400 Leica photographers agree: we love CCD!

[leafster]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

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.

 

Put it this way.. In my opinion, those 500 petitioners probably or already knew that the chances of what they are hoping for are extremely low. Probably never going to happen. And yes, people will eventually move on to whatever the next offered technology. If is CMOS, it is then CMOS. Or whatever offered.

 

Some choose to see the negativity side of this petition movement, or simply think it is a waste of time and effort. But what I see here is a sincere move. A group of people trying, regardless the size of group, or the eventual outcome.

 

I signed, not because I have a M9-P. Is because I see inspiration. This is much more worthy than CCD. People will remember they have tried, with no regret.

[Prosophos]

Put it this way.. In my opinion, those 500 petitioners probably or already knew that the chances of what they are hoping for are extremely low. Probably never going to happen. And yes, people will eventually move on to whatever the next offered technology. If is CMOS, it is then CMOS. Or whatever offered.

 

Some choose to see the negativity side of this petition movement, or simply think it is a waste of time and effort. But what I see here is a sincere move. A group of people trying, regardless the size of group, or the eventual outcome.

 

I signed, not because I have a M9-P. Is because I see inspiration. This is much more worthy than CCD. People will remember they have tried, with no regret.

 

Wow, you actually "get it", my friend. Thank you for your sensitivity, and understanding.

[IWC Doppel]

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.

 

I won't be buying an M240 and I suspect the next model on if CMOS is unlikely to sit in my camera bag. I will however be buying a Monochom (CCD) and more of course lenses

[Antonio Russell]

I use film Ms exclusively and can't help but see the irony in this whole issue.

 

Guys, you bought a computer that takes pictures, digital obsolescence is surely a fact of life. The medium is far from mature.

Edited February 5, 2015 by A Aparicio

[IWC Doppel]

I use film Ms exclusively and can't help but see the irony in this whole issue.

 

Guys, you bought a computer that takes pictures, digital obsolescence is surely a fact of life. The medium is far from mature.

 

I don't think anyone is saying don't develop, quite the reverse. It's about which technology to develop and focus on. I assume by digital obsolescence you mean digital formats or models and not digital per se ?

[Antonio Russell]

I assume by digital obsolescence you mean digital formats or models and not digital per se ?

 

CCD is now obsolete it seems... Didn't last long did it?

 

As a film user having to read about the "death" of film (still alive and kicking thank you very much), I can't help but enjoy the irony of Peter's petition.

[Prosophos]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

CCD is now obsolete it seems... Didn't last long did it?

 

As a film user having to read about the "death" of film (still alive and kicking thank you very much), I can't help but enjoy the irony of Peter's petition.

 

Try this for irony: a self-proclaimed 100% film shooter participating in this discussion.

 

Methinks the only thing you "enjoy" is being negative. What I can never comprehend is: Why? Is it for the sport of it? It's much easier to put down, so it's not much of a sport. Then again, maybe that's the attraction for you.

 

(By the way, some of us shoot both film and digital and "ironically" appreciate both.)

[Lenshacker]

Likening the move from the M9 to the M240 is more like moving from Kodachrome to Kodachrome II. I've read of one photographer that was so upset that Kodak sent him a freezer-full of Kodachrome.

 

I still have 75ft of Kodachrome in the refrigerator, process K-11. Double-8.

 

And I also have a KAF-1600 in a DSLR that works perfectly. Bought it in 1993. I can still use it, but cannot use the Kodachrome. Maybe I can spool it onto a Minolta-16 cartridge and process as B&W. It was still good in 1975, and I've kept it cold.

Edited February 5, 2015 by Lenshacker

[Antonio Russell]

Please, allow an old man some enjoyment.:-0

 

Its a similar enjoyment to seeing CDs disappear (after being told for decades that vinyl's time was up!). Ah, the irony!

 

I do look forward to getting a digital M one day, but when the dust has settled and the technology is mature. But maybe I won't be around by then...

[IWC Doppel]

CCD is now obsolete it seems... Didn't last long did it?

 

As a film user having to read about the "death" of film (still alive and kicking thank you very much), I can't help but enjoy the irony of Peter's petition.

