Movie Mode and the M10

[Per P.]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I can't believe you sucked me into replying to this one... I thought Thanksgiving was a time for family, food and football. Did you get bored with all the "what lens should I choose" threads since you lob such a cheeky hand grenade into the forum

 

Anyway, I don't mind Leica going into the video business but it wouldn't be for me and if they build it into an M10 then that would probably ensure I stay with the M9. The main reason I like the M is the simplicity. Even if the entire system is a bunch of workarounds to compensate for the inherent design flaws I still find it simpler and more intuitive to use than a modern SLR.

 

Moreover, every time I am handling and S2 it makes me envious because there you have the simplicity without the workarounds. It's just a little too big and a lot too expensive for me so I hope they are working on those aspects rather than on the video mode.

 

Bottom line if I want video I would rather look somewhere else and not obsess with being able to use M lenses. I mean, who would be pixel peeping a video for heavens sake?

[Advertisement]

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

[mmradman]

Video or not M9 and upgraded M10 is not going to help deliver six fold sales growth Leica is aspiring to if Leica does not address market trends.

 

In the future average Leica buyer will be swayed more by the video capabilities than by presence of Oscar's holy spirit.

 

Opinion of few diehards, sorry to say, is irrelevant.

 

Personally video does not interest me.

[Anasebi]

Even if the M10 does have video, it would be a far cry from the SLR full frames due to a lack of IBIS (in body image stabilization). There is no way to shove that on a full frame sensor into something as small as an M camera, also I highly doubt Leica will release M glass with optical image stabilization. Then theres the issue that video quality itself. It is highly dependent on the experience of the manufacturer too. All combined we have a recipe that just ends up with a why bother scenario. It will likely have video due to market concerns as others have said, I just highly doubt it will be good.

 

There are so many options for decent small form HD video these days at cheap prices. Even without IBIS, a Nex C3 is pocket change for the video it outputs. Either way nothing semi pro matches the 5DII, nothing significantly smaller will rival it soon either.

[Rick]

Per, I thought you left us forever. Good to see you here. I remember our conversation in Italy where I got the impression that you were in the keep it simple camp. That is definitely something I like too and that resonates with me. But, I also like the design concept of hiding complicated and advanced technology behind simplicity. I think both can be had.

 

And, it isn't pixel peeping that makes the Leica glass so appealing to me. It is shooting in low light at f1.4 with a beautiful and colorful lighted background that just melts OOF light sources into the ambience of the scene that interests me. Anyone with the 5DII knows what I'm trying to describe. Can you imagine that with say, I don't know, maybe the 50mm Summilux FLE.

 

As an aside, I've made you infamous in the People Forum. I posted a picture of us when you met Linda and me in Tremezzo, on Lake Como, for lunch. I tried to warn you in an email a I sent you a month ago. http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/people/211176-lake-como-special-guest.html

 

And, "cheeky hand grenade?" I like that.

 

Keep in touch,

 

Rick

[Rick]

Unless there's an EVF you'd have to use the rear screen to frame. That means for most people - those that don't use a tripod or similar - the video would look like crap due to camera shake.

 

Put me down as one of the people not interested.

 

By the way, on my 5DII I had to lock the mirror up to get live view on the rear screen and that of course is the only way you can shoot video on that camera. So, it wouldn't be any different on the M10. And, really, I don't think it would look like crap at all - actually the contrary. So, I'll move you back over to the tentatively-open-minded-maybe column.

 

Anasebi, I never used IS on the 5DII and it looked great. I'm not sure if any cinema quality cameras even have that.

 

And, while I'm thinking of it, everything in movies is usually shot with primes. There is not much "zooming" going on in most movies.

[Sp12]

Seems kind of silly to require a pro body just to autoexposure bracket more than three frames in a row. All it would take is a simple firmware update. Yet firmware update after firmware update comes and goes bringing new goodies for the videographers, with little or no improvement in the camera's still picture functionality.

Much as Leica faces pressure against raising the M9's MP count to avoid eating into S2 sales (though the relative mediocrity of M lenses helps alleviate that to some extent), Canon faces similar issues with features in its lower level cameras. The 50D has no movie mode. The 60D has no microadjust. The 1D series are the only ones with good bracketing, F/8 AF, and voice annotations. These are all (though F/8 AF is some hardware) firmware features left out to protect higher end bodies. Video is made homogenous throughout the Canon line.

