Tmuussoni Posted October 23, 2015 Share #121 Posted October 23, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Loren, Without dragging this thread into the technical side, the Leica from 2012 has higher dynamic range and color depth than the touted Sony A7s (the 12 MP shoot a black cat in the dark ISO monster). The Sony does not give 14bit output, only 12bit. Yet the Sony scores higher on DxO mark. The great Sony RX1 also scores higher yet the image is not as workable as the M and is certainly not better. Just two examples. My point is that to be in the top 4 of DxO's weird scoring that weights ISO performance as the skewing factor, is really good. And, the fact is that the actual image quality of the M is not behind the technological curve. It could be argued it is the best. But, I'll leave it here and just say that I don't think Leica is going to have any problems keeping up especially when the new M is finally released. Rick I am quite happy with the dynamic range of M 240. That said, obviously I expect the next M to have a small improvement here. A7s and M 240 are practically even when it comes to dynamic range. A7r&A7r II have a small edge. But the difference is A7s is a High ISO monster and M 240 is not. I don't like to go over ISO 3200 with M 240. ISO 12800 looks about same on A7s as M 240 at ISO 3200. That's quite the difference. So what I would like to see in next M is slight improvement in dynamic range (there can never be too much dynamic range if you ask me), and considerably better high ISO performance. And a real bulb mode. And improved EVF. We will see. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 23, 2015 Posted October 23, 2015 Hi Tmuussoni, Take a look here Next M Camera. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
algrove Posted October 23, 2015 Share #122 Posted October 23, 2015 +1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FrozenInTime Posted October 23, 2015 Share #123 Posted October 23, 2015 The M monochrome has shown me that ISOs above 5000 are really useful. With no new M apparent this winter, I have been thinking than a A7sII is the way to go for > ISO 10,000 color in the interim. I also have a background concern that at ultra high ISOs , where the camera can see into the darkness better than the naked eye, I'm beginning to think the optical rangefinder will struggle and EVF night vision is the way to go. Investing double the money in the SL while waiting for a sleek M body with killer > 6400 ISO does not sit well. Anyone else going to try Sony as a result of ( correct me if there are any signs to the contrary ) delaying a new M model in order to give the SL a clean launch. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkP Posted October 23, 2015 Share #124 Posted October 23, 2015 I'm going to just wait and enjoy my M240, Monochrom v1, M7 and Contax T3. They produce stellar results as do all of my fast Leica lenses. I've been shooting fast glass keeping to max ISO 400-800 (well occasionally higher) in low light for years now so I think I can wait a bit longer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
helged Posted October 23, 2015 Share #125 Posted October 23, 2015 While we wait for the M miniature ... Or do we? Nevertheless. Ergonomics: No. In-the-box: Interesting. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mirekti Posted October 23, 2015 Share #126 Posted October 23, 2015 While we wait for the M miniature ... Or do we? Nevertheless. Ergonomics: No. In-the-box: Interesting. Not bad, but I'd rather leave it at 24MP and add more dynamic range if possible. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TW528 Posted October 23, 2015 Share #127 Posted October 23, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) According to these patents Leica has been working on some sort of hybrid viewfinder. As for video capabilities I think that's here to stay as they really don't have to do anything to add it. Removing it would simply be switching the function off essentially. The only thing is they would need to be competitive (4K) even if video is an afterthought on such a camera. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmx_2 Posted October 23, 2015 Share #128 Posted October 23, 2015 I've not tested the second generation sonys but the first A7 did not appeal me. However a question regarding the iso-performance on the sonys. With the M240 I totally agree, 3200 is maximum when it comes to noise and banding however I can easily underexpose 3 steps, when shooting RAW, giving me an effective ISO of 25600ISO. So my question, is the 12800 ISO on the Sony from RAW-file or jpg? