IkarusJohn Posted February 4, 2015 Author Share #681 Posted February 4, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) I can't imagine what I would do with 50MP files. The 24MP files from my M60 and 18MP files from the Monochrom are more than adequate without worrying about shutter speeds, handholding, tripods and shutter slap (A7r). Pain in the ass, from my experience (D800E and A7r). Though I do think that Nikon and Canon will chase each other down this rabbit hole ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 4, 2015 Posted February 4, 2015 Hi IkarusJohn, Take a look here What do you want in the next digital M?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
CheshireCat Posted February 4, 2015 Share #682 Posted February 4, 2015 Because it is this side of the cbiokogical barrier, you can see a difference. A monochrome CMOS may well be the ultimate decelopment You will be able to see a difference also with 50 MP, especially on color to B&W conversions, on large prints, and crops. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted February 4, 2015 Share #683 Posted February 4, 2015 I would much prefer a faster body than a better place in the megapixel race. Leica Ms have never been made for billboard shooters. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
menos I M6 Posted February 5, 2015 Share #684 Posted February 5, 2015 This whole MP nonsense is just that - nonsense. Of course more is always better and I am at the forefront of loving pushing technology (although I love my cameras like my coffee - classic and simple). Right now though I don't see any need for a Leica M to provide more resolution than it does at 18 - 24MP. These resolutions work fantastically with current computers, storage, prints and resolve so much detail for the application of these cameras. If one really has the need of cramming 50MP and more in a M body, maybe the Leica M is not the right camera and one should shoot 4x5 or MF digital instead ? I see the further development in other aspects digital A LOT MORE IMPORTANT. - wider dynamic range (this should at all times be the highest priority for sensor developers) - more bit depth - higher clean ISO - less filtration, so lower resolution sensors do show higher acuity (Leica MM vs M9) In regards of the M format, I have always been promoting a "back to the roots", "simple is better" design and loathe the largeness and complications of the latest generation of M cameras (did not buy a M10 and don't plan to for that very matter). We need the M smaller again (MP size is perfect). The M60 showed a bold design step, I always wanted - refine this and bring it into mass production please. I know by now it is unrealistic to think of but I would not mind a digital M where I would have to wind on the shutter - this aspect when shooting with my film bodies just feels right. Swapping between digital and film bodies always makes me hesitate when using the digital again. Put some effort into the viewfinder. We NEED different magnifications without futzing with those terrible screw in magnifiers. I would love to have .58 and .85 (or even a true 1:1) finder back! Maybe a missing LCD display allows some space for larger viewfinder optics to package and allow for this freedom of finder options? I always found the 1:1 finder magnification in the EPSON R-D1 fantastic (obviously the camera was larger and had a smaller sensor probably allowing for a more generous space for the finder). If the journey of the next M continuous into the bigger, more gadgets, more buttons, more menu functions realm as the M10 did, I am surely not buying another new digital M. The Leica M should not emulate Japanese gadgetry. Leica has proven themselves absolutely incapable of going the speed and quality of implementation of such, so why try and emulate something they really are not? Have these aspects of camera design settle in Leica/Japanese P&S cameras, the Leica compact camera systems and keep the Leica M pure and true to it's genes. This counts as well for lens offerings - every single generation of newer lenses is getting larger and heavier. Only very, very few new lens offerings are true to the original Leica sense. Why do we not have ANY Leica 50mm as tiny and lightweight as the original Leitz 5cm f3.5 Elmar? Why no tiny, fast lenses as the 35 Summilux pre ASPH? It seems that the angst of delivering an optically less perfect product prevails and prevents Leica from catering such specialized optics. Please have a good look at some lenses Miyazaki San has created - sure these are wild exotics but there is a true pleasure of using small lenses on a Leica M. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rirakuma Posted February 5, 2015 Share #685 Posted February 5, 2015 I would much prefer a faster body than a better place in the megapixel race. Leica Ms have never been made for billboard shooters. I agree with this. I use to shoot a D800 and I much more enjoyed the faster response from a 24mp file. I know this can be fixed with a better computer but I really don't think most shooters will need 50mp. I'm not even complaining about the 10mp files from M8. I understand there's needs for a high megapixel camera but once the average shooters/hobbyist get over pixel peeping it really is just moot. A few things I'd like from the new M is a thinner body, if you can get it as thin as the M6 I can imagine lots of Leica enthusiast lusting to upgrade regardless of whether they're using an M/M9/MM. No IR filter, I know this is far fetched but I really enjoy the black and white files from the M8, if you want clean colour slap on a filter. I don't think this will happen though because they would want to keep their monochrom range distinguishable. Bit depth/ISO/DR are also always welcomed. Lower base ISO and faster shutter speeds is also lustworthy. Leica make our wishes come true and take our money ! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted February 5, 2015 Share #686 Posted February 5, 2015 You will be able to see a difference also with 50 MP, especially on color to B&W conversions, on large prints, and crops. On an A3 print? I doubt it. On an A1 print at normal viewing distance? Equally so. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted February 5, 2015 Share #687 Posted February 5, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) ^^^ The "perceptual MP" (P-MP) is an interesting concept, but I am not really a fan of this kind of "trivializations". Just a few points, so we can take this "P-MP" thing with a big grain of salt: - What is the aperture at which it is computed ? - Which sensor(s) or optical benches are used ? - How can different lenses be compared ? - What if my sensor is monochromatic vs RGBG ? Which kind of demosaic algorithm is used, and which test patterns ? - What about center vs corner resolution ? Shouldn't this be a graph like the MTF ? - How comes the Zeiss APO Sonnar 135/2 is "stuck" at 36 MP ? Should it be "36+" just because DXO does not have any higher density sensor to test with ? ... and so on, and so forth. Before we have the answers to all this, it does not make sense to draw any conclusion. You will have to go onto DxO's website for all these answers. They introduced the concept because from studying access to the various parts of their previous website, they found that few people were looking at the MTF diagrams they used to publish. From talking to their members, they further found that few people really understood the concept of MTF diagrams, for example the difference between the tangential and sagittal measurements. They do explain in detail how they weight their technical results from the MTF measurements on the optical bench to arrive at the easily understood concept of the perceptual MP figure. Of course it is a simplification but as the methodology is identical for each lens test, it might be better to consider it more as a relative rather than absolute measurement but it is indicative. My own view is that it is of limited benefit to have additional MP on a camera, where they are only of use when you stop down the lens. Even then, it is likely with modern lenses designed to perform well wide open, that the much of the benefit will be limited to the edges of the image. I did some test shots on another thread (on lens diffraction limitation) to see if it was better to use an ND filter rather than stopping down a lens heavily in very bright conditions. The answer was in the centre of the image, it was better to use an ND filter, whereas at the edges, the decrease in spherical aberration, attendant on stopping down, outweighed the increase in diffraction and it was better to stop down. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted February 5, 2015 Share #688 Posted February 5, 2015 Well it depends on the quality of the file, but yes, you do see the difference in the print, hence my need for it. No matter how decent the pixels, interpolation is interpolation. Sure you can get an OK print (I would not print a1 from 18-24MP and be happy) but put the two of them side my side and there will be no contest at all. Put that in a professional environment where you livelihood counts on it and it becomes more of an issue I can assure you. I totally understand there is a group who don't want more than 24, but for Leica to remain a usable and credible brand for professional applications, they need to introduce high MP body, or one that allow a 24MP mode as most do. That is my experience and unless I see real gains from Leica I will need to move on. When the entire industry is pushing pixels, one can not ignore or dismiss the demands and needs, they are not imaginary. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted February 5, 2015 Share #689 Posted February 5, 2015 I can't imagine what I would do with 50MP files. The 24MP files from my M60 and 18MP files from the Monochrom are more than adequate without worrying about shutter speeds, handholding, tripods and shutter slap (A7r). Pain in the ass, from my experience (D800E and A7r). Though I do think that Nikon and Canon will chase each other down this rabbit hole ... But these are all side effects of cameras not designed for the purpose. I hand hold a Hasselblad H with digital back without issue. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted February 5, 2015 Share #690 Posted February 5, 2015 Well it depends on the quality of the file, but yes, you do see the difference in the print, hence my need for it. No matter how decent the pixels, interpolation is interpolation. Sure you can get an OK print (I would not print a1 from 18-24MP and be happy) but put the two of them side my side and there will be no contest at all. Put that in a professional environment where you livelihood counts on it and it becomes more of an issue I can assure you. I totally understand there is a group who don't want more than 24, but for Leica to remain a usable and credible brand for professional applications, they need to introduce high MP body, or one that allow a 24MP mode as most do. That is my experience and unless I see real gains from Leica I will need to move on. When the entire industry is pushing pixels, one can not ignore or dismiss the demands and needs, they are not imaginary. So you at the 5%, it may well pay off not to enter in the marketing rat race. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted February 5, 2015 Share #691 Posted February 5, 2015 This whole MP nonsense is just that - nonsense. I have heard higher MP being called a lot of things but never before nonsence. Perhaps it's nonsense for you, certainly not for me. Of course more is always better and I am at the forefront of loving pushing technology (although I love my cameras like my coffee - classic and simple). Why does a high MP camera need to be anything but simple? Design it in an M60 body for all I care. These resolutions work fantastically with current computers, storage, prints and resolve so much detail for the application of these cameras. I need more than 24MP. I suggest there needs to be two bodies or pixel binning. 65MP works fantastically well with my 2010 Mac Pro and perfectly well on my Macbook Pro too. If one really has the need of cramming 50MP and more in a M body, maybe the Leica M is not the right camera and one should shoot 4x5 or MF digital instead ? I do. The reason of format is the reason we NEED high MP in a small format now that technology permits it. I see the further development in other aspects digital A LOT MORE IMPORTANT. - wider dynamic range (this should at all times be the highest priority for sensor developers) - more bit depth - higher clean ISO - less filtration, so lower resolution sensors do show higher acuity (Leica MM vs M9) But development in the areas you state (dynamic range, ISO, less filtration etc) won't stop. But development in these areas won't stop. We need the M smaller again (MP size is perfect). No thanks. The current M size is perfect, IMO. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted February 5, 2015 Share #692 Posted February 5, 2015 So you at the 5%, it may well pay off not to enter in the marketing rat race. Canon, Sony, Nikon, Pentax are not reacting to 5% Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted February 5, 2015 Author Share #693 Posted February 5, 2015 But these are all side effects of cameras not designed for the purpose. I hand hold a Hasselblad H with digital back without issue. Larger sensor, and not jus pixel count, makes this a completely different issue. You would find the same thing with a Leica S. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted February 5, 2015 Share #694 Posted February 5, 2015 Larger sensor, and not jus pixel count, makes this a completely different issue. You would find the same thing with a Leica S. Yes, but only with current designs. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted February 5, 2015 Share #695 Posted February 5, 2015 Well it depends on the quality of the file, but yes, you do see the difference in the print, hence my need for it. No matter how decent the pixels, interpolation is interpolation. Sure you can get an OK print (I would not print a1 from 18-24MP and be happy) but put the two of them side my side and there will be no contest at all. Put that in a professional environment where you livelihood counts on it and it becomes more of an issue I can assure you. I totally understand there is a group who don't want more than 24, but for Leica to remain a usable and credible brand for professional applications, they need to introduce high MP body, or one that allow a 24MP mode as most do. That is my experience and unless I see real gains from Leica I will need to move on. When the entire industry is pushing pixels, one can not ignore or dismiss the demands and needs, they are not imaginary. Paul, It depends very much on the rip engine you are using to print. I have had A1 prints done professionally by the gallery in our village, from M8 files, using the Epson Rip Engine. They were completely satisfactory and one won a gold medal at Aix en Provence photo festival in 2008. I have not had any A1 prints done yet from the 24 MP M240 files and I imagine they must be a bit better than the M8 but probably not noticeable from more than 2 metres away. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob_w Posted February 5, 2015 Share #696 Posted February 5, 2015 There are a lot of assumptions in this thread about how a higher MP count might be used if/when it arrives. Quite possibly it will be used in other ways to deliver visible improved quality -- other than printing directly at full size, that is -- that we cannot foresee until it happens. Among other famous historical gaffes is the comment from Don Estridge when he introduced the IBM PC XT with a 10Mb hard drive - "but I don't know what a personal user would ever do with such a vast amount of storage". As for me, the M improvement I want to see as I said some 650 posts back in this thread, is one frameline per lens please. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted February 5, 2015 Share #697 Posted February 5, 2015 The 50MP Canon is official and at around £2.5K. I am almost certain this is going to be what the 5D was when it first came out: Groundbreaking. I'm going to buy one and a Zeiss Otus and hold out hope for the next M. If Leica can't step up to plate this time around i'll be selling up. It's like breaking up with a really hot girlfriend who just wasn't right Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted February 5, 2015 Share #698 Posted February 5, 2015 You will have to go onto DxO's website for all these answers. I went there, but could not find the answers in their explanation chapter. Can you point me to the proper page ? They introduced the concept because from studying access to the various parts of their previous website, they found that few people were looking at the MTF diagrams they used to publish. Few people look at the MTF, but this is not a valid reason to express a complex concept like lens performance with a single number, which is not even properly explained. This is not what I expect from a serious web site, and very misleading for users. As a matter of fact, even MTF graphs are insufficient to fully describe lens performance. as the methodology is identical for each lens test, it might be better to consider it more as a relative rather than absolute measurement but it is indicative. We do not know the methodology, and my educated guess is that it is not identical for each lens test. My own view is that it is of limited benefit to have additional MP on a camera, where they are only of use when you stop down the lens. Even then, it is likely with modern lenses designed to perform well wide open, that the much of the benefit will be limited to the edges of the image. Good lenses wide open will easily use the extra resolution in the center of the frame. To get the full resolution in the corners, you may need to stop down, as we have been doing forever across generations of lenses and media technologies. Nothing new here, so what is "of limited benefit" ? I did some test shots on another thread (on lens diffraction limitation) to see if it was better to use an ND filter rather than stopping down a lens heavily in very bright conditions. The answer was in the centre of the image, it was better to use an ND filter, whereas at the edges, the decrease in spherical aberration, attendant on stopping down, outweighed the increase in diffraction and it was better to stop down. This is what I expect from any good lens, but results strongly vary depending on the lens, on the aperture, on the focus field shape, on the pixel pitch (camera used), et cetera. Now try to express all these "details" with a single number Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted February 5, 2015 Share #699 Posted February 5, 2015 The 50MP Canon is official and at around £2.5K. I am almost certain this is going to be what the 5D was when it first came out: Groundbreaking. I'm going to buy one and a Zeiss Otus and hold out hope for the next M. If Leica can't step up to plate this time around i'll be selling up. It's like breaking up with a really hot girlfriend who just wasn't right Same here, but I'll keep both girlfriends Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winedemonium Posted February 6, 2015 Share #700 Posted February 6, 2015 - don't need any more megapixels. 24 MP is fine - improved dynamic range - some kind of in camera image stabilisation? (not a biggie) - some kind of implementation to keep the sensor clean and self-clean when its dirty. (This is actually my number 1) - improved white balance / colours in auto mode. (Nothing beats getting this right manually at capture, but there is room for auto to be improved) - a really great EVF - ability to zoom anywhere in the frame during live view focusing - without compromising the build quality advances made with the M240 over the M9, slim the camera back toward film M dimensions and weight. (Sounds tricky? Leica have managed to shrink and improve many times over the years). - "Intelligent scene select" mode, especially for cats (kidding!) Basically, not much. I'm mostly very happy with the M/-P 240. I use other cameras when I want other stuff so I'm not looking for the M to do all things. I use digital Ms in a very similar way to film ones. Finally, a nod to Peter's petition... if their was an updated CCD with a reliable long-lasting sensor, I'd buy that next instead of the "new" model. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.