M9: Thom Hogan on Luminous landscape.

[Mike Rawcs]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Looks like Michael Reichmann isn't the only one wishing for more from a digital rangerfinder.

 

Thom Hogan considers what's next for Leica....

 

 

Luminous landscape

[jonoslack]

Well

I think a monochrome M9M would be a fine thing - a real special edition one could fall in love with . . . all the rest of it . . . put it in a different camera and leave the M as it is - It isn't broken.

 

The very fact that every pundit comes up with a different set of enhancements says it all for me.

 

I'd be really interested in lots of these design ideas, but

please please please

put it in a different camera - call it an N or whatever - just don't throw away what you already have by making it into something different.

[plausch]

I really do not understand why Leica should produce a digital version of the M9 for black and white photography. There is no digital camera fpr BW on the market and no one but some Leica nuts longues for one.

 

Can't you use a Leica for Film? And can't you produce - back at home - a monochrome picture with the help of Photoshop etc?

[jklotz]

Here we go again. Wait a sec, let me go get some popcorn....

[chmilar]

There is no digital camera fpr BW on the market

 

Digital camera for B&W, on the market: Phase One Achromatic Back

[cirke]

a mono M9 will be really great but without EVF it is a 100% never for me

[ashwinrao1]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Respectlyfull to Tom, that picture posted on LL for his article looks like a bad dodge and burn job. He's a good photographer and respected Nikon reviewer, but not sure sure they chose that pick.

 

Otherwise, I am in complete condordance with Jono in my sentiments. Put these changes in a non M body...not in an M mount RF...

[stunsworth]

Simple desaturation of a colour image gives pretty boring, dull and drab results, so there would need to be a colour sensor of some kind to provide a non-linear colour to black and white conversion. So what's the point in having a black and white only camera?

 

Maybe I'm missing something, or is it another case of someone seeing an overly simple solution to a more complex problem and not thinking it through?

[jonoslack]

Simple desaturation of a colour image gives pretty boring, dull and drab results, so there would need to be a colour sensor of some kind to provide a non-linear colour to black and white conversion. So what's the point in having a black and white only camera?

 

Maybe I'm missing something, or is it another case of someone seeing an overly simple solution to a more complex problem and not thinking it through?

 

Hi There

The point of a monochrome sensor (as I understand it, and I understand little) is that you don't need to have a bayer filter, and therefore you don't need to demosaic.

 

It won't be desaturated - because, without the bayer filter the sensor is simply collecting light values.

 

This means that instead of averaging out values over 4 pixels (RBGB) to get the value for each pixel - you simply get the value for that pixel. Resulting in a lot more effective resolution for the same number of pixels, and your Raw file is not messed with by demosaicing. The Kodak 760M was much loved at the time.

 

So, as Thom Hogan says - you get something more like the resolution of 24 (or 30) mp in comparison with bayer sensors.

[stunsworth]

Jono, I understand what you are saying about the resolution, but the point I was making about the light values is that they would be a simple map of the light intensity for each pixel.

 

If you desaturate a colour image, you are removing the colour information and are left with a pixel that varies from black to white according to the intensity of the light falling on it. Desaturating an image does not give very pleasing black and white results.

[markowich]

thom's main message is that the kodak sensor in the M9 is scarse. inelastic files, midtone noise levels too high, 640iso scaringly bad (before you disagree please compare to the D3s), edge issues etc. his plea for a monochrome version originates from the issues with (RGB) M9 files. again, it shows that leica is still an optics company, with an unfortunate choice of 'digital' consultants.

peter

[horosu]

The focusing help via the EVF in the viewfinder makes perfectly sense to me.

[markgay]

Great comments by Thom. Some of the sharpest, most original ideas and taking the debate about a future M way, way beyond the scope of the usual humdrum ripostes.

 

Between them, Thom Hogan and Michael Reichmann have quantified the few key limitations of the current digital M that matter, and thus open the way to the specific improvements that would add value.

 

Now, I'd like to hear the thoughts of Roger Hicks and I'd be happy.

 

Regards,

Mark

[jonoslack]

thom's main message is that the kodak sensor in the M9 is scarse. inelastic files, midtone noise levels too high, 640iso scaringly bad (before you disagree please compare to the D3s), edge issues etc. his plea for a monochrome version originates from the issues with (RGB) M9 files. again, it shows that leica is still an optics company, with an unfortunate choice of 'digital' consultants.

peter

 

HI Peter

It's a funny old world - when you apply technical criteria to an artistic endeavour you do at least have the consolation that most other people are only interested in the demonstrable and will follow you (hence Canon's great Success, and also that of dpreview).

 

I persevered with Nikon right up to the D3, and I always knew that (for natural light) the colours were horrible - brutal and unsubtle. I quite accept that the Kodak sensors have poor high ISO, and lots of noise, but since the Olympus E1, the colour has been 'just so' and I still think that's the case with the M9. I'm not talking about accuracy, but about 'satisfactoriness'.

 

I quite understand that you are a mathematician, and that you're concerned with absolutes and not nuances - still, I actually think that Thom Hogan wanted a monochrome sensor on the M9 because of the lack of a Bayer filter and the resultant lack of the demosaic and consequential increase in resolution - not because he was necessarily irritated with the poor high ISO noise on the M9.