 

I still have an M6 available for use and might pick up an MP, I love film. I have a large vinyl collection, and a large number of CD's with no desire to go to CA (The sound quality vs convenience compromise is NOT there yet). My decisions are quality decisions, which has some subjectivity. I don't get the irony point though tbh

 

Seems more irony in staying with film and challenging the support for one digital technology over another. A quick look at Wiki shows CMOS was invented in 1963, CCD in 1969, so we are talking about which technology to back, obsolescence isn't relevant IMO

[mjh]

A quick look at Wiki shows CMOS was invented in 1963, CCD in 1969, so we are talking about which technology to back, obsolescence isn't relevant IMO

Obsolete doesn’t equal old. CCD-based digital cameras have been around for 40 years now and for most of that time CCD was deemed the superior imaging technology compared to CMOS. But during the last 15 years it was mostly CMOS technology where all the exciting developments were happening and soon CMOS imagers surpassed their CCD cousins. Now we have a choice of FSI CMOS and BSI CMOS, stacked CMOS sensors are showing a lot of promise, and in the future there may be hybrid sensors using organic layers or quantum dots on top of a CMOS substrate. CCD technology, on the other hand, is rather stagnant these days.

[batmobile]

Whatever produces a quality image. No viewer cares about the rest. While some newer sensors and systems may be it better (for some people) more often and more easily, none of this changes the image before you. If it works, it works. In reference to another thread, nobody needs to defend the CCD. It still makes great images (which some even prefer) but CMOS is making so much possible that CCD cannot. I think there is already one great CCD Leica around (the M9 and derivatives) and I, for one, feel no imminent need to upgrade my Monochrom, but that is not to say that I am not excited by what may be coming with the successor to the M240.

Edited February 5, 2015 by batmobile

[Paulus]

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.

 

The M60 got only 551 " votes"

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m-type-240/347609-leica-m-edition-60-your-opinion.html

[Bill Livingston]

The M60 got only 551 " votes"

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m-type-240/347609-leica-m-edition-60-your-opinion.html

 

The M60 wasn't designed and manufactured as a response to a vote in a forum... As far as I am aware, the 'votes' you refer to are after the fact.

 

So unless I have completely missed your point, I'm not sure I understand the relevance.

[pop]

I have removed one unfriendly post and some retorts. Even if the preference of one sensor architecture over the other was a pure placebo, which I do not believe, there was no reason for sneering at people. Please have a look at our forum rules.

Edited February 6, 2015 by pop

[Winedemonium]

I've not waded through all 11 pages of this, so my apology if I am repeating someone else's point here -

 

I imagine - though lack the technology knowledge to assert - that taking the CMOS sensor out of an M240 and putting a CCD sensor in its place might be quite expensive to do. The M240 was built with the CMOS sensor it uses from the ground up.

 

I imagine too that Leica are not going to abandon CMOS for the next generation M camera. Given the pattern Leica have established across the S, M, and X cameras, the next generation will be an M typ 2xx with CMOS upgrade and some other new features, a new M Monochrom based on the M240 (i.e. a CMOS Monochrom), and an M-E-240 based on the current M240, but with something removed, and the top plate in grey.

 

Give or take.

 

The conundrum then is this, as I see it: Leica do make certain limited edition issues in very small quantities. Usually the changes are cosmetic, so don't incur the sort of preproduction R&D we are talking about here.

 

So, a new CCD Leica M would require the development of a CCD sensor to fit the new body and hardware of the M240 (or newer still), sharing other innards with a more mainstream CMOS camera. The R&D might not be satisfied by resulting sales.

 

On the other hand, Leica have an ongoing problem taking care of M8/.2, M9/M-E and M Monochrom users, and for that alone need to come up with a stable solution for those cameras.

 

I would guess therefore, that if Leica come up with an updated CCD sensor for the M9 body, it is more likely that they would issue an updated M-E mkII based on the M9 than come up with an new M240-like CCD camera.

 

That said, Leica have been known to surprise. And what Peter's petition has shown is that there is a customer base out there (no doubt larger than the actual number who have signed), and if you don't ask you don't get.

 

I signed. I wish Peter well with his petition. Much like the Monochrom was referred to as the "Henri" after HCB, I think if Leica issue a new CCD M it should be called the "Peter". It will be, at least by me!, and I will buy one if Leica make it.

