JimKasson Posted February 6, 2015 Share #701 Posted February 6, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) 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've done some simulation testing that indicates that we could profit from 2 um pixel pitches with today's better lenses, which is five or six times the pixel count of today's FF sensors. depending on the assumptions, 1.25 um might be even better. Graphs: Sensel vs lens resolution | The Last Word Pictures: Big vs little pixels | The Last Word Jim Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 6, 2015 Posted February 6, 2015 Hi JimKasson, Take a look here What do you want in the next digital M?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
JimKasson Posted February 6, 2015 Share #702 Posted February 6, 2015 I hand hold a Hasselblad H with digital back without issue. What delay do you use between mirror up and shutter activation? Jim Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted February 6, 2015 Share #703 Posted February 6, 2015 What delay do you use between mirror up and shutter activation? Jim None. The camera is exceptionally well dampened. The new Canon mirror dampening looks very interesting too, the sample images out today are really very promising. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Warwick Posted February 6, 2015 Share #704 Posted February 6, 2015 "What do you want in the next digital M?" ..... ..... looking at the amazing sample images for Canon's 5DS, something along a 50mp Leica M would be superb. Especially given I like large photos. I will say this again - Leica has perhaps created the best lens in the world for 35mm format (i.e., the 50mm APO). But in my view, it could be stretched much further and make Leica stand out from the pack, but potentially only if that lens was bolted to a very high megapixel camera. Leica has possibly done the reverse of other manufacturers ..... e.g., the Nikon D800 had much chatter that it was lens constrained, perhaps the new 50mp Canon 5Ds will be lens constrained too? Whereas the Leica M is not lens constrained, but possibly now sensor constrained vs. its competitors?? Don't get me wrong. I ADORE Leica's products -- but i would be hugely curious (and likely to part with my money) if it produced a high megapixel Leica M, whether that is a color or Monochrom sensor, because Leica is already "there" with the lenses. And yes, at that high MP, it's clear that it would require perfect technique (heavy tripod etc), but that it personally what I'd like in order to maximise the superb Leica lenses. I'd probably also keep the M240 and M7 for "general snaps"! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMJ Posted February 7, 2015 Share #705 Posted February 7, 2015 An interesting blog to follow is that of Thom Hogan (byThom.com). His background is Nikon but there appears no bias. He looks at the camera industry as a business. The big boys Canon & Nikon are simply in their long term arms race. All good for us as they offer interesting products, but the elephant in the room is that the camera industry (as we know it) is dying fast. Look at the sales - in all sectors. Look at the predictions coming out of Sony's sensor division. These companies are fighting each other to stay on top as the boat sinks. Camera phones are all the masses need....take photo & immediately put on-line. People don't want all the faffing around, & like it or not the companies are not charities. Same happened at the end of the 1990s as everyone had a film camera in the cupboard so why buy a new one - iterating this or that did not work. Digital saved them. The camera industry needs to come up with a major change or smart phones will kill them. I enjoy the basic (compared to DSLR - I have a D800) experience of using my Leica & see the arms race for what it is. I can produce A3+ prints & these are more than enough for a home wall. Cameras with 50, 100, 200, 300MP will not save the industry. Quality is important but not to the masses where 'good enough' rules. Complexity is not what the masses are after & they are the ones who have the bag of money. The industry is fighting the wrong battle & fan boys don't help. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted February 7, 2015 Share #706 Posted February 7, 2015 "What do you want in the next digital M?" ..... ..... looking at the amazing sample images for Canon's 5DS, something along a 50mp Leica M would be superb. Especially given I like large photos. I will say this again - Leica has perhaps created the best lens in the world for 35mm format (i.e., the 50mm APO). But in my view, it could be stretched much further and make Leica stand out from the pack, but potentially only if that lens was bolted to a very high megapixel camera. Leica has possibly done the reverse of other manufacturers ..... e.g., the Nikon D800 had much chatter that it was lens constrained, perhaps the new 50mp Canon 5Ds will be lens constrained too? Whereas the Leica M is not lens constrained, but possibly now sensor constrained vs. its competitors?? Don't get me wrong. I ADORE Leica's products -- but i would be hugely curious (and likely to part with my money) if it produced a high megapixel Leica M, whether that is a color or Monochrom sensor, because Leica is already "there" with the lenses. And yes, at that high MP, it's clear that it would require perfect technique (heavy tripod etc), but that it personally what I'd like in order to maximise the superb Leica lenses. I'd probably also keep the M240 and M7 for "general snaps"! I agree. Canon have done an exceptional job with this camera and the results are really exciting. Looking at lenses used with those samples, I'm actually surprised by a couple of them how good they are with older lenses. These results with Leica lenses would be something else entirely. Really on another level. Adding stabilisation like Sony has done with their ibis style design, and electronic shutter will really reduce and mostly mitigate past vibration associated issues. Combined with the 240's new shutter it's going to help considerably. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
