How many megapixels in the next M?

[JonPB]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

This topic makes me think that the next Leica release will be informative. If an S with more pixels comes out in a solo announcement, an M might follow a few months later with more than 24 megapixels. If an M is announced without that presage, however, I'd expect them to keep the same pixel count in the next generation.

 

Regardless, much hoopla will be made of it: someone will say it is a deal breaker and sell their entire kit, someone else will say it is immaterial and upgrade anyways, and someone else will sit back and laugh while their printer plods away at creating a great photograph from an M8 capture. To each their own.

 

Leica will do what they will do. What we think they may do is not really relevant as one may as well get out a deck of Tarot cards.

 

My deck of Aciel cards reads, "yes." Admittedly, they are normally more informative when accompanied by pinot noir, which I have come to believe is kind of Germanic kool-aid.

 

Cheers,

Jon

[marchyman]

How about just one model with a menu option, call it decimate, that reads only every other line?

 

 

Wouldn't the decimate model read 9 out of 10 lines

 

24 is fine for me, now.  I don't know what I may like/dislike in the future.

[Advertisement]

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

[CYBORA]

Leica won't want to threat the S line with more megapixels 

 

So get ready for a sensor similar to SL in terms of pixel, ISO, DR and other stuff. Just think it as a M body with SL sensor ( of course the sensor will be optimized for M lenses this time ) 

[pico]

Wouldn't the decimate model read 9 out of 10 lines

 

24 is fine for me, now.  I don't know what I may like/dislike in the future.

 

Yes I know the origin of decimate. In fact it meant 10% of a Roman army to slaughter.

[jmahto]

Leica won't want to threat the S line with more megapixels 

 

So get ready for a sensor similar to SL in terms of pixel, ISO, DR and other stuff. Just think it as a M body with SL sensor ( of course the sensor will be optimized for M lenses this time ) 

If M goes up to 36mp, then using the same sensor technology (same pixel width), S will go to 56mp (36*0.8^2 = 56). This will not be threatening to S even if new S comes after new M.

 

But my crystal ball says that probably Leica will stick to sensor from Q or SL and stay at 24mp in new M since they can make use of this sensor technology longer. My crystal ball also adds a note saying moving to 36mp is natural evolution down the road since sensor technology is evolving. 

 

Edit: My crystal ball is better than Steve Huff's which he used in 2012 for M240 (he said he saw built in EVF).

http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2011/08/29/a-look-in-to-my-crystal-ball-for-2012-i-see-leica/

Edited May 20, 2016 by jmahto

[Tailwagger]

Even then these upgrades feel too quick to me.  The only real desire I have is a faster EVF with no buffering so that I can use 135mm + lenses comfortably with continuous shooting for some very ocassional  use.  So I can not think of the M240 as vintage, when my M8 is only just acquiring that status.

 

IMO, there are laws of diminishing return at play for a lot of what people might desire, but in some dimensions, certainly the one you mention Leica isnt there yet with a least with the  M. Certainly a 3-4K add on evf would make a more versatile camera AFAIC.  

 

Back on the MP thing, successfully taking advantage of 40 or 50MPs, certainly without some form of IS, requires a lot more discipline, higher shutter speeds and/or a really good tripod. That might make sense for an SL2, but little for a next gen M. One also has to consider how a M with 35MP or 40MP CMOS might play against the current S.  Leaves it somewhat squeezed between the M on one hand and the other established MF systems that range up to 100MP these days.  

 

I too am pretty happy with the M from an output standpoint, I'd just like to see the next gen take the camera closer to state of the art EVF and low noise pixels. Heresy I know, but if I were musing about anything, I wouldn't mind a single PD site, center frame, that lit an LED in the VF when it detected focus.  Wishful thinking aside, there are other improvements which seem more befitting than an increase in pixies and to my way of thinking more real world useful. 

[jmahto]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

... I will also add that M having more mp than SL is not threatening to SL since M is considered superior/purer to SL anyway (at least in M user's mind).

[CYBORA]

If M goes up to 36mp, then using the same sensor technology (same pixel width), S will go to 56mp (36*0.8^2 = 56). This will not be threatening to S even if new S comes after new M.