Edited February 6, 2015 by Winedemonium

[IWC Doppel]

Obsolete doesn’t equal old. CCD-based digital cameras have been around for 40 years now and for most of that time CCD was deemed the superior imaging technology compared to CMOS. But during the last 15 years it was mostly CMOS technology where all the exciting developments were happening and soon CMOS imagers surpassed their CCD cousins. Now we have a choice of FSI CMOS and BSI CMOS, stacked CMOS sensors are showing a lot of promise, and in the future there may be hybrid sensors using organic layers or quantum dots on top of a CMOS substrate. CCD technology, on the other hand, is rather stagnant these days.

 

Fair point. I do want Leica to differentiate and not simply catch up and follow. One thing that may have driven the appeal of CMOS is clearly price, flexibility/functionality with video EVF etc, and ofcourse power. But none of those really concern me. Leica is in the unique position to focus in areas others can't aftord or justify.

[Prosophos]

I've not waded through all 11 pages of this, so my apology if I am repeating someone else's point here -

 

I imagine - though lack the technology knowledge to assert - that taking the CMOS sensor out of an M240 and putting a CCD sensor in its place might be quite expensive to do. The M240 was built with the CMOS sensor it uses from the ground up.

 

I imagine too that Leica are not going to abandon CMOS for the next generation M camera. Given the pattern Leica have established across the S, M, and X cameras, the next generation will be an M typ 2xx with CMOS upgrade and some other new features, a new M Monochrom based on the M240 (i.e. a CMOS Monochrom), and an M-E-240 based on the current M240, but with something removed, and the top plate in grey.

 

Give or take.

 

The conundrum then is this, as I see it: Leica do make certain limited edition issues in very small quantities. Usually the changes are cosmetic, so don't incur the sort of preproduction R&D we are talking about here.

 

So, a new CCD Leica M would require the development of a CCD sensor to fit the new body and hardware of the M240 (or newer still), sharing other innards with a more mainstream CMOS camera. The R&D might not be satisfied by resulting sales.

 

On the other hand, Leica have an ongoing problem taking care of M8/.2, M9/M-E and M Monochrom users, and for that alone need to come up with a stable solution for those cameras.

 

I would guess therefore, that if Leica come up with an updated CCD sensor for the M9 body, it is more likely that they would issue an updated M-E mkII based on the M9 than come up with an new M240-like CCD camera.

 

That said, Leica have been known to surprise. And what Peter's petition has shown is that there is a customer base out there (no doubt larger than the actual number who have signed), and if you don't ask you don't get.

 

I signed. I wish Peter well with his petition. Much like the Monochrom was referred to as the "Henri" after HCB, I think if Leica issue a new CCD M it should be called the "Peter". It will be, at least by me!, and I will buy one if Leica make it.

 

Thank you!

 

I always knew that it was going to be a long shot, but I decided it was worth trying when I realized that every single CMOS sensor-based camera I evaluated (and I've owned and used all of the headlining ones) was inferior to the M9/M-E at base ISO levels.

 

Leica is in possession of a wonderful sensor that sets them apart from the competition. This is important.

 

It is with great interest therefore that I follow their efforts to fix the corrosion issue. And I would be elated of course if they offered an updated CCD sensor in a future M camera.

 

Thanks again.

[Lenshacker]

Another question for M240 owners, with regard to banding at High ISO:

 

Have you noticed a difference in banding with regard to lighting source? A difference between fluorescent lighting vs incandescent? Quickly flickering light vs steady illumination?

 

The M240 CMOS sensor "oversamples", takes two samples of data and averages it together to reduce noise and increase dynamic range. A CCD does not, accumulates charge through the entire exposure.

 

If the Lighting changes dramatically during the exposure, as would happen with some types of lighting- there might be an effect that is visible in the image. Darker portions of the image during the averaging "might" fall into the non-linear range of the response. It's "Pathological", but seems possible. Slightly brighter portions of the scene would remain in the "linear" response of the sensor and average out properly. Pixels in the "now you see it, now you don't" might not average out properly.

 

You spend a decade developing signal processing algorithms, this is how you think.

Edited February 11, 2015 by Lenshacker

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[rodluvan]

Try this for irony: a self-proclaimed 100% film shooter [..]

 

Methinks the only thing you "enjoy" is being negative.

 

is that a PUN?!