batmobile Posted February 7, 2015 Share #707 Posted February 7, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) I disagree that 24 MP is all anyone ever needs and feel exactly the same way as Paul J about 24 MP and A1. You can see a clear difference between the A7 and A7R at this size. A lot of subject matter does not require this detail and for certain B&W work I actually prefer less resolution even for large prints (just as I chose TriX over Tmax 400). For certain applications, basing your print detail on observation no closer than two metres is erroneous, because people can and do step a lot closer in exhibitions. Whether you need the detail all depends on the style and presentaiton of the image, however. The style and look sets the expectation. The question is whether the Leica M is the right platform for super high res cameras, but if Leica gave us SRAW and MRAW it would be a non-issue. You could switch up and down as you wish. I wonder if Leica would be able to do what Sony has done with the A7 series and give different sensors in the same body? I doubt it, but I think a 24MP body with great high ISO and good buffer and a 36+ MP body with more of an emphasis on ultimate resolution would keep everyone happy. I think B&W scenic shooters will be ecstatic when Leica delivers a 36MP Bayerless CMOS sensor. That would be phenomenal for hand-held landscapes, because you will be able to generate the shutter speed to hand hold, just as you can with the current MM. If I had to choose one 'next M' it would be this: 36 MP with MRAW and SRAW. 14 stops DR. No banding below 6400. Colour on par with Sony, or my Ricoh GR. No IR and skin issues. Better thumb grip/rest Silent shutter mode I don't think Leica needs to go nuts. Some nice evolutionary changes will do it. The M240 is a superb camera that Leica should be well positioned for a cracking successor. IBIS would be a pleasant surprise. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted February 7, 2015 Share #708 Posted February 7, 2015 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 I don't use labs where this is an issue but you will easily see the difference between 18-24 and 50mp in two prints side by side regardless of rip. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Warwick Posted February 7, 2015 Share #709 Posted February 7, 2015 I disagree that 24 MP is all anyone ever needs and feel exactly the same way as Paul J about 24 MP and A1. .... For certain applications, basing your print detail on observation no closer than two metres is erroneous, because people can and do step a lot closer in exhibitions. ....... The question is whether the Leica M is the right platform for super high res cameras, but if Leica gave us SRAW and MRAW it would be a non-issue. You could switch up and down as you wish. .....I wonder if Leica would be able to do what Sony has done with the A7 series and give different sensors in the same body? I doubt it, but I think a 24MP body with great high ISO and good buffer and a 36+ MP body with more of an emphasis on ultimate resolution would keep everyone happy. .... I think B&W scenic shooters will be ecstatic when Leica delivers a 36MP Bayerless CMOS sensor. I fully agree with all of the above. The availability of a very high megapixel M (e.g., 50mp) would catalyse much better quality for LARGE prints - especially for landscapes / architecture. And we have the lens ready for it with the 50mm APO. I like prints, and i like to print large -- that's why megapixels matter to me personally. For many, sure, if you don't print large or prefer internet based images, i get it, there is less reason to want a very high megapixel camera -- i accept that 18-24mp is enough .... albeit when the Monochrom appeared everyone commented that they loved it partly due to its "amazing resolution" that exceeded the M9 .... and when the 50mm APO appeared everyone loved it partly because its "amazing resolution" exceeded other lenses ...... Similarly, maybe if we one day see a very high megapixel M, we might be converted to such a proposition of the presumably "amazing resolution" that 50mp would achieve over 18-24MP with good technique ..... Leica owners do like sharpness after all! I very much agree with the above quote ...... Sony has done with the A7 series and give different sensors in the same body .... I think a 24MP body with great high ISO and good buffer and a 36+ MP body with more of an emphasis on ultimate resolution would keep everyone happy ...... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
