sdk Posted July 18, 2015 Share #101 Posted July 18, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) I really hope that the next Leica M has a resolution bump to 36, 42 or 50 MP, as well as improved live view and accessory EVF. I did finally get an M-P and an Olympus EVF. It's certainly a step up from my M9-P in overall image quality, especially after making a custom color profile for daylight with the X-rite Color Checker Passport & LR plugin, but I'd like to get resolution similar to my D800E with good ZF.2 lenses for my Leica and ZM lenses. The EVF blackout on the M-P 240 is ridiculously long compared to using an SLR, which is quite annoying, and the focusing acuity with the EVF leaves a lot to be desired. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 18, 2015 Posted July 18, 2015 Hi sdk, Take a look here New M at PhotoPlus Expo 2015?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
tobey bilek Posted July 18, 2015 Share #102 Posted July 18, 2015 Or learn to use the "Curves" function which can give a good approximation to the response of film - provided the initial exposure is appropriate! I use the generic medium contrast curve in ACR as a starting point point. Usually it is good enough. It is built into the preset I use. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted July 18, 2015 Share #103 Posted July 18, 2015 surely it will be possible at some stage for sensors to detect wavelength. That is essentially how the Foveon works. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted July 18, 2015 Share #104 Posted July 18, 2015 The EVF blackout on the M-P 240 is ridiculously long compared to using an SLR, which is quite annoying, and the focusing acuity with the EVF leaves a lot to be desired. Encouragement along these lines comes from my using the Q from day one where lag is about gone. It's like the bink of an eye long. I keep hoping something like that can be attainable in the next M of course with an external EVF having the Q's EVF quality. Should be an easy adaption now that the Q is out. Of course higher DR and ISO would be welcome. MP? I am happy with 24. When I want more I use my 51MP 645Z system. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted July 18, 2015 Share #105 Posted July 18, 2015 Encouragement along these lines comes from my using the Q from day one where lag is about gone. It's like the bink of an eye long. I keep hoping something like that can be attainable in the next M of course with an external EVF having the Q's EVF quality. Should be an easy adaption now that the Q is out. Of course higher DR and ISO would be welcome. MP? I am happy with 24. When I want more I use my 51MP 645Z system. Agreed. I'd use my PhaseOne XF, with 80MP digital back. As I never need more MP, I don't have one ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanJW Posted July 18, 2015 Share #106 Posted July 18, 2015 I use the generic medium contrast curve in ACR as a starting point point. Usually it is good enough. It is built into the preset I use. +1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mirekti Posted July 19, 2015 Share #107 Posted July 19, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) I use the generic medium contrast curve in ACR as a starting point point. Usually it is good enough. It is built into the preset I use. I also have various presets and it works. ...up to the point where I'd need a bit more dynamic range ;-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrp Posted July 19, 2015 Share #108 Posted July 19, 2015 I really hope that the next Leica M has a resolution bump to 36, 42 or 50 MP, as well as improved live view and accessory EVF. I did finally get an M-P and an Olympus EVF. It's certainly a step up from my M9-P in overall image quality, especially after making a custom color profile for daylight with the X-rite Color Checker Passport & LR plugin, but I'd like to get resolution similar to my D800E with good ZF.2 lenses for my Leica and ZM lenses. The EVF blackout on the M-P 240 is ridiculously long compared to using an SLR, which is quite annoying, and the focusing acuity with the EVF leaves a lot to be desired. I'd prefer that they improved the usability (eg, focusing) and improved the dynamic range over adding Mpx, if there was a trade-off. Even getting the sensor performance to Q level would be welcome, although if that was the only improvement, I probably would've upgrade. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdk Posted July 19, 2015 Share #109 Posted July 19, 2015 Encouragement along these lines comes from my using the Q from day one where lag is about gone. It's like the bink of an eye long. I keep hoping something like that can be attainable in the next M of course with an external EVF having the Q's EVF quality. Should be an easy adaption now that the Q is out. Of course higher DR and ISO would be welcome. MP? I am happy with 24. When I want more I use my 51MP 645Z system. I'm waiting on Pentax to market a full frame 645 digital camera. I loved using the 645nII for several years, but the 645D and 645Z have sensors that are only about 20% bigger physically than 35mm full frame, which means the lovely Pentax 645 FA and A lenses I have would get cropped quite a bit. But to get back to the next Leica M topic, the reason I'd prefer a higher-res body is I would like to get better results from the M system's smaller lenses. I'm no longer a fan of hiking around with big cameras. The higher resolution of the Nikon D800E does make a noticeable difference to me, at the largest print sizes I do, especially with something like the Apo Sonnar 135mm, the 50 and 100mm Makro Planars, or even the AFS Nikkor 28mm/1.8 G. While the Zeiss 35mm/1.4 Distagon ZM, Elmarit 28mm/2.8 ASPH and 75mm/2 Apo Summicron ASPH are not as highly corrected as the Apo Sonnar, they would give close to comparable results with less weight to carry about. I understand that 24MP is satisfactory for many people, but for me it's barely sufficient. But I'm very picky coming off years of medium format film work. To me 36MP is close enough to 645 film in Image quality, while 24MP falls just short of it. Your mileage will probably vary. If Leica is smart and not too risk averse, they will produce both and improved 24MP Leica M and a high-res Leica M-P, to compete with the D800 family and the Canon 50MP bodies and sell them to both groups of users. I suspect both would sell well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted July 20, 2015 Share #110 Posted July 20, 2015 I'm waiting on Pentax to market a full frame 645 digital camera. I loved using the 645nII for several years, but the 645D and 645Z have sensors that are only about 20% bigger physically than 35mm full frame, which means the lovely Pentax 645 FA and A lenses I have would get cropped quite a bit. Just thought I would mention that MR at Lula in his Sept 2014 review said the 645Z sensor is 70% larger than a FF 35mm sensor. It is either 70% or 20% as you state. Oonly one number is correct. Perhaps the comparisons are for different values? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted July 20, 2015 Share #111 Posted July 20, 2015 Just thought I would mention that MR at Lula in his Sept 2014 review said the 645Z sensor is 70% larger than a FF 35mm sensor. It is either 70% or 20% as you state. Oonly one number is correct. [...] Or both? The surface of the Pentax's sensor seems to be 66% larger (1,437 vs 864 mm2) while its diagonal looks 26% longer (54.7 vs 43.3 mm) IINW. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted July 20, 2015 Share #112 Posted July 20, 2015 My math… Pentax sensor 43.8mm x 32.8mm = 1436.64 total sq. area. 35mm format = 24mm x 36mm = 864 total sq. area. Difference is 66.3% more for the Pentax….or, conversely 35mm format is 60.1% of the size of the Pentax. And note that the Pentax 645 digital is quite a bit smaller (53%) than the traditional 6x4.5 cm film format. Jeff I see lct offered similar... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edwardkaraa Posted July 20, 2015 Share #113 Posted July 20, 2015 The S sensor is 30x45, exactly 25% linearly larger than 24x36. The Pentax has a 4:3 image ratio but still around the same ballpark. Film 645 format is around 60% larger than 24x36 linearly. A huge difference. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mornnb Posted July 20, 2015 Share #114 Posted July 20, 2015 The S sensor is 30x45, exactly 25% linearly larger than 24x36. The Pentax has a 4:3 image ratio but still around the same ballpark. Film 645 format is around 60% larger than 24x36 linearly. A huge difference. There are other alternatives. Hasselblad has the Hasselblad H5D-60 with a 40.2 x 53.7mm 60MP sensor. Phase One has a IQ3 80MP with a 40.4 x 53.7 mm sensor. These are the largest digital sensors anyone makes, and are much closer to true medium format than the Leica S or Pentax 645. 40x54 has 3 times the image area of the 35mm format. (And about 3 times the price of a Leica M) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted July 20, 2015 Share #115 Posted July 20, 2015 Largest? Ummm... http://gizmodo.com/5841852/the-worlds-largest-cmos-sensor-is-recording-meteors-at-60fps Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted July 20, 2015 Share #116 Posted July 20, 2015 I do believe MR's comparison is 35mm versus 645Z CMOS sensors. CCD sensros are not mentioned in his comparison since he was cocentrating on more modern CMOS technology. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdk Posted July 21, 2015 Share #117 Posted July 21, 2015 The sensor of the Pentax 645 digital cameras is c.60% larger in area than 35mm sensors, but not in linear size which is only about 20% larger. Linear size is more important for resolution, while area is more important for light gathering ability, all things being equal (which they never are in technologies from different companies). So you could have a 33x44mm medium format sensor with the same pixel size as a 35mm size sensor, and that would have c.20% higher resolution but similar light sensitivity and dynamic range. Or you could have the same resolution in both sensors and the pixels would be about 60-70% larger on the medium format sensor, which could mean better sensitivity and dynamic range if the engineering is done well in other aspects of signal capture and processing. So there are always trade-offs in designing photo equipment. So MR at Lula and I are both right, but we were talking about different units of measurement (area vs. length).If Pentax went back to the 42x55mm size of their film 645 cameras for their next digital medium format camera that could easily have BOTH higher resolution and larger pixels than 35mm size digital cameras (assuming similar technology). Such a camera would have 2.67 times (167% increase) the sensor area of 35mm and a 50% linear size advantage (1.5X) over the smaller format. And a 55mm/2.8 would go back to being a nice wide angle rather than a normal lens. Of course the cost might be a lot more for the sensor, and that might not be something Pentax can market successfully until fabricating large sensors becomes easier and cheaper. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdk Posted July 21, 2015 Share #118 Posted July 21, 2015 And note the confusion over format size linear resolution versus area is similar to the confusion many people have over camera megapixels. At first glance it would seem that a 24MP camera has twice the resolution a 12MP camera does, but the resolution jump is actually only 50% because resolution is related to the linear pixel number (6000px long dimension versus 4000px long dimension). The 50MP Canon 5DS series finally gets an actual doubling of the resolution of 12 MP cameras like the Nikon D700 and D3, if you do the math properly, based on linear number of pixels. And so the Nikon D800 series (36MP) have a 24% higher resolution than a Leica M (24MP) which isn't huge, but is noticeable in practice when making large prints that withstand close scrutiny, and the Canon 5DS and 5DS R offer 46% more resolution than the Leica M, and 18% more resolution than my D800E that I have such respect for. But really they are all wonderful tools (not that I've used the new Canons but they seem like a great idea to me). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
k-hawinkler Posted July 21, 2015 Share #119 Posted July 21, 2015 And note the confusion over format size linear resolution versus area is similar to the confusion many people have over camera megapixels. At first glance it would seem that a 24MP camera has twice the resolution a 12MP camera does, but the resolution jump is actually only 50% because resolution is related to the linear pixel number (6000px long dimension versus 4000px long dimension). The 50MP Canon 5DS series finally gets an actual doubling of the resolution of 12 MP cameras like the Nikon D700 and D3, if you do the math properly, based on linear number of pixels. And so the Nikon D800 series (36MP) have a 24% higher resolution than a Leica M (24MP) which isn't huge, but is noticeable in practice when making large prints that withstand close scrutiny, and the Canon 5DS and 5DS R offer 46% more resolution than the Leica M, and 18% more resolution than my D800E that I have such respect for. But really they are all wonderful tools (not that I've used the new Canons but they seem like a great idea to me). Thanks. I agree, more resolution isn't everything, but it helps. I have both the D800E and A7R with their 36 MP and am looking forward to the A7R Mark II with 42.4 MP. Considering all the other improvements the A7R II would still be of interest to me even if it had only 36 MP. Later this month and in early August the A7R II will start shipping. Then I'll find out for myself whether Leica WA M lenses will fare better than on the A7R. If push comes to shove I suppose one can replace the sensor cover glass and significantly improve M lens performance as was observed with the A7R. In any case the A7R II should be a terrific camera for my Leica R lenses. :-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbdecker Posted July 21, 2015 Share #120 Posted July 21, 2015 ISO improvement and Bulb without a short limit (means i can get rid of a Sony 2nd body for occasional use) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.