New Leica M 240 follow-up in 2017 : The speculations.

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

You could ask -and pay- for express service, or if a professional, register for professional service (requires proof)

 

 

I did not complain about the charge, which was not insignificant. It just seems to me the concept of "customer service" should include "reasonable turn around time". Do we have a shortage of Leica gnomes in America?  The camera is probably open on the bench for a day. Does it cost them more to get it done sooner? Getting behind is one thing, being perpetually behind, is something else.

 

I, like you, have a pretty serious addiction, er, attachment to the kit....      I'm a little cranky these days, for reasons way outside of the scope of this forum. My apologies if I seem disrespectful. 

[Advertisement]

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

[Tailwagger]

I think Leica has to get back to a formula that treats the body as a lifetime commitment, "no regrets", purchase. 

 

First, welcome! 

 

From my own perspective, I'm not sure by any reasonable measure that they are not already there with the 240 and its siblings.  A brief scan of this forum would yield dozens upon dozens of personal wish lists and proposed improvements. And I would never suggest that the current M is perfect as it is, nor would I be unhappy if many of these suggestions were addressed by the upcoming generation. But while it is undeniable that there are many more advanced cameras, devices that technically are far more capable than an M, I've come to believe that its almost silly to measure the 240 etal against these alternatives and the technology they provide.  And so, for the most part, I no longer do.

 

None of the digital cameras I currently or have previously owned are even remotely as endearing or as capable of spirit.  Just as I'd far rather listen to a musician who bungles a passage or two, but plays with pace, rhythm, subtlety than suffer through a technically perfect, yet soulless, performance, so I accept, even embrace, this camera's imperfections. It simply is so utterly capable of stamping personality on the result in just the way I was hoping it would. Everything else feels cold by comparison. For me, this trait is so much more valuable than any technical innovation that I might (and often do) wish for, that if my 3.5 year old M along with my current bag of lenses was the last system I ever possessed, I would be entirely content... as long as I manage to swing a good copy of the 75mm Summilux someday .

[TRIago]

My M9 is 100% no regrets purchase. I will use the camera as much as I can and I've got no plans for selling it or buying another one. And I'm not alone for sure.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Paulus]

Hasselblad is a medium format camera. The problems with high MP sensors handheld have to do with pixel size, not directly with pixel number.

A medium format sensor can hold a larger number of pixels as a 24x36 one for a given pixel size.

 

In general the larger the pixel (thus the lower the MP count) the better the image quality will be. So there is an optimum that balances resolution vs. acuity. At the moment that is someplace between 20 and 30 MP for a 24x36 sensor. Possible it will shift upwards in the future as sensor manufacturing technology progresses, maybe with the newest Panasonic technology which allows for larger pixel surfaces. Leica will always go for the optimum result, not for the highest possible resolution.

But I don't understand Jaap, why Erwin Puts makes that remark in his latest book then, page 362 about the optimal sensor being 40-50 Mp ?

[otto.f]

Well explained, Jaap.  It's a shame not enough people understand that very simple concept.

To meet the optical performance of the actual lens collection?

[jaapv]

But I don't understand Jaap, why Erwin Puts makes that remark in his latest book then, page 362 about the optimal sensor being 40-50 Mp ?

Optimal from an optical of view. That optimal 50 MP sensor does not exist today. There are still too many drawbacks from the optical aberrations of the microlenses and Bayer filter, from crosstalk, colour bleed, insufficient fill  by not utilizing the full surface , etc. on higher-pixel density sensors. That is  the shifting of the compromise  by advancing technology (not the least of which is reduction of the tolerances in the sensor manufacturing process) I talked about.

Come to think of it, Erwin's ideal sensor does exist: It is used in the 246.

[Exodies]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Isn't the iPhone sensor about twenty times denser than the M typ 240? 12 megapixels in 32 square mm

[david strachan]

That's why we liked the M8 and M9...big pixels.

 

cheers..

[jaapv]

Isn't the iPhone sensor about twenty times denser than the M typ 240? 12 megapixels in 32 square mm

Yes - but try and use them It is a different compromise.

