M8 ... its sharp because ?

[Riley]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Ok we have all seen plenty of M8 example images on various threads

maybe we can agree that for the mostpart they look sharp to exceptionaly sharp

my question is why is this so, is it the glass used, or is it the sensor of M8

 

and 'if' it is the glass, then the results can be duplicated on another body...yes ?

 

or 'if' it is the sensor, is this associated with the IR issue, aka IR is good ?

 

Riley

[Advertisement]

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

[carstenw]

It's both. The best lenses in the world combined with a AA-filter-less Kodak sensor which draws like medium format sensors.

[John Maio]

If you look at the photo forum, you will also see that film-based images taken with the "M" lens also have that certain sharp "3D" effect produced by Leica glass even after scanning.

 

As others have said, its an optical system and all elements contribute.

[Guest malland]

Sharpness is an overrated concept: in a photograph tonality and composition are usually a lot more important for aesthetic impact, particularly in B&W.

 

—Mitch/Johannesburg

http://www.flickr.com/photos/10268776@N00/

[carstenw]

Sharpness is not everything, and may not even be the most important thing, that is painfully obvious. However, having a camera system which is *capable* of sharpness, and understanding how to use it to get the maximum, is a very valuable tool. Slight softness can easily ruin certain types of images.

 

Having said that, my favorite lens so far is the Leica 80mm Summilux, both for its softness wide open, and for its sharpness stopped down.

[sean_reid]

Ok we have all seen plenty of M8 example images on various threads

maybe we can agree that for the mostpart they look sharp to exceptionaly sharp

my question is why is this so, is it the glass used, or is it the sensor of M8

 

and 'if' it is the glass, then the results can be duplicated on another body...yes ?

 

or 'if' it is the sensor, is this associated with the IR issue, aka IR is good ?

 

Riley

 

Hi Riley,

 

It has to be both. The lens must deliver the resolution and the camera must be able to record that information without degrading it. Weaken either link and it's gone.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[sdai]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Without the mirror slap, the chances your images get blurred are much less.

[waterlenz]

Ok we have all seen plenty of M8 example images on various threads

maybe we can agree that for the mostpart they look sharp to exceptionaly sharp

my question is why is this so, is it the glass used, or is it the sensor of M8

 

and 'if' it is the glass, then the results can be duplicated on another body...yes ?

 

or 'if' it is the sensor, is this associated with the IR issue, aka IR is good ?

 

Riley

 

 

The reports that the M8 can produce images with very high sharpness (especially in the corners) confirm the design decisions. Imagine a hypothetical alternate model with a thicker IR filter in front of the image plane, e.g., 1mm thick, would the results be the same? Most likely not!!

Tom

[carstenw]

Certainly not. One can see what happens with thicker filters by looking at the corners of an R-D1 picture taken with, for example, the CV15. Much softer, and with odd internal reflections, even with a larger crop factor. Leica, IMO, did the right thing here, even if it annoys us all with filters. In a couple of years, maybe a thinner IR filter for the sensor has been developed which allows us to put our 486's in the drawer.

[Riley]

thanks for the replies

 

so, being its the lenses and the sensor

could we say that there has been a reduction of filter material at the sensor

and like carstenw says, this makes M8 sharper

 

or more coherently, prime here is that the real difference is the sensor

virtually any camera could use leica glass, albeit without AF if so equiped etc

therefore, as it works out, having a IR filter on the front of the lens, in leu of stronger filtering at the sensor, seems to work out better (if you want sharper) for the mostpart

 

Riley

[Riley]

kinda makes you wonder about existing cameras, as to what IR filtering they have

and if this is something that one could use to gain some sharpness

 

Riley

[waterlenz]

kinda makes you wonder about existing cameras, as to what IR filtering they have

and if this is something that one could use to gain some sharpness

 

Riley

 

A thicker rear IR filter is allowable in an SLR because of the longer back focal length. Maybe a thinner IR filter is preferable with a 24x36mm sensor relative to that with an APSC sensor? The AA filter, if present in a dSLR, is well known as a sharpness reducer.

Tom

[ustein]

>Sharpness is an overrated concept: in a photograph tonality and composition are usually a lot more important for aesthetic impact, particularly in B&W.

 

True. On the other side getting a sharp image more blurred is not that complicated but getting a blurred image sharp is impossible.

 

To get me right I very much relate to your quote. Here is my usual story:

 

In a top carmel photo gallery I saw an exhibition of many colored Cibachrome prints by a highly regarded photographer. None of these prints was critical sharp (rated by photographers). But all of them were just beautiful and I would be proud of all of them. These prints told their stories in great colors and good compositions.

 

If a viewer tells me that our prints are sharp this does not please me at all. It just tells me that my print may lack a story for this viewer.

 

 

Uwe

[Riley]

Tom i dont know if i have this right but...

isnt that the mount register ?

in which case here are some registers for comparison

 

Canon EOS 44mm

Nikon 46.5mm

K Mount 45.46mm

Konika RF Hexar 27.95mm

Leica M lenses 27.95mm

Leica R lenses 47.0mm

Leica Screw 28.8mm

M42 45.46mm

Olympus E1 38.67mm (therefore four thirds)

 

Riley