 

But my crystal ball says that probably Leica will stick to sensor from Q or SL and stay at 24mp in new M since they can make use of this sensor technology longer. My crystal ball also adds a note saying moving to 36mp is natural evolution down the road since sensor technology is evolving. 

 

Edit: My crystal ball is better than Steve Huff's which he used in 2012 for M240 (he said he saw built in EVF).

http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2011/08/29/a-look-in-to-my-crystal-ball-for-2012-i-see-leica/

 

       I am not sure if we will wait about 6 years again for the next generation S  ( assuming that from S2 to S 007  - 2008-2014 ) , so guessing the years 2020 or 2021 for the new version with new processor / sensor  technology etc. Not just an LCD upgrade. If this happens, then M with 36 mpix coming in 2016 will be a threat for S.

 

I hope to see a built in EVF ( maybe hybrid design ) in the next M

 or

A new compact body like Q or M design having EVF with M-mount.

[jaapv]

A threat for the S? Have you ever used one? Or even held one? The S is a medium format camera, sleek for its class, but it is a heavy, bulky DSLR and as such has nothing in common with an M camera.

Megapixel-megaschmixel. The sensor resolution does not define a camera. The concept and design does.

 

Quite apart from that, the sensor size does matter. The MP count being equal, the larger sensor will always give superior results.  There is no way that a 36 MP 135-size sensor can match the output of a 37.5 MP sensor in 645 format.

[CYBORA]

A threat for the S? Have you ever used one? Or even held one? The S is a medium format camera, sleek for its class, but it is a heavy, bulky DSLR and as such has nothing in common with an M camera.

Megapixel-megaschmixel. The sensor resolution does not define a camera. The concept and design does.

 

Quite apart from that, the sensor size does matter. The MP count being equal, the larger sensor will always give superior results.  There is no way that a 36 MP 135-size sensor can match the output of a 37.5 MP sensor in 645 format.

 

   Yes the quality will be much different, I am with you with this. But all the MF producers except Leica went more than 50 mpx (  it was the first complain we heard when the 007 was announced )  and I think this would be a problem for Leica having M and S as almost same megapixels in consumer mind for marketing. The consumers want to have more DR / quality etc from a MF and 007 gives them, but MF also means distinctive big prints from other products on the market for the brand. The S users may be disappointed for an identical mp level M , even they couldn't find a more than 50 mpix S with the latest model.

Edited May 21, 2016 by CYBORA

[david strachan]

What's the point?  Huge number of megapixels for every image...needs a lot of management from processing to storage.  Storage is close to free, but is it? 

 

Just who does print billboard pictures??

A lot of it's about "just because we can"? I'd like to know.

 

It's the quality of each and every pixel that counts.

But what would I know...I'm happy with 10 megapixels...

[jmahto]

For billboard pctures you have iPhones.

[lct]

[...] I'm happy with 10 megapixels... 

 

Shame on you David. You're not modern at all. Modern photogs never compose when they shoot. They do it by cropping In PP so they need a lot of megapixels to present decent pictures to their relatives or clients .

[Tailwagger]

A threat for the S? Have you ever used one? Or even held one? The S is a medium format camera, sleek for its class, but it is a heavy, bulky DSLR and as such has nothing in common with an M camera.

Megapixel-megaschmixel. The sensor resolution does not define a camera. The concept and design does.

 

Quite apart from that, the sensor size does matter. The MP count being equal, the larger sensor will always give superior results.  There is no way that a 36 MP 135-size sensor can match the output of a 37.5 MP sensor in 645 format.

 

 

S, no. Pentax, yes, given I currently possess and still shoot with a 645D and 645Z.  MF is indeed a different animal of a different purpose, but its not clear to me where the market for the S comes from, dedicated MF shooters or Leicaphiles. I'm not sure the former view the S as a truly serious player in that space compared to Hassie, P1 or even the Z regardless of pixel count and at least some of the latter can be a little fickle about such things on occasion .  