[cirke]

Isn't the iPhone sensor about twenty times denser than the M typ 240? 12 megapixels in 32 square mm

 

yes but noisy at 50 ISO :-)

[jaapv]

Very noisy - but you won't see it on a phone screen and there is aggressive noise reduction going on. That reduces the resolution dramatically.

[luigi bertolotti]

Very noisy - but you won't see it on a phone screen and there is aggressive noise reduction going on. That reduces the resolution dramatically.

I agree... cellphones pictures imo are for screen viewing only... and even not too big and good PC LCD screens... if you try to get just an A4 print, the quality falls dramatically...

[jmahto]

I agree... cellphones pictures imo are for screen viewing only... and even not too big and good PC LCD screens... if you try to get just an A4 print, the quality falls dramatically...

Although the pics are noisy, I have made A4 size pics from iPhone 6 that are quite good. It just need good light. The dynamic range is lacking and highlights tend to blow out but the results are not bad. It actually depends on the subject. A high frequency picture (fine branches and leaves) is not suitable due to aggressive NR but a cityscape turns out good.

[jaapv]

Although the pics are noisy, I have made A4 size pics from iPhone 6 that are quite good. It just need good light. The dynamic range is lacking and highlights tend to blow out but the results are not bad. It actually depends on the subject. A high frequency picture (fine branches and leaves) is not suitable due to aggressive NR but a cityscape turns out good.

Correct, and nowhere near the nominal resolution. The pixels are simply too small and too densely packed, so it all falls apart.

[Paulus]

Correct, and nowhere near the nominal resolution. The pixels are simply too small and too densely packed, so it all falls apart.

But surely, 40Mp would be possible, given the fact, that sony has a 36 Mp ?

[Morry]

My understanding is that ultra megapixels become too sensitive and the camera will require image stabilizer or tripod, wrong ?

 

Not sure how practical for M camera to have built-in IS, but anyway I feel 24mp are just too good to be enough.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[cirke]

Very noisy - but you won't see it on a phone screen and there is aggressive noise reduction going on. That reduces the resolution dramatically.

 

but using procamera and DNG  is a little better

[rosuna]

Hasselblad is a medium format camera. The problems with high MP sensors handheld have to do with pixel size, not directly with pixel number.

A medium format sensor can hold a larger number of pixels as a 24x36 one for a given pixel size.

 

In general the larger the pixel (thus the lower the MP count) the better the image quality will be. So there is an optimum that balances resolution vs. acuity. At the moment that is someplace between 20 and 30 MP for a 24x36 sensor. Possible it will shift upwards in the future as sensor manufacturing technology progresses, maybe with the newest Panasonic technology which allows for larger pixel surfaces. Leica will always go for the optimum result, not for the highest possible resolution.

 

 

There is a serious drawback with very large images: the size of the files. They require more storing capacity and more processing power. 

 

I don't need larger images than 24MP. A reportage camera doesn't need this. I would prefer wider dynamic range and lower noise (both narrowly related).

 

Moreover, 24MP versus 36MP does not make a great difference in linear resolution.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[rosuna]

Thinking about the new M... I don't have any complains on my M240. 

 

The new camera will bring a better sensor, better screen, larger buffer, better EVF (I don't need improvements there because I don't use the EVF at all)... 

 

All sensor updates bring improvements, and that is expected, but I am happy with the current sensor, considering resolution and performance in the reasonable range of ISO values (200-1600). 

 

The only real improvement, for me, would be a smaller, thinner and lighter body, more similar to the film M cameras. I find the digital Ms a bit too fat and heavy. That is not easy to achieve. 

 

Anyway, Leica may explore the possibility of a different branch of cameras in the M system: lighter, cheaper EVF-based M cameras. I am not sure, but maybe there is a public for that. Some kind of modern CL-like camera.

[grillo]

I'm not too hopeful for a smaller M camera. To me the SL, the T and the Q are too big, and they killed the small X2 for the much bigger X113. Leica's idea of the ideal camera size isn't in sync with mine.