 

And reading his article again, I think you've put a lot of emotive content into it which wasn't there in the original (scaringly bad, midtone noise etc.). Which is surprising, you being such an empirical kind of a guy.

[jaapv]

The economics of the thing? Leica stopped developing the R because the curves of projected sales and expected price crossed. How much would such a camera cost? A special run of sensors, low volume. Say (not my estimate but by an RFF poster who appears to be in the sensor business): 4000 $. The camera in a special run? 6000 $. 10.000 $ for a very limited number of B&W only & Leica fans. Economic pie in the sky, I fear, gentlemen. And I am not even talking about the dedicated R&D and software development.

[jonoslack]

The economics of the thing? Leica stopped developing the R because the curves of projected sales and expected price crossed. How much would such a camera cost? A special run of sensors, low volume. Say (not my estimate but by an RFF poster who appears to be in the sensor business): 4000 $. The camera in a special run? 6000 $. 10.000 $ for a very limited number of B&W only & Leica fans. Economic pie in the sky, I fear, gentlemen. And I am not even talking about the dedicated R&D and software development.

 

Hi Jaap

Of course you're right - I did talk about this when I visited Solms, and it was clear that a B&W M was completely out of the question financially.

Sad though

[AlanJW]

Thom Hogan is thoughtful and very knowledgeable on B&W, which he clearly has a passion for. I have learned a lot over the years from his writings about B&W conversions. His personal plea for a B&W Digital M is eloquent, but I wonder how many others Thom speaks for. Certainly not for me.

 

He also suggests that Leica must do as he requests in order to save the company from oblivion. (There have been many such posts offering Leica the "answer" to its problems) In essence what Thom proposes is that Leica focus on an even smaller niche than the niche it now addresses with the M9. Unless there is some huge demand for B&W M's I don't quite understand how this would "save" the company. The only way this would make sense not to abandon color but just provide an option for B&W only for those that want it. Sort of a Leica a la carte for B&W only.

 

Since M9's (and M8s) are very capable of producing first-rate black and white images right now, the question to me is whether Thom's black and white M would produce images so startlingly better than an M9 that a sufficient number of people would go out an plunk down thousands of dollars for one to cover the additional costs. I suspect there are not many -- and that the resale value of such a camera would be limited by the smaller base as well. I know that I would not be interested as while I do like to produce black and whites I also like to play with the juxtapositions and tonalities of different colors and I would not ever want to limit myself to B&W.

[Jeff S]

Simple desaturation of a colour image gives pretty boring, dull and drab results, so there would need to be a colour sensor of some kind to provide a non-linear colour to black and white conversion. So what's the point in having a black and white only camera?

 

Maybe I'm missing something, or is it another case of someone seeing an overly simple solution to a more complex problem and not thinking it through?

 

This is essentially what the rep at my Leica dealer told me when I once asked about the possibility of a monochromatic M. He looked at me as if I were nuts, and explained the situation as you did.

 

I have no engineering background, so I'll leave it to others more technically inclined to agree or disagree. I didn't search old threads, but I seem to recall there has already been robust discussion on this topic.

 

Thom mentions in his article that he wants a light b&w alternative to a "landscape" camera. It seems to me that, if a monochromatic digital camera makes sense to begin with, then a monochromatic R makes more sense than a monochromatic M, given the ability to use tilt-shift lenses. Or, maybe he's suggesting this would be possible on an M with his suggested EVF enhanced view.

 

Again, I'm not the engineer here. And, I'm also not one to say what's best for others. I am, however, curious if his ideas have technical merit. Maybe I'll do that search.

 

Jeff

[Gentleman Villain]

All opinions in photography have some kind of validity (at least cultural) no matter how sometimes seemingly ridiculous. But these types of "wonky" (to quote Jaapv) opinions should not be coming from the people writing instruction manuals and operating some of the largest photo resource sites on the net. This is straight up high school photography class nerd talk. Man, this is just low. This is Ken Rockwell stuff. Do ya'll really take these people seriously anymore?

 

OT - Why are "landscape" photographers talking about gear at all? The only thing a landscape photographer needs is an 8x10 camera, tripod and some film and spot meter!!! Haven't they figured this out yet? This is not rocket science. HOw many camera systems does a person really need to go through before he figures out how to take a picture of a sunset from the side of the road of a scenic loop in a national park? It's not that damn difficult..rant over lol

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[gravastar]

For a monochrome rendering of a scene you need either:

 

A sensor that has 3 separate channels and included RGB filters as in existing Bayer systems. The 3 channels allow you to apply any post production filtration without having filters on the lens. This is the lowest resolution option and what we have at present in the M8 and M9.

 

or

 

A single channel sensor with an overall panchromatic response (achieved by a corrective sensor cover glass filter). This gives the highest resolution but requires external lens mounted filters to manipulate the tonal response similar to that achieved when using film and filters

 

or

 

A single channel sensor with no panchromatic correction filter. This would give visible and strong infrared components to the image. High resolution, but may need additional infra red cut filtration as well as conventional filters as used in monochrome film photography. This also allows near infra red photography with a visible cut/ IR pass filter.

 

There is also the question do you increase photosite area to reduce noise at the expense of the (increased) resolution of the monochrome sensor in the last two options.

 

Bob.