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mornnb Posted October 23, 2015 Share #129 Posted October 23, 2015 I am quite happy with the dynamic range of M 240. That said, obviously I expect the next M to have a small improvement here. A7s and M 240 are practically even when it comes to dynamic range. A7r&A7r II have a small edge. This is why I sold my A7R. In practise due to edge smearing issues the M240 offers more resolution with M lenses regardless of less pixels. And the dynamic range is comparable. I don't like to go over ISO 3200 with M 240. You can get quite usable photos at ISO 6400 on the M240 if you are careful with it. The colour reproduction at this ISO is surprisingly good, though it is extremely noisy in the shadows. The trick is to slightly overexpose and avoid a scene with large areas in shadow. A flat scene that is well exposed will look quite good at ISO 6400. Also, Lightroom can entirely remove any colour noise and reduce the noise as well. However, the high ISO limitations of the M240, provide one with a reason to own a set of Summilux's and a Noctilux. ISO 3200 on a Summilux tends to look better than ISO 12800 on a 2.8 zoom on my Canon body as well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bocaburger Posted October 23, 2015 Share #130 Posted October 23, 2015 Using a lens with faster maximum aperture is a viable option only if the shallower DOF isn't an issue to the specific shot. That said, having shot film for decades, the high-ISO performance on the M240, or M9 for that matter has been more than satisfactory for my purposes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted October 23, 2015 Author Share #131 Posted October 23, 2015 I'm going to just wait and enjoy my M240, Monochrom v1, M7 and Contax T3. They produce stellar results as do all of my fast Leica lenses. I've been shooting fast glass keeping to max ISO 400-800 (well occasionally higher) in low light for years now so I think I can wait a bit longer. I was giving a series of seminars around the country last week on risk allocation. I found I had a free morning in Wellington (my old home town). I walked down from our apartment into town for breakfast, M-A and Summitar 50/2 in my pocket. I'd have to say it was a joy. One thing did strike me, though. This is the best pocket camera I have, but once I'm in the mood to take pictures, the only thing in my pocket is the lens cap. Lovely camera and the collapsible lens from 1948 really quick and easy to use. I was out of practice assessing exposure, I have to concede. When I get round to processing and scanning the film, I'll post here. PS I meant to add that I was shooting Tri-X, and it was an interesting reminder how at ISO 400 a max shutter speed of 1/1,000 is ample. I seemed to be in the f/4 1/250 tange (it was overcast and flat). Using film is an interesting reminder of how ridiculous the digital fixation can be on MP count, ISO and dynamic range. The Monochrom does all that for me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmahto Posted October 23, 2015 Share #132 Posted October 23, 2015 I always put my subject dead center. Where else should it go-to the corner? If your subject can talk then you can ask for their corner preference. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted October 24, 2015 Share #133 Posted October 24, 2015 Ok, let me get this straight... the main subject doesn't always have to be in the center??? But, that is where the lens is the sharpest! If, the subject is near the corner then you would get smearing, distortions, field curvatures, light fall off, and nobody ever looks at the corner of a picture, anyway. Right? I know when I go to a photo gallery I'm usually standing so close to the photograph looking at how sharp it is that I can't even see the edge of the print. You guys are really messed up. You need to spend more time on the internet reading forums about lenses and cameras so you can understand how to take a good photograph. Rick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted October 24, 2015 Share #134 Posted October 24, 2015 Your dog is pretty much centered up. You must be right about centering. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted October 24, 2015 Share #135 Posted October 24, 2015 Your dog is pretty much centered up. You must be right about centering. I know, right? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted October 24, 2015 Share #136 Posted October 24, 2015 I know, right? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkP Posted October 24, 2015 Share #137 Posted October 24, 2015 Lovely camera and the collapsible lens from 1948 really quick and easy to use. I was out of practice assessing exposure, I have to concede. When I get round to processing and scanning the film, I'll post here. Please post in the 2.0/5cm Summitar thread instead. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mornnb Posted October 24, 2015 Share #138 Posted October 24, 2015 Ok, let me get this straight... the main subject doesn't always have to be in the center??? But, that is where the lens is the sharpest! If, the subject is near the corner then you would get smearing, distortions, field curvatures, light fall off, and nobody ever looks at the corner of a picture, anyway. Right? I know when I go to a photo gallery I'm usually standing so close to the photograph looking at how sharp it is that I can't even see the edge of the print. You guys are really messed up. You need to spend more time on the internet reading forums about lenses and cameras so you can understand how to take a good photograph. Rick Agreed....The sharpest part of a lens should be the thirds intersects as that is closer to where the subject is. The mid frame is more important especially in terms of portraiture with wide apertures. Centre sharpness isn't so important in practise. But I want the mid frame to be damn sharp even at f1.4. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted October 24, 2015 Author Share #139 Posted October 24, 2015 By here, I meant on LUF - I'll post in the Photo Forum ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.