Sorry, I think Leica as something wrong.

[the warrior]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Traductor

 

 

Leica is not just a camera to take pictures and a goal, Leica is a filosifia.

I note with concern a course is wrong.

I do not like having a photographic camera that costs 7,000 euros a CMOS inside, that is already a canikon, a CCD was different, something that NASA used in missions to Mars.

My Monochrom is a product that is not seen in other manufacturers, it's different, but CMOS is equal to others.

When Leica launched the digital way many shouted: NO !!

Now we are on the same path as the rest, I do not like this.

I think I'm not alone.

I will not buy another camera Leica CMOS inside, I prefer any other manufacturer, canikon.

My Leica Monochrom and my Leica Mp will remain with me, but no new ones.

It is my thought.

 

[Joakim]

I think it is more to a camera than the sensor.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[tookaphotoof]

Here we go again...

 

But since you posted it, let me ask you what's so special about ccd?

Anyways, if you don't want to spend 7.000 euro (I actually paid far less) you might want to consider the Sony DSC-W800. 

Still available for around 70-80 euro and it has a ccd sensor inside. Lens included.

 

 

[pop]

There is no need to ridicule each other. There are many members who feel the CCD to be superior to the CMOS, we have several threads on the topic, I believe.

[zlatkob]

I do not like having a photographic camera that costs 7,000 euros a CMOS inside, that is already a canikon, a CCD was different, something that NASA used in missions to Mars.

 

If you really value that very special "mission to Mars" difference of having a CCD sensor, you can get it in some of the cheapest point & shoot cameras.  Now that is something different!  Don't make the mistake of buying the $45,000 Hasselblad H5D-200c, because that has a "canikon" CMOS sensor equal to others.

Edited April 24, 2015 by zlatkob

[Lenshacker]

https://www.teledynedalsa.com/imaging/products/sensors/area-scan/FTF7046M/

 

Maybe someone will put a camera body around the above 32MPixel CCD monochrome sensor. They've got to be selling it to someone.

 

Nikon makes a monochrome version of the CMOS sensor in the D4/Df, but only use it in a microscope camera. 

 

Phase 1 used a new monochrome CCD in their newest Monochrome camera, 60MPixels.

 

I believe it is this one:

 

https://www.teledynedalsa.com/imaging/products/sensors/area-scan/FTF9168M/

Edited April 24, 2015 by Lenshacker

[BerndReini]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Yes, there is more to a Leica than the sensor. I wish they made their cameras a little more affordable. The price of the of the original M8 at release I think was $4,795. That would be high enough for any future M camera at release. Whether it is Cmos or CCD is completely irrelevant. I just wish Leica would choose a sensor and processing firmware/ software that is as good as any of the competition's at release.

 

I will definitely buy the next color version of the M with the expectation that it will be a significant upgrade from my M9. All it would need for me to qualify compared to the M240 is another stop of usable ISO without banding, faster startup time, and better implementation of live-view (movability of the magnification area and much less shutter lag with live view.)

 

Despite these criticisms I would have probably still bought an M240 had it not been for the terrible initial white balance before the firmware fix. It just made me so weary and reminded me of the IR issues of the M8 that hadn't been acknowledge at release that by the time Leica fixed the warm white balance in the firmware, I had lost my initial excitement.

[tobey bilek]

With proper software application, CMOS will have exactly the same colors.   There is a problem with some IR leakage so you may need to touch up some blacks (color select>desaturate).

 

You need CMOS for live view and video not that I care for either.  

 

CCD is being discontinued

 

 

A solution needs to be found for corrosion on sensor cover.     

[biglou]

" A solution needs to be found for corrosion on sensor cover.  "

 

I suppose this specific question of corrosion is not related to ccd versus cmos but only to the sensor cover itself chosen by Leica.

This could be addressed without changing technology.

[Prosophos]

 

Traductor

 

 

 

Leica is not just a camera to take pictures and a goal, Leica is a filosifia.

 

I note with concern a course is wrong.

 

I do not like having a photographic camera that costs 7,000 euros a CMOS inside, that is already a canikon, a CCD was different, something that NASA used in missions to Mars.

 

My Monochrom is a product that is not seen in other manufacturers, it's different, but CMOS is equal to others.

 

When Leica launched the digital way many shouted: NO !!

 

Now we are on the same path as the rest, I do not like this.

 

I think I'm not alone.

 

I will not buy another camera Leica CMOS inside, I prefer any other manufacturer, canikon.

 

My Leica Monochrom and my Leica Mp will remain with me, but no new ones.

 

It is my thought.

 

 

I agree with you, of course. 

 

Peter.

[biglou]

Basically a sensor plays the role film does, Leica cameras in the past used exactly the same films as others, this is not the film nor sensor that distinguish first this brand from others.

Now all we can expect from Leica is providing us cameras featuring state of the art sensors and electronics added to the other camera qualities and features that make a Leica, size, form, telemetry, simplicity of menues and commands etc...

[Lenshacker]

Leica moved to CMOS to offer Liveview, Electronic View Finder, and Video capability. Some like these features, others have no use for them. Phase 1 must have looked at the existing technology available before selecting a 60MPixel CCD to replace their current 39MPixel monochrome camera. I suspect Phase 1 evaluated the sensor  for still photography alone, liveview and video were not considered.

[BerndReini]

Higher ISO due to lower noise (easier noise reduction on sensor) is the absolute main reason for the switch to CMOS. Digital video used to be exclusively CCD sensor based due to motion artifacts with CMOS sensors. Then still photography in its quest for higher ISO drove the CMOS development and now they replaced CCD sensors in video and still applications.