 

Leica dropped the R10 because it didn't want to directly compete with Nikon and Canon.

Leica dropped the R10 because it would have cost at least as much as a digital M to develop but had 1/10th the market interest at the featureset they could offer at that development cost. I'll see if I can find the Photokina interview for you.

 

Unless there's an EVF you'd have to use the rear screen to frame. That means for most people - those that don't use a tripod or similar - the video would look like crap due to camera shake.

 

Why couldn't you keep it to your eye and use the RF. Assuming it's calibrated well with the sensor you should be able to focus and compose just as well. That said, I know a ton of people who shoot very stable footage handheld with LCDs and no IBIS. Heck, an M10 could even be made with IBIS if Leica chooses the right digital partner.

 

Leica would be making the same mistake as Canon did with the 5D2 vs 1Ds3 if they raise the M to 36+MP because it would basically have the same resolution as the S2 and cannibalize it's sales.

Agreed 100%. The S2 is proof that Leica has the people and philosophy to design a nearly perfect digital camera. I hope they prove they can make a powerful, functional, and modern M10 as well.

 

10fps why? Is anyone seriously going to do sports or wildlife which would require those frame rates?

That is a good point. The M9 barely has the processing power to produce a decent JPG because of size constraints. What leads you to think that the hypothetical M10 electronics will have the capability to handle video data volumes?

 

 

It's not just the 10FPS, it's that Sony is able to put all these features into a smaller, much less expensive, and higher IQ body. Leica made a poor choice of Jenoptik for the M9's electronics, when they really need a partnership with someone like Fuji or Sony for a more size and power efficient processor to expand the M10's capabilities.

 

You are correct. The M9 has several glaring deficiencies given its price, none the least of which is the cheap LCD screen on the back of it. If they are going to do a digital rangefinder, at that price, then they should do it right. I expect the M10 to be a much better camera than the M9, just as the M9 is much better than the M8.

 

Exactly. As I said before -- if Sony can put all of the features of the NEX-7 into a body 1/7th the price and ~1/3rd smaller I expect Leica to be able to do at least that much for 7K.

[pico]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have from my former employer Canon XL-* digital cameras to make movies - a professional digital video. Next door to my office was our professional video person who uses superior technology. I studied motion picture making. He is 30 years younger and we both agree that the miniature camera attempts to video are just pathetic, but adequate to the average enthusiast - but remember that the average is stupid and the next lower half of them are stupider yet. Don't go there. Aspire to learn cine work or.. well, you know where you are going and if you do not, then you will never know.

 

Leica's cache is excellence. I've no idea why they would wish to enter the paradigm of crappy output from an "M". It is to lead to godawful amateur crap. That is not Leica. Ever.

 

.

[stunsworth]

By the way, on my 5DII I had to lock the mirror up to get live view on the rear screen and that of course is the only way you can shoot video on that camera. So, it wouldn't be any different on the M10. And, really, I don't think it would look like crap at all - actually the contrary. So, I'll move you back over to the tentatively-open-minded-maybe column.

 

Please don't try to speak for me, I have years of experience at doing it for myself.

 

If you like video with camera shake then I agree that there's nothing wrong with using the rear screen - see YouTube for lots of evidence of technically poor video shot that way. Personally - and it is a personal thing - outside of 'edgy' content I prefer video to look stable,

[stunsworth]

... adequate to the average enthusiast...

 

I think that's a major issue. Still photography is hard enough, doing video well is far more difficult IMHO. That's one of the reasons that I have no interest in video. I lack that ability. Looking at video sharing sites I realise I'm not alone in lacking that particular talent.

[jaapv]

Much as Leica faces pressure against raising the M9's MP count to avoid eating into S2 sales (though the relative mediocrity of M lenses helps alleviate that to some extent), Canon faces similar issues with features in its lower level cameras. The 50D has no movie mode. The 60D has no microadjust. The 1D series are the only ones with good bracketing, F/8 AF, and voice annotations. These are all (though F/8 AF is some hardware) firmware features left out to protect higher end bodies. Video is made homogenous throughout the Canon line.

interesting- but wholly irrelevant. Canon does not build rangefinder cameras, and that is the subject here

 

Leica dropped the R10 because it would have cost at least as much as a digital M to develop but had 1/10th the market interest at the featureset they could offer at that development cost. I'll see if I can find the Photokina interview for you.

