400 Leica photographers agree: we love CCD!

[Prosophos]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Looking at Paul's link, the indoor photos obviously could benefit from WB adjustment if it's his desire to neutralize the color tint. It was precisely in such situations where my experience with the M9 was that skin tones quickly take on a splotchy, mottled yellow-magenta color separation when WB neutralized, and is generally much less of a problem with the M240.

 

I shot a season of weddings for another photographer with the M9, and he frequently complained about this and other color related 'problems' with M9 files. Our approach is generally available light work, and often the M9 was used in mixed and poor indoor lighting conditions. Last year I primarily shot his weddings with the M240 and his color related complaints were considerably fewer.

 

While I appreciated his complaints about the M9, and it isn't necessarily why I added the M240, I believe he also didn't have sufficient experience with M9 files to fully optimize them. Yet, that said, from my own work with both cameras, there are certainly situations where M240 images are easier to deal with - indoor mixed lighting conditions. For outdoor scenes, IMO, the wider dynamic range of the 'flat' M240 files allows more leeway in post production and still gives me the option to process the files to a higher contrast look reminiscent of the M9, if desired.

 

Funny thing is I remember this being a very similar point of contention about 10 years ago after Canon replaced the CCD-based 1D with the CMOS-based 1D Mark II. Many complained about the softness of the CMOS look, the color...

 

I'd have to agree with you regarding the M240's superiority in indoor mixed lighting conditions. However, I don't like photographing in those conditions, because the resulting images (from any camera) are never appealing to me, but I can certainly understand why some people would need to (for documenting a wedding, for example).

 

Your last comment regarding Canon's transition from CCD to CMOS is interesting. Nikon (obviously) made the same transition. To this day, at base ISO, I prefer the CCD-based Nikon D200 (or D70 output) vs. the CMOS cameras that followed.

[Advertisement]

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

[Lenshacker]

Another question for M240 photographers shooting at high ISO and seeing banding in the images:

 

Have you experimented with using slower SD cards?

 

From personal experience with the M Monochrom shot at ISO10,000: my camera showed banding using faster class 10 cards than it did with class 4 cards. I use the slower cards when shooting highest ISO with any of my cameras, including the Df. I also shoot uncompressed DNG on the M9 and uncompressed NEF with the Df. The "compressed NEF" on the Df is "Visually lossless" but in reality is a lossy algorithm. The difference comes in when you stretch the histogram in post processing. I am not sure about the compression algorithm used on the M240. There has to be a reason why some images show banding and others do not.

[Paulus]

I don't think my statement should offend you (was this a sincere question?).

 

I understand the need to have higher ISO capabilities, hence my continual experimentation with different CMOS sensors (including the M240).

 

Please do not be offended, however, when I point out that the majority of the images you linked to display the "tomato face" skin tone appearance. The alternative explanation is that most of your subjects have first degree sunburns (less likely).

 

Thank you for your comment. No offence, more rethorical. The tomato skin is a choice. The red light gave a special ambiance which I did want to alter in post processing. I wanted the colours as I saw them that night.

[Jeff S]

In my opinion (and in the opinion of the signatories of My Open Letter to Leica), the M9/M-E/Monochrom/M8 sensors provide superior colours, tonal transitioning, and micro-contrast vs. the M240.

 

The CCD sensors also produce files that are more robust for the purposes of post-processing.

 

If you just substituted the word 'cameras' for 'sensors' above, you would have eliminated a fair amount of the controversy here.

 

And the PP debate accounts for a chunk of the remainder.

 

The fact that you hope for improved color in the next generation of the M240 suggests that you understand that there's more to the issue than CCD or CMOS (for surely new M240 iterations will be CMOS).

 

Jeff

Edited February 1, 2015 by Jeff S

[Prosophos]

Thank you for your comment. No offence, more rethorical. The tomato skin is a choice. The red light gave a special ambiance which I did want to alter in post processing. I wanted the colours as I saw them that night.

 

Thank you for understanding. I respect your decision to keep the native light.

 

I do, however, see the problematic red skin tone exaggeration even in the occasional outdoor shot:

 

Marcel Verbeek, Paul Sips, Hugo Doesburg, William van Barneveld - pauljoostenfotograaf

[Prosophos]

Regarding the M9 for low-light shooting, it is not as "bad" as some people would have you believe.

 

Here is an image that was shot at ISO 640 and then "pushed" in LR for an effective ISO of 2500:

 

Birthday Girl. | Photographs by Peter

 

I admire how the sensor in the M9 can deal with the mixed lighting AND maintain excellent "crispness", tonality, and colour.