menos I M6 Posted February 7, 2015 Share #710 Posted February 7, 2015 The Leica M's strength and most intended use in the past has been to provide a dependable, reliable, fast to use and compact system for reportage, documentary, journalism work with it's strengths in unobtrusive size and silence also very helpful in portraiture and photography in sensitive places. People who wanted to record high quality work for little grain, sharp detail, large reproduction generally chose the much better suiting platforms of large format cameras - or in certain cases medium format. I would absolutely hate to see the Leica M pressed into an area of work other cameras are much better suited for (Leica even offers some of these in their own product offering) if it's traditional strengths will suffer from design at that (read excessive functions, complications and certainly excessive file bloat and resolution where it is not needed). Sure do large prints at several meter width look worse made from a 24MP 35mm camera than with a 50+ MP medium format back, but hey, I also would love my iPhone to have 100 MP in the next iteration so my advertisement studio business can finally take off you know. The good thing though when the digital Leica M system will finally be messed up, my Mono might still be working as it does now and certainly will the bag of old film bodies which suffice just fine. The megapixel measure-bator-game does nothing good to the Leica M. It doesn't belong here. We need a bit more dynamic range, less excessive functions and complications, 16bit files with less filtration would be nice too. Higher resolution? No thanks. I use a digital MF system or large format for that. Since when exactly has become carrying the proper camera gear to landscape locations so much of a nuisance that we want all of our tiny gadgets to replace them? Was it since we drive our automatic transmission SUVs to Starbucks to pick up our Iced Vanilla Soymilk Latte before dropping in at the pedicure salon before heading out to the local camera brand fan club meeting? Or is it really that nowadays where every kid is a photographer we need to blow up every trivial shot we do to billboard size to distinguish ourselves and need our tiny cameras to provide the resolution to do so? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted February 7, 2015 Share #711 Posted February 7, 2015 [...] I would absolutely hate to see the Leica M pressed into an area of work other cameras are much better suited for (Leica even offers some of these in their own product offering) if it's traditional strengths will suffer from design at that (read excessive functions, complications and certainly excessive file bloat and resolution where it is not needed). [...] +1. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Warwick Posted February 7, 2015 Share #712 Posted February 7, 2015 People who wanted to record high quality work for little grain, sharp detail, large reproduction generally chose the much better suiting platforms of large format cameras - or in certain cases medium format. With film, 120 trounced 35mm, and 4x5 or 8x10 trounced medium format film in terms of grain / smoothness / tonal transition. Grain / noise is generally non existent these days at low ISO across most digital cameras, regardless of format. As such, the benefit of lowering grain is no longer a reason for going up in format size like it was in the past. MF digital sensors can be much smaller than 6x7cm film for that very reason - the IQ180 crams in pixels into a fairly small space and can combine that with high resolution digital lenses like one uses from Rodenstock to achieve higher resolution than "bigger sensor" 6x7cm format films. Given grain is no longer a catalyst to justify larger formats, why shouldn't 35mm extend further in that direction, especially when ultra high resolution lenses like the APO Summicron already exist? I would add that digital has shrunk differences between formats (compared to format differences with film) and -- megapixels aside -- there is relatively diminished returns from moving from 35mm to MF digital. Again, it's about sensor resolution, whether that is film or digital: it's amazing just how good a Leica FILM camera can print off Adox CMS 20 vs a lower Rez "sensor" like ISO 400 film! I say all the above as a long term user of both MF film and 4x5 by the way. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted February 7, 2015 Share #713 Posted February 7, 2015 What about an 50 MP sensor with optional pixel binning to 24 MP? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted February 7, 2015 Share #714 Posted February 7, 2015 If it is to get a slow camera again thanks no thanks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted February 7, 2015 Share #715 Posted February 7, 2015 The Leica M's strength and most intended use in the past has been to provide a dependable, reliable, fast to use and compact system for reportage, documentary, journalism work with it's strengths in unobtrusive size and silence also very helpful in portraiture and photography in sensitive places. People who wanted to record high quality work for little grain, sharp detail, large reproduction generally chose the much better suiting platforms of large format cameras - or in certain cases medium format. I would absolutely hate to see the Leica M pressed into an area of work other cameras are much better suited for (Leica even offers some of these in their own product offering) if it's traditional strengths will suffer from design at that (read excessive functions, complications and certainly excessive file bloat and resolution where it is not needed). Sure do large prints at several meter width look worse made from a 24MP 35mm camera than with a 50+ MP medium format back, but hey, I also would love my iPhone to have 100 MP in the next iteration so my advertisement studio business can finally take off you know. The good thing though when the digital Leica M system will finally be messed up, my Mono might still be working as it does now and certainly will the bag of old film bodies which suffice just fine. The megapixel measure-bator-game does nothing good to the Leica M. It doesn't belong here. We need a bit more dynamic range, less excessive functions and complications, 16bit files with less filtration would be nice too. Higher resolution? No thanks. I use a digital MF system or large format for that. Since when exactly has become carrying the