Jump to content

March LFI debunks CCD vs CMOS theory

FrancoisG

By FrancoisG
in Leica M9 / M-E

Recommended Posts

wilfredo

wilfredo

Posted
Posted

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Compare these two threads

 

M8 http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/other/112892-m8-photographs-post-them-here.html

 

M http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/other/274176-leica-m-shots-post-them-here.html

 

I see an obvious difference and the M8 wins hands down! Sorry!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 110
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Knorp

Knorp

Posted
Posted
It remains my sole M. It truly delivers the best flesh tones I've seen of any digital camera . It is void of what I call the "Teflon Effect" on flesh tones.

 

Yep, I have to agree with you, Wilfredo.

That "teflon effect" is one of the reasons I feel very reluctant to order the new M (typ 240).

Its lure is definitely in all the bells & whistles and I'd love to mount my R-glass.

But regarding IQ .... mmm, I'm not overly enthousiastic - to put it mildly.

I think I'll hang on to my CCD-cams for a little longer ...

 

Kind regards.

Link to post
Share on other sites
rirakuma

rirakuma

Posted
Posted

I agree the colors from M8 & M9 is much more pleasing than the new M. Do you guys believe that this is a firmware related issue? I have the M on order but if they can't get the colors right I can see myself switching to an M9 in the future. If only they offer an upgrade for the M9 to have the same build quality as the M240 I'd happily get that now. That's what an M9P should have been..

Link to post
Share on other sites
jaapv

jaapv

Posted
Posted

That has more to do with the raw developers still floundering. We had exactly the same in the first months of the M9. It was near-impossible to tame the reds and the greens were weird in the beginning.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Lee Martin

Lee Martin

Posted
Posted

I'm not sure I can follow this thread to the technical level that may be required to make a genuinely informed decision, but I'm sure that in the great majority of cases, the actual quality of the photograph will always outweigh the very small differences that may arise between the two sensors. I have to assume, in fact i am certain that both the sensors in the M9 and the M240 are obviously bigger in size and of a far better quality than the Leica X1. Well if you look in the architecture section under a recent submisission outlining somebody's first pictures taken with an X1, with some clever post processing you can see just what is possible. Amazing pictures, and who cares what it was taken with, as unless you have these additional skills to compliment the photographers skill initially it really makes no difference what it's taken with. This is proven by people taking brilliant photographs on this forum, using cameras decades old. Under laboratory conditions there will be a measurable difference, but it's all about what you actually hang on the wall, not the information in the metadata box.

Link to post
Share on other sites
plasticman

plasticman

Posted
Posted

 

I've been coming round to the new M recently - but this stopped me in my tracks. Bit sad to have sold my M8 when I look at these side-by-side. :(

Link to post
Share on other sites
FPB

FPB

Posted
Posted

 

I have to agree too. And it is not he only hint in that direction.

Cancelled my order for the M in the meantime, bought a second M9-P.

 

Bill

Link to post
Share on other sites
Dirk Mandeville

Dirk Mandeville

Posted
Posted

 

Sorry, but this is a false comparison. The M8 was released in 2007 and the first pictures in this thread are from 2010. Lots of time for them to tweak the firmware and for people to take their best pictures and gather them for the thread. The M thread, on the other hand, has pictures that were taken with the very first camera's off the production line, with very early firmware versions, before there was even a profile for it in Lightroom, and these pictures are mostly test shots. Certainly not representative of the best shots people could take after some experience with the camera. So, comparing these threads is like comparing apples and oranges. Come back in a year or two and compare them, and then you will get a better idea of how the M actually compares to the earlier cameras.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Dirk Mandeville

Dirk Mandeville

Posted
Posted
Good idea. I'll wait until 2016 and look again for the M then, and be happy with my M9s in the meantime.

 

Bill

 

If you are not already on the waiting list, then it very well may be 2016 before you have the opportunity to get one. :D

 

Seriously, though, I have decided the same. I am happy with the M9, and for the cost of the investment, I would rather put any additional monies at this time into lenses. I will wait for the M to be a little further developed before I upgrade. I must say that canceling that pre-order was one of the hardest things I have done in a while, though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
rirakuma

rirakuma

Posted
Posted
That has more to do with the raw developers still floundering. We had exactly the same in the first months of the M9. It was near-impossible to tame the reds and the greens were weird in the beginning.

 

Thanks for this info, I wasn't around during the release of the M9.

Link to post
Share on other sites
MirekE

MirekE

Posted
Posted

 

On the first look, I thought yeah, the M8 pictures are better.

 

But if I read it correctly, the M8 was released Jan 2008 and the thread was created in Jan 2010, so we are looking at pictures from people, who already learned how to shoot and post process M8. They are showing off their best pictures from the camera, not what they shot on their way from the store. In the M thread though, people are showing their more or less very first shots. In addition, some of the M shooters are clearly enjoying and showing what the camera can do in conditions where the previous models would fail, rather than what the camera is capable of in ideal light. Going back and forth between the threads, I can see pictures in the M8 thread that the M would do better. And I have high hopes that the profiles will improve over the time and we will find our way through the sliders of LR to make the M pictures more appealing.

 

In other words, if you open the threads two years from now, your verdict might be different.

 

Edit: Looks like Dirk beat me to it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
pico

pico

Posted
Posted
I agree the colors from M8 & M9 is much more pleasing than the new M. Do you guys believe that this is a firmware related issue? [...]

 

The 'Teflon' look of the Typ 240 could be due to overcompensation for noise for all ISOs which makes it excessive at native ISO and a bit higher.

Link to post
Share on other sites
jaapv

jaapv

Posted
Posted
On the first look, I thought yeah, the M8 pictures are better.

 

But if I read it correctly, the M8 was released Jan 2008 and the thread was created in Jan 2010, so we are looking at pictures from people, who already learned how to shoot and post process M8. They are showing off their best pictures from the camera, not what they shot on their way from the store. In the M thread though, people are showing their more or less very first shots. In addition, some of the M shooters are clearly enjoying and showing what the camera can do in conditions where the previous models would fail, rather than what the camera is capable of in ideal light. Going back and forth between the threads, I can see pictures in the M8 thread that the M would do better. And I have high hopes that the profiles will improve over the time and we will find our way through the sliders of LR to make the M pictures more appealing.

 

In other words, if you open the threads two years from now, your verdict might be different.

 

Edit: Looks like Dirk beat me to it.

 

About the M9 20-09-2009, and there are many more...

 

In tungsten, Jono, right now on uncompressed RAWs, I needed to move the RED slider in LR / ACR by 50 points (really) to get skin remotely right: something is seriously messed there. This completely shifted every other red in the shot.

 

As I said previously, I'm sure Adobe will address this soon.

 

And you're right, it may be related to what program we're all good at (I don't have a Mac, so I've never tried Aperture or Raw Developer), but the prints I've seen from people with Aperture haven't been very convincing. I'm just calling them as I see them, since I'm pretty proficient in C1 and PS (ACR), though I have to give credit to Zlatko B. for the secret red shift to make the M9 look reasonably in ACR.

 

Of course, the processor is secondary compared to the photo content :) Your files are always worth looking at!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...