 

That would be quite a feat, seeing that the announcement that the R line was dropped was made at a dinner, by Mr. Daniel, with about 100 LUF members present. The reason he gave was that Leica was unable to compete with the Japanese industry in the DSLR field. You can find the reports of that time in the forum. Uuse the search function with the keyword "hessenpark"

 

Why couldn't you keep it to your eye and use the RF. Assuming it's calibrated well with the sensor you should be able to focus and compose just as well. That said, I know a ton of people who shoot very stable footage handheld with LCDs and no IBIS. Heck, an M10 could even be made with IBIS if Leica chooses the right digital partner.

Does not sound like a very high grade way of doing videos to me. Certainly not on a high grade camera.

Agreed 100%. The S2 is proof that Leica has the people and philosophy to design a nearly perfect digital camera. I hope they prove they can make a powerful, functional, and modern M10 as well.

That sentiment I can share, but you left out an essential part:"that continues the Leica M tradition and philosophy" Which rules out an overpriced NEX clone.

 

 

It's not just the 10FPS, it's that Sony is able to put all these features into a smaller, much less expensive, and higher IQ body. Leica made a poor choice of Jenoptik for the M9's electronics, when they really need a partnership with someone like Fuji or Sony for a more size and power efficient processor to expand the M10's capabilities.[

I'll happily leave these opinions to you. Fortunately they are not borne out by reality. The processor for the M10 is made by Fujitsu to Leica specs. As for Jenoptik, they are market leader in high-end applications and military electronics.

 

 

Exactly. As I said before -- if Sony can put all of the features of the NEX-7 into a body 1/7th the price and ~1/3rd smaller I expect Leica to be able to do at least that much for 7K.

I may well buy a NEX but not because I think Leica should build one. Just as a practical point and shoot that can take my lenses in an emergency. Even the 2005 DMR blows it out of the water in image quality....

[Sp12]

Please don't try to speak for me, I have years of experience at doing it for myself.

 

If you like video with camera shake then I agree that there's nothing wrong with using the rear screen - see YouTube for lots of evidence of technically poor video shot that way. Personally - and it is a personal thing - outside of 'edgy' content I prefer video to look stable,

 

This is one of the most baffling justifications against movie mode I've seen yet. Look at the amount of quality footage produced from a 5DII. Why would we have to use an M9 handheld all (or even part) of the time. Look at Denoir's slider setup he used for Ulrik castle.

 

interesting- but wholly irrelevant. Canon does not build rangefinder cameras, and that is the subject here That would be quite a feat, seeing that the announcement that the R line was dropped was made at a dinner, by Mr. Daniel, with about 100 LUF members present. The reason he gave was that Leica was unable to compete with the Japanese industry in the DSLR field. You can find the reports of that time in the forum. Uuse the search function with the keyword "hessenpark"

Interview with the blond chick about 2/3rds down the page: leica.overgaard.dk - Thorsten Overgaard's Leica Pages - The Leica History - Page 1

 

Does not sound like a very high grade way of doing videos to me. Certainly not on a high grade camera.

So why not use a slider or steadycam if it's important to you. I've certainly seen a ton of high quality footage produced for Rebels handheld.

 

I'll happily leave these opinions to you. Fortunately they are not borne out by reality. The processor for the M10 is made by Fujitsu to Leica specs. As for Jenoptik, they are market leader in high-end applications and military electronics.

Has the M10 processor been outed? I know Jenoptik has been cited as one of the limiting factors in the M9's FPS due to narrow bus width, so I assume they're responsible for at least some of the M9's electronics that are limiting.

 

I may well buy a NEX but not because I think Leica should build one. Just as a practical point and shoot that can take my lenses in an emergency. Even the 2005 DMR blows it out of the water in image quality....

? I'm not sure of that last statement. The A77, which has a pellicle mirror making it 1/3rd stop worse than the NEX-7 will be, has better color response, DR, resolution, FPS, and noise per unit area than the M9 (and the NEX-7 without the mirror has lower noise anyway despite being a 1.5x crop). The DMR is built on 4 year older tech and has half the sensor area of the M9, so I have very serious doubts about the DMR competing on any level with the NEX-7.

[denoir]

Leica's cache is excellence. I've no idea why they would wish to enter the paradigm of crappy output from an "M". It is to lead to godawful amateur crap. That is not Leica. Ever.