 

I just had a conversation with a fashion photographer who uses the Pentax 645Z. He loves it. He says, he has to do a lot of post work to recreate the look he likes from all his previous CCD systems, but he says the the high ISO capabilities of the sensor combined with the price make it a no-brainer.

 

It is done. CMOS is the future until something better comes around.

[Lenshacker]

Last time I checked, My CCD based Leica worked well at ISO 10,000 and does not show any signs of banding.

[BerndReini]

We have been through this many times, and I understand there are various tricks to get the most out of CCD sensors at high ISO. I am perfectly happy with my M9 and just added a CCD MM to my arsenal. I do not own any CMOS cameras with the exception of my iphone and a Sony RX100 point and shoot that I let my kids use. However, the greatest, most competitive engineers in photography and cinema have not been able to produce CCD cameras that can compete with CMOS cameras in high ISO. If your CCD camera can do ISO 10,000 then the CMOS version can do 25,000 at the same noise level and without banding.

 

I have been shooting video with professional Panasonic CCD cameras for a long time, and my camera just got replaced with a new model with a CMOS sensor (Varicam 35 and Varicam HS). My camera's base ISO is 320 and I love the colors and rendering from it. The new camera has a dual ISO (!!!) of 850 and 5,000. I don't know exactly how this is done, but in a demonstration ISO 850 and 5,000 were completely free of noise and in many examples hard to distinguish from each other, while anything in between ISO 850 and 5,000 was noisier.

 

There is at least a stop and a third gain in high ISO between my m9 and the M240. I use my M9 up to ISO 1,000 and I would use the M240 up to ISO 2,500 without reservations. Whether any of that gain matters to you and me personally is not the question. The fact is that unless you, or some other specialty company builds another CCD camera, then the CCD sensor in cameras for general photography is dead. Done. Leica will not build another camera with a CCD chip. Anyone betting against that might as well put their money on Qatar winning the next soccer world cup.

[Mornnb]

 

 

 

Traductor

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Leica is not just a camera to take pictures and a goal, Leica is a filosifia.

 

I note with concern a course is wrong.

 

I do not like having a photographic camera that costs 7,000 euros a CMOS inside, that is already a canikon, a CCD was different, something that NASA used in missions to Mars.

 

My Monochrom is a product that is not seen in other manufacturers, it's different, but CMOS is equal to others.

 

When Leica launched the digital way many shouted: NO !!

 

Now we are on the same path as the rest, I do not like this.

 

I think I'm not alone.

 

I will not buy another camera Leica CMOS inside, I prefer any other manufacturer, canikon.

 

My Leica Monochrom and my Leica Mp will remain with me, but no new ones.

 

It is my thought.

No.

Happy M240 user here who could not disagree with you more!

 

The M240 is the perfect digital camera. It offers everything you'd expect from a real digital camera like liveview, an EVF, a high resolution screen to check focus/composition. While providing a great rangefinder experience.

The sensor has high dynamic range and excellent colour rendering that leaves a lot of room for post production tweaks in Adobe products. The M240 represents Leica's full hearted acceptance of digital, as opposed to a digital camera that really wanted to be film. Which is what I always thought of the M8/M9.

Edited April 26, 2015 by Mornnb

[jaapv]

I do not recall anybody “shouting no” at the introduction of the M8. All I recall was a sense of relief that the company finally entered the digital age and had a chance of surviving.

[thighslapper]

 Leica will not build another camera with a CCD chip. Anyone betting against that might as well put their money on Qatar winning the next soccer world cup.

 

....... I note a Belgian Company (sounds familiar ?) has been working on a CCD based sensor with CMOS electronics bolted on to the back to produce a hybrid chip with the advantages of both ...... currently more designed for imaging from space .... but you never know .... technology advances very rapidly these days .....  

Edited April 26, 2015 by thighslapper

[Prosophos]

https://www.teledynedalsa.com/imaging/products/sensors/area-scan/FTF7046M/

 

Maybe someone will put a camera body around the above 32MPixel CCD monochrome sensor. They've got to be selling it to someone.

 

 

 

I would love to try that sensor, preferably in an M body.  It would be interesting to see how far they've pushed the technology.  

 

And - as you write - somebody must be buying it. I wonder who?

 

Peter.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Lenshacker]

....... I note a Belgian Company (sounds familiar ?) has been working on a CCD based sensor with CMOS electronics bolted on to the back to produce a hybrid chip with the advantages of both ...... currently more designed for imaging from space .... but you never know .... technology advances very rapidly these days .....  

I asked some engineers about the latest in CCD sensor designs and got this same answer.

 

The problem of adapting CMOS and CCD sensors to the M-Mount has everything to do with geometry and inclination angle. This necessitates trade-off in sensor design. The CCD sensor is fundamentally better at collecting light with high angles of incidence compared with CMOS. If you own an M9 and M240, turn off lens detection for a wide-angle lens or a very fast normal lens, see which one vignettes more without any type of lens corrections applied. The "Tricks" played to get the sensor to work include using special offset microlens arrays and thinning the sensor. For CCD's, sensor thinning means less material to store electrons. The sensor in the M9 has a lower saturation count than the one in the M8, both use the same width pixels, I can only assume the M9 pixels are not as deep. With CMOS, it means giving up material in the pixel and bringing the processing portion of the chip in closer to the light gathering sections. Reduced saturation count and a possible source of noise. SLR's do not have this problem as the angle of incidence allows use of deep pixels. The saturation count on the CMOS sensor used in the Nikon D4 and Df is double that of the M8, triple that of the M9 and M240. ISO performance in terms of noise compares with the M Monochrom, I have had both cameras out at the same time.

 

Back-Side Illuminated CMOS is promising. 

Edited April 26, 2015 by Lenshacker