimpressive colors, and lack of sharpness – basically, disappointing on every issue we would want the M to stand out!

    This is a big disappointment for me. I was considering purchasing the M, so I could have one good street camera that I can carry with me wherever I go. I didn’t mind the price. I have the means to purchase whatever I want. But with the M, it seems that I won’t be getting much of what I wanted.

    Again,I’ll reserve my final judgment until I see better shots. Perhaps it’ll
    turn out that the dynamic range is spectacular, the digital feel is
    nonexistent, the colors awesome, and the sharpness unmatched. If that
    happens, I’d be rushing in my order. But as of now, I’m not sold. At all.

  • Sum1

    I examined the Performance Proofs on the Leica site (though some
    wouldn’t download), and became pretty convinced not to purchase the M. I say “pretty convinced” since I’m still open to be proven wrong, but so
    far, M’s performance is certainly not stellar, not unique, not 13K+ worthy.

    Take for example the image of the girl with the dog. There are burnt spots
    on her forehead and nose. The M’s dynamic range is so poor it couldn’t
    handle that? WTF? Or take the image of the building – the 6400 ISO while
    not bad, is unimpressive and feels overly digital. That’s not what one
    would expect from a 13K+ camera, and the top Canon/Nikons fare even better under those conditions. The colors aren’t unique either – Canon/Nikon seem to produce even better colors. The peacock shot, when viewed at full size, isn’t sharp at all.

    Aside for the size (and prestige), why would anyone spend so much on a camera that doesn’t deliver? Poor dynamic range, digital feeling, unimpressive colors, and lack of sharpness – basically, disappointing on every issue we would want the M to stand out!

    This is a big disappointment for me. I was considering purchasing the M, so I could have one good street camera that I can carry with me wherever I go. I didn’t mind the price. I have the means to purchase whatever I want. But with the M, it seems that I won’t be getting much of what I wanted.

    Again,I’ll reserve my final judgment until I see better shots. Perhaps it’ll
    turn out that the dynamic range is spectacular, the digital feel is
    nonexistent, the colors awesome, and the sharpness unmatched. If that
    happens, I’d be rushing in my order. But as of now, I’m not sold. At all.

  • ccd

    Yellowish

  • ccd

    Yellowish

  • http://www.facebook.com/michael.kholodov Michael Kholodov

    Just as I expected from any CMOS sensor – it’s a Canon, not Leica anymore. Microcontrast is gone, glow is gone. The samples are flat and boring. The high ISO is a good thing to have but any decent camera already has it.

  • Back to top