 

Given there are 42MP cell phones in the marketplace, its not difficult to assert that pixel count is a poor comparison point.  I do think, however, being so emphatic about the superiority of larger sensors purely on the basis of size is a bit of an overgeneralization. Output quality, of course, isn't a straight line function of real estate. IIRC, the S is still CCD, as is my D, which in my experience means taking far greater care with highlights in the context of less dynamic range to play with. It was just such frustrations that pushed me to buy a Z.  And much to the dismay of some, the differences between an A7Rii and the 645Z are not quite as profound as one might think. There are even scenarios, given the IBIS, where the Sony can actually be superior.

 

Regardless, my hope is that Leica stays in the vicinity of 25MP going forward. IMO, it provides the best compromise between acuity and the realities of shooting hand held. 

Edited May 21, 2016 by Tailwagger

[CYBORA]

What's the point?  Huge number of megapixels for every image...needs a lot of management from processing to storage.  Storage is close to free, but is it? 

 

Just who does print billboard pictures??

A lot of it's about "just because we can"? I'd like to know.

 

It's the quality of each and every pixel that counts.

But what would I know...I'm happy with 10 megapixels...

 

Megapixels are going up and storages with more capacity and processors with more power will be less expensive. In 10 years , we will be talking about cameras having 100+ MPs. 

 

This is unavoidable in the age of technology.

 

Anyone can continue using their current cameras but don't expect the manufactures stay using the same megapixel count for years and years...  Love it or not, the customers demand more and the companies provides more for years. This is how the business goes. Leica just plays this game slower than others 

[darylgo]

If we were back in the 6mp days then an increase in resolution would be quite significant, less today with 24mp. Not the metric I am seeking, but I wouldn't mind an increase. It's the first spec listed with any new camera and quantifiable. More important is dynamic range and quality of the pixel. Not all pixels are created equal. Either I have become accustomed to Leicas pixels or they have spoiled me, I think it is the latter. My real desire for the new M would be 5 axis image stabilization. All lenses would benefit and the images quality gains would be significant in low light and for all the stellar lenses in the Leica lineup. I don't see any evidence of Leica adding IS and moving in that direction, the SL has lens stabilization is the only evidence that it's on Leica's radar at all. One last thought, Michael Reichmann many years ago listed on his website the improvements he would like to see in a M9 successor. I believe there were ten. Leica incorporated most if not all his recommendations. It is a testament to him that Leica paid so much attention to one individual. Only a few days ago Michael passed away, and we all lost an all-time great in photography.

[adli]

I agree that dynamic range and quality of the pixels are much more important than more pixels in todays cameras. And not to mention higher ISO with good quality. Leica who used to be king of the night in the film days have lost this position to Nikon.  Regarding pixels, I have not heard any of those stating that they NEED more pixels managing to give any proper explanation of this need  apart from being a desire.

 

Sorry to hear about Michael Reichmann, he and Luminous Landscape have contributed a lot to this generation of photographers.

[Paul J]

I agree that dynamic range and quality of the pixels are much more important than more pixels in todays cameras. And not to mention higher ISO with good quality. Leica who used to be king of the night in the film days have lost this position to Nikon. Regarding pixels, I have not heard any of those stating that they NEED more pixels managing to give any proper explanation of this need  apart from being a desire.

Your signature states "all you ever need is a 35 and 90", you have an overly constrained view of "need" and miss the fact that some peoples needs are outside of your uses or understanding of them.

 

I do not share your need, what so ever, for more dynamic range and higher iso over 400, or 800, at the most. I need 60-80mp quite frequently.

[lct]

A good question would be to know if Leica users prefer more DR or more isos in general. I prefer more DR personally but i'm not sure the majority would vote like me.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[adli]

If you want to start a signature war, you state in yours "Perception. Not perfection". Nob the less you claim that you need 60-80 MP without being able to tell how your image will be better perceived with more pixels. Amusing.

 

My sig is a statement on the discussions where people are saying that they need this and they need that, unable to differentiate their needs from their desires. I am of course aware that in many types of photography, you will need different focal lengths, but in traditional photojournalism, you will get a long long way with the classic reporage combination of 35 and 90.

 

Your signature states "all you ever need is a 35 and 90", you have an overly constrained view of "need" and miss the fact that some peoples needs are outside of your uses or understanding of them.

I do not share your need, what so ever, for more dynamic range and higher iso over 400, or 800, at the most. I need 60-80mp quite frequently.