proper camera gear to landscape locations so much of a nuisance that we want all of our tiny gadgets to replace them? Was it since we drive our automatic transmission SUVs to Starbucks to pick up our Iced Vanilla Soymilk Latte before dropping in at the pedicure salon before heading out to the local camera brand fan club meeting? Or is it really that nowadays where every kid is a photographer we need to blow up every trivial shot we do to billboard size to distinguish ourselves and need our tiny cameras to provide the resolution to do so? It seems you suffer from megapixelphobia. It is not a gimmick, or a gadget, or some sort of purile game to get the biggest, the heavens certainly aren't going to fall. It's just a camera, the same camera, with more detail. I remember a day that people cried they didn't want or need more than 8mp, who today shoots 8mp? To me, quality high res = far better IQ. I will never understand how a photographer wouldn't want that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted February 7, 2015 Share #716 Posted February 7, 2015 To me, quality high res = far better IQ. I will never understand how a photographer wouldn't want that. Maybe you need to visit more museums, galleries and other exhibits. I can't remember seeing a wonderful pic and thinking "this memorable image/print would be so much better if it just had more resolution". In fact, I can think how that might detract from quite a few marvelous photos. If the amazing IQ of cameras today, Leica or otherwise (in conjunction with exceptional processing options and materials) is a limitation for any photographer, unless s/he is in some technical specialty area, that person likely has other issues or limitations that haven't been considered or recognized. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted February 7, 2015 Share #717 Posted February 7, 2015 Maybe you need to visit more museums, galleries and other exhibits. I can't remember seeing a wonderful pic and thinking "this memorable image/print would be so much better if it just had more resolution". In fact, I can think how that might detract from quite a few marvelous photos. If the amazing IQ of cameras today, Leica or otherwise (in conjunction with exceptional processing options and materials) is a limitation for any photographer, unless s/he is in some technical specialty area, that person likely has other issues or limitations that haven't been considered or recognized. Jeff Maybe you are just living in, and for the past. You are certainly doing a lot of assuming. It's the same old tired and naive and myopic arguments about "limitation" too. Some of my most successful images that have showed in museums and exhibits have been 70 inch prints from a 60mp camera by the way. People always comment on the level of detail. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Warwick Posted February 7, 2015 Share #718 Posted February 7, 2015 The issue for me is that, to print large with digital, one NEEDS a lot of megapixels. Why? For digital sensors, stretching a file too far in size beyond its native resolution makes the image look fake ...... whereas film and a massive drum scan responds differently given it maintains a photographic integrity to it at almost any print size. Sure, a large photo from film gets more and more grainy, but it never falls abruptly off a resolution "cliff" to look fake like digital can when pushed too far. Hence, given I like large prints, it is that cliff that is a key reason why I would welcome more megapixels. Especially given I think Leica lenses can handle it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted February 7, 2015 Share #719 Posted February 7, 2015 Maybe you are just living in, and for the past. You are certainly doing a lot of assuming. It's the same old tired and naive and myopic arguments about "limitation" too. Some of my most successful images that have showed in museums and exhibits have been 70 inch prints from a 60mp camera by the way. People always comment on the level of detail. I'm quite present, thanks, but admittedly not impressed by the trend to print bigger and bigger, or the tendency for bokeh frenzy, or various other current 'art' directions. Fortunately, for me, there is still lots of great work to see and admire….from current and past photographers and other artists. One needn't live in the past to find detail among the lesser interesting aspects of a great work. And the bigger the print, the farther away I stand. I am curious, though, if people already "always comment on the level of detail" in your work, what's the urgency about wanting more? Different strokes... Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
menos I M6 Posted February 8, 2015 Share #720 Posted February 8, 2015 Why is it that the moment someone expresses their wish of keeping a product changing into something else ridiculed as druids trying to keep mankind from evolving? This is nuts. Paul, if those 60MP photographs of yours worked so well in museums and galleries with people commenting on the great detail from it's high resolution sensor, why not keep using those type of cameras (60MP btw is way, way outdated nowadays) and stop drooling over a fantasy where you could squeeze those sensors into something entirely else, breaking it in the progress? You know, toasters are for toasting sliced bread - they work marvelously at that one simple task. Sure you could build a 40" flatscreen into them to also watch the news while waiting for your bread to pop, but will it not be inconvenient to squeeze that abomination into a small kitchen? … grabbing my staff and robe to be going back into my cabin in the woods now … Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.