.

 

Are you kidding me? Have you not seen the humongous amount of crap that Leica M users output each day? Just take a look at the M9 shots on flickr. It makes you embarrassed to be a member of the same species, much less to use the same camera system. Rubbish is the norm and 99% of the stuff taken with Leica is godawful amateur crap - and the same goes for every other camera systems. Good photographers are rare and they'll make decent shots with just about any camera system. Arm them with a great camera system and it will improve the results but you have to have a decent photographer to start with.

 

With a movie mode people will produce the same godawful amateur crap they do with traditional photography. There will be no net loss or gain.

 

 

I have from my former employer Canon XL-* digital cameras to make movies - a professional digital video. Next door to my office was our professional video person who uses superior technology. I studied motion picture making. He is 30 years younger and we both agree that the miniature camera attempts to video are just pathetic, but adequate to the average enthusiast - but remember that the average is stupid and the next lower half of them are stupider yet. Don't go there. Aspire to learn cine work or.. well, you know where you are going and if you do not, then you will never know.

 

Many industry professionals would disagree with you. DSLRs are now being used in high end productions. Did you know for instance that most of the latest season of House MD (one of the most popular US prime time shows) was entirely shot using Canon 5DII's? With a full frame digital film camera and high quality glass you can get a certain look that you can't with traditional Super 35.

 

And yes of course you'll need follow focus, dollies, cranes, sliders etc - all the support equipment to make it look professional. And of course very few people go the full length. That is however not the fault of the camera system - give an F35 to an amateur and you'll get crap results as well.

[danedit28]

As someone who actually works in video post production, I can tell you with absolute confidence that there is no way to remove micro shakes of the camera when hand holding something of such little mass. Rick, I'm on board with most everything you're saying and I find your posts amusing and informative but for what it's worth, you're 100% wrong on this one.

 

I don't believe that using the rear screen would cause undo camera shake. Practice a little and I think you would do fine. I'll put you down as a maybe with some practice.

[denoir]

? I'm not sure of that last statement. The A77, which has a pellicle mirror making it 1/3rd stop worse than the NEX-7 will be, has better color response, DR, resolution, FPS, and noise per unit area than the M9 (and the NEX-7 without the mirror has lower noise anyway despite being a 1.5x crop). The DMR is built on 4 year older tech and has half the sensor area of the M9, so I have very serious doubts about the DMR competing on any level with the NEX-7.

 

You are right about the FPS, but off about everything else. The A77 IQ is really a joke compared to the M9. Resolution is much lower, DR is very limited (especially the highlights), color response is embarrassing and on the noise front it's somewhat worse than the M9 (which is not particularly good to start with).

 

Yeah, I have both. Or rather, I had. I had the NEX-C3, 5N and A77 for a couple of weeks before I returned the A77 and the 5N. Of the lot the 5N is the best followed by the C3, but all were crap - the M9 is in a different league altogether. I ended up keeping the C3 as an M-mount backup as it was the smallest of the lot.

 

Perhaps the NEX-7 will be better, but after using the A77, I'm not holding my breath.

[danedit28]

If Sony can shove 24MP into a NEX-7, get it to have 10FPS and better DR/color than an M9 or D3x, have an optional near-optical quality EVF, movie mode and live view, and have near perfect ergonomics (for digital) for ~1100$ I don't see why Leica can't two-up that for 7K.

 

Too bad they can't fit in a viewfinder. I may be in the minority here but I will never want a LiveView mode. They are sluggish, pixelated, misrepresent contrast and colors, drain the battery, difficult to see outdoors and lack detail for fine focusing. I much prefer to view the subject I'm shooting with my eyes.

 

Thanks for reading.

-dan

[kdriceman]

This isn't a size constraint issue; its a matter of poor choice in processor. They could easily have plenty of processing power in a tight space if they had made better design choices.

 

Jeff

 

I believe that is Jaap's point. They don't have a good track record for making good design choices in the electronic design process. Leica's strength is optics not electronics and that shows in the M8 and M9. They produce outstanding images, but it is not because of the electronics. This makes me skeptical of adding another layer of processing like video to an M10.

[Sp12]

You are right about the FPS, but off about everything else. The A77 IQ is really a joke compared to the M9. Resolution is much lower, DR is very limited (especially the highlights), color response is embarrassing and on the noise front it's somewhat worse than the M9 (which is not particularly good to start with).