[Paulus]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thank you for understanding. I respect your decision to keep the native light.

 

I do, however, see the problematic red skin tone exaggeration even in the occasional outdoor shot:

 

Marcel Verbeek, Paul Sips, Hugo Doesburg, William van Barneveld - pauljoostenfotograaf

 

I do not know. What I do know is that I wanted to keep the light outside as I was seeing the redidsh light from lower sun. The sun sets around 22:00 see also info. I did not make a whitebalance that evening. I took a white balance in the midst of day, so that I can imitate the red sunset as we see it with film. Also see:

 

Ballonvaart en landing in Moerenburg: "Trying to catch a Virgin." - pauljoostenfotograaf

 

Just as take the blue morning light. Measure the noon the day before and shoot the morninglight and don't alter the white balance ( with the M9 )

The thing is: Comparing with these choices is always difficult:

 

Affligem kleur - pauljoostenfotograaf

 

Another reason for the " red " might be the use of an IR filter on my 50asph.

Edited February 1, 2015 by Paulus
extra words

[Lenshacker]

Thank you for your comment. No offence, more rethorical. The tomato skin is a choice. The red light gave a special ambiance which I did want to alter in post processing. I wanted the colours as I saw them that night.

 

I see no issues with the colors of the M240, very difficult lighting.

 

The Banding issue is of more concern to me, as illustrated in your image here:

 

Marcel Verbeek, Paul Sips, Hugo Doesburg, William van Barneveld - pauljoostenfotograaf

 

Myself- I would experiment with some different memory cards, the highest speed SD cards caused banding in the M Monochrom when shooting at High ISO. Also caused an issue in the Df. I keep some slow cards in my camera case.

 

JUST AS AN EXAMPLE, this is from the Nikon Df at ISO12,800, 1/30th second, at F2. Manual focus Nikkor-O 35/2.

 

Luray Caverns

[Prosophos]

I do not know. What I do know is that I wanted to keep the light outside as I was seeing the redidsh light from lower sun. The sun sets around 22:00 see also info. I did not make a whitebalance that evening. I took a white balance in the midst of day, so that I can imitate the red sunset as we see it with film. Also see:

 

Ballonvaart en landing in Moerenburg: "Trying to catch a Virgin." - pauljoostenfotograaf

 

Just as take the blue morning light. Measure the noon the day before and shoot the morninglight and don't alter the white balance ( with the M9 )

The thing is: Comparing with these choices is always difficult:

 

Affligem kleur - pauljoostenfotograaf

 

Another reason for the " red " might be the use of an IR filter on my 50asph.

 

 

I completely understand. Thank you for your civil and considerate discourse.

[rscheffler]

Regarding the M9 for low-light shooting, it is not as "bad" as some people would have you believe.

 

Here is an image that was shot at ISO 640 and then "pushed" in LR for an effective ISO of 2500:

 

Birthday Girl. | Photographs by Peter

 

I admire how the sensor in the M9 can deal with the mixed lighting AND maintain excellent "crispness", tonality, and colour.

 

My feeling, from my own extensive experience with the M9, is if you accept the M9's colour and WB interpretation for a specific scene, then there's not a lot to dislike. Another great example of this is some of the colour work by Mitch Alland posted here in the M9 ISO-less thread some time ago, of Thai night market scenes, where he left the WB to allow the fluorescent lights to remain greenish. In my own experience, shooting corporate work, receptions, etc., I would get very good results at ISO 1250 when the spectral quality of artificial lighting was of higher quality (broader spectral range). It was always in situations with lower colour quality lighting, and trying to neutralize the WB, that I ran into splotchy chroma quality. I suppose any camera would benefit from broader spectrum light, since it would allow better exposure in each colour channel. But there is definitely something with the CMOS cameras I have used that handles this problem better at higher ISOs.

 

Brian - that's an interesting suggestion. I have noticed some banding at ISO 3200, though I suspect it's also hidden in the files at 1600 and perhaps also lower. Something happens internally with the M240's file handling when ISO changes from 1000 to 1250. The 'green shadow' problem is gone at 1250 and higher and the frame rate is roughly halved. My experience with the M9 was that many higher speed cards I tried resulted in consistent banding. With my preferred cards in that camera, most images were banding free, unless I shot extended sequences; the later images in those sequences had greater likelihood for banding. When I tested some UHS-1 SDHC cards, every frame showed banding.

[Prosophos]

Update: My Open Letter to Leica has now exceeded 500 signatures (and climbing).

