jdlaing Posted May 12, 2016 Share #21 Posted May 12, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) IR filtration has no effect on acutance. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 12, 2016 Posted May 12, 2016 Hi jdlaing, Take a look here M240 Special Edition Concept. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
lm_user Posted May 12, 2016 Author Share #22 Posted May 12, 2016 IR filtration has no effect on acutance. Ok - does sensor glass cover thickness affect acutance? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted May 12, 2016 Share #23 Posted May 12, 2016 Yes but not noticeably. If it has an anti aliasing filter it does. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonPB Posted May 12, 2016 Share #24 Posted May 12, 2016 "Noticeable" is a dangerous concept among folks who have climbed so far up the diminishing returns ladder as to settle on Leica -- and I count myself among those. I think that Leica chose a thinner than usual cover glass precisely because they felt that thicker glass resulted in noticeable differences, at least among their most demanding customers. On the other hand, while I might be intrigued by a full-spectrum M camera, I wonder if metering and focusing wouldn't be issues. For metering, the sensor would need to have a similar sensitivity as the sensor, which I doubt would present too much of a challenge -- but it would require a change, and beyond that I have no insight. For focusing, I notice that my lenses do not have infrared index marks. I suspect that, even as much as Leica obviously cares about color correction, the focus does shift for infrared (and ultraviolet). Consequently, perhaps this would be a better variation for the SL? I like the concept. I just worry about the implementation. Cheers, Jon Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 12, 2016 Share #25 Posted May 12, 2016 IR filtration has no effect on acutance. The thickness of the IR filter clearly has. Compare the per-pixel acuity of the M8 and M9, the thickness grew from 0.5 mm to 0.8 mm. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lm_user Posted May 12, 2016 Author Share #26 Posted May 12, 2016 Thanks for the feedback, it helped me to clarify my thoughts a bit. Perhaps a better question? Would you be interested having both options 1 and 2 available in the next M and would you purchase option 2? 1 - New M announced af Photokina with IR sensitivity similar to M240 2 - New M announced at Photokina with increased IR sensitivity - but with noticably improvrd acutance. IR filters required for color and cyan corners fixed in camera? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
david strachan Posted May 12, 2016 Share #27 Posted May 12, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) We need another hypered M8. Super acutance, and not get hung up on filters..they do serve many situations, as they've done with all photography in the past. So use, and enjoy them. Another new M8 please, at same APS-H with no IR filter...long exposures ( a good point with CCD) and allow the photographer to choose their filter to suit the image with on-lens filters. It does allow more interpretation..rather than straight photography. The CCD does have nicer "grain" at it's, albeit , low base ISO. CMOS noise looks plastic. ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted May 12, 2016 Share #28 Posted May 12, 2016 I would be prepared to trade a better acutance for the obligation to use on-lens IR-cut filters perhaps, as i still use the latters with my M240, but in no way for a noisy sensor. I don't find that my modern CMOS sensors give a more plasticky rendition than my old CCDs BTW. Foveon sensors are still superior as far as acutance is concerned but noise is a problem with them unfortunately. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 12, 2016 Share #29 Posted May 12, 2016 And crosstalk. And colour smearing. I don't think they would do well on rangefinder type lenses as they are now. But the idea is worth developing further IMHO. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted May 12, 2016 Share #30 Posted May 12, 2016 Well the IQ of my DP2 Merril is superior to anything i've ever used i must say but it is a subjective matter of course. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 12, 2016 Share #31 Posted May 12, 2016 Not surprising. It is APS-C and not prone to steep incidence angles. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lm_user Posted May 13, 2016 Author Share #32 Posted May 13, 2016 So far we have 3 interested buyers. Jaapv - you should step up. . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.