 

I'll admit to not having used the M9 for at least 4 months, having used the A77 only for ~20 minutes in store, and not having touched the NEX-7. I'm also going off of previews and Dxomark (which has not proven to be the most amazing resource). DxOMark - Compare cameras side by side

 

I definitely contend the A77 has more DR than the M9. And better color. And IMO better total image sharpness. The M9 smacks it around for per-pixel sharpness of course having no AA filter. Sony's own NEX-7 head tech suggests that the 24MP sensor in the NEX-7 is matched or slightly better than the 16.2MP one they use in the 5N, which has been my experience with the A77 assuming +1/3rd stop.

! in the first ~30 minutes -- I don't remember the exact time when he discusses it.

 

Edit: He mentions a comparison between the two at ~1h27m

[Rick]

As someone who actually works in video post production, I can tell you with absolute confidence that there is no way to remove micro shakes of the camera when hand holding something of such little mass. Rick, I'm on board with most everything you're saying and I find your posts amusing and informative but for what it's worth, you're 100% wrong on this one.

 

Hi Dan, I agree with you if you are comparing hand held cameras of any make to what you are used to working with from professionall video. But, do you think it is fair to compare hand held video to what you guys are doing. And, remember you guys use tripods and steady cam supports. By the way, all of that same stuff can be done to the 5DII and it is being done by Lucas Film and the guys at House.

 

Also, sometimes a small camera is needed to go places a large camera can't go or where there isn't room for a lot of huge lights, stands and light boxes... like say the bedroom.

 

Just kidding... that would be gross.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[danedit28]

Many industry professionals would disagree with you. DSLRs are now being used in high end productions. Did you know for instance that most of the latest season of House MD (one of the most popular US prime time shows) was entirely shot using Canon 5DII's? With a full frame digital film camera and high quality glass you can get a certain look that you can't with traditional Super 35.

 

Sorry, I feel like I'm the video police in this thread so I just needed to correct a few things before this goes too far:

1. DSLRs are NOT being used in high end productions. They are being used in low budget productions or as an extra camera where the crew doesn't mind if they get destroyed in an action sequence. High end productions have real budgets and they use high end cameras like the Arri Alexa or the RED Epic or they shoot on film.

2. Most of House MD was NOT shot on a Canon 5D. It was documented in several articles that the 5D was used for a few cutaway street scenics throughout the season. Furthermore, they shot one complete episode of House with the 5D two seasons ago and the finishing editor of the show wrote how they saved a bunch of money by shooting with cheap cameras but then they ended up spending all that money in post production to fix all of the compression artifacts of the 5D.

3. If the "look" you're referring to is muddy blacks, blocky compression artifacts, and dirty motion smearing, then yes, super 35 cannot achieve those looks.

 

Thanks for reading

-dan

[Rick]

Sorry, I feel like I'm the video police in this thread so I just needed to correct a few things before this goes too far:

1. DSLRs are NOT being used in high end productions. They are being used in low budget productions or as an extra camera where the crew doesn't mind if they get destroyed in an action sequence. High end productions have real budgets and they use high end cameras like the Arri Alexa or the RED Epic or they shoot on film.

2. Most of House MD was NOT shot on a Canon 5D. It was documented in several articles that the 5D was used for a few cutaway street scenics throughout the season. Furthermore, they shot one complete episode of House with the 5D two seasons ago and the finishing editor of the show wrote how they saved a bunch of money by shooting with cheap cameras but then they ended up spending all that money in post production to fix all of the compression artifacts of the 5D.

3. If the "look" you're referring to is muddy blacks, blocky compression artifacts, and dirty motion smearing, then yes, super 35 cannot achieve those looks.

 

Thanks for reading

-dan

 

I actually believe all of this. I have a friend in LA that has his own video company and he has barely even heard of what I'm talking about when I try to talk about the 5DII with him. He just does not see them used at all.

 

Even though we are saying or it has been mentioned that these small cameras are being used in some professional applications, I don't think anybody is trying to believe that they are getting a $50-$150k pro video cam. I think you are setting up a little bit of a straw man to knock down here. But, I get your point.

 

I just want to play around with my lenses and really great video if, we get CMOS, which means we get live view, which means I hope Leica doesn't block the stream from being written to the card. That's all.