 

Peter | P r o s o p h o s

[Antonio Russell]

Update: My Open Letter to Leica has now exceeded 500 signatures (and climbing).

 

Peter | P r o s o p h o s

 

Congratulations, but tens of thousands also signed a petition to bring back Kodachome (a far more laudable campaign IMO) and it didn't happen... I would not hold your breath.

[Lenshacker]

 

I have noticed some banding at ISO 3200, though I suspect it's also hidden in the files at 1600 and perhaps also lower. Something happens internally with the M240's file handling when ISO changes from 1000 to 1250. The 'green shadow' problem is gone at 1250 and higher and the frame rate is roughly halved.

 

My guess: it's taking a second frame of data and using it for non-uniformity correction. There is "all sorts of data acquisition and signal processing stuff" taking place in these cameras. The unlocked M8 Raw mode has given me and others a chance to play with the raw data, get a feel for what is going on internally. Arvid has demonstrated software that gets rid of banding on the M8 used at ISO 10,000 equivalent.

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m8-forum/360761-m8-hideous-unusable-high-iso-performance.html

 

The M Monochrom at ISO5000 with a 1936 Sonnar, wide-open at F1.5 and 1/30th:

 

L1003955

 

And the M8 Raw mode, Base ISO160, underexposed 5 stops, F1.4 and 1/60th:

 

autocurves_ISO5000eqv

 

I had a yellow filter on the Sonnar, which would account for the longer exposure.

 

Note- the M8 exposure is Raw mode, base ISO160 at EV-5, then boosted in Photoshop. ISO5000 equivalent and does not show banding. I did not even use Arvid's newer features to correct the uniformity. This is an 8 year old CCD camera, looks pretty good to me. I would expect the Uniformity in the M240 to be better than it is.

 

 

I love CCD's. I've collected and read CCD long sheets since 1991, first DSLR used a KAF-1600. You cannot do on-chip data conversion signal processing with CCD's. The M8 was crippled due to the DNG-8 compression. The M9 and M Monochrom corrected that, and went farther for reducing noise. The rendering by the cameras- beautiful. Looking at the specification sheets for the CCD's- hard to see what parameters with regard to noise and saturation count can be improved given the geometry of M-Mount lenses.

 

The next generation M will likely be based on BSI or some variation of CMOS sensor. My bet is on BSI. What needs to be done- more attention given to getting rid of banding and non-uniformity; more attention to color matching and color profiles.

Edited February 4, 2015 by Lenshacker

[Prosophos]

Congratulations...

 

Thanks!

 

...but tens of thousands also signed a petition to bring back Kodachome (a far more laudable campaign IMO) and it didn't happen... I would not hold your breath.

 

I guess I'm naive to try (still breathing though...).

[IWC Doppel]

I am happy to have signed and agree with the sentiments. I haven't changed my mind since shooting an M240 or seeing images. As good as the M240 might be, as accurate as it might be I simply prefer M9 images. That's enough for me

[piblondin]

You are possibly correct. And I thank you for raising a reasonable point.

 

But people need to remember that photography is mostly done at base ISO, even in the dark regions of Canada where I live.

 

I'm not sure I agree with you here. I almost always need to maintain a shutter speed between 1/250 and 1/500 to stop moving subjects and maintain sharpness. That doesn't always allow me to shoot at ISO 160 when I'm at f/5.6.

[TRIago]

I'm not sure I agree with you here. I almost always need to maintain a shutter speed between 1/250 and 1/500 to stop moving subjects and maintain sharpness. That doesn't always allow me to shoot at ISO 160 when I'm at f/5.6.

 

Well this is not 100% true. You can use flash and your image will be sharp on low ISO too.

[NB23]

100% of the petitioners are Leica customers and they will buy the next Leica. Cmos LEICA.

 

The number of petitioners is so low that it only confirms that Leica have taken the right decision.

 

Besides, this is more of a Blog shilling then anything else.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Lenshacker]

Hopefully the next Leica M shows dramatic improvement over the low-light performance of the M240. High-ISO performance is the driver behind most camera manufacturers moving to CMOS, and the improvement comes from signal processing gain. The uniformity of the high-ISO images shown from the M240 is not as good as the Leica M8, let alone the M Monochrom. Leica offers the very best in CCD based cameras, the same cannot be stated about their CMOS entry.

[Prosophos]

100% of the petitioners are Leica customers and they will buy the next Leica. Cmos LEICA.

 

The number of petitioners is so low that it only confirms that Leica have taken the right decision.

 

Besides, this is more of a Blog shilling then anything else.

 

Thanks for keeping this thread alive.