Jump to content

M10 the new maestro II sensor.


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 42
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

The SL and Q sensors are very similar, but not the same. They're from the same sensor family, however.   The M10 sensor is new: Jono's report suggests it can achieve about a half stop more ISO compared to the SL and about two stops more ISO than the typ 240 sensor (presuming about the same noise, of course). And of course, Leica has continued tuning color, as they have throughout the M8, M9, M240, SL, and M262 introductions. It is likely that the M10 produces the best color yet.   It is im

I don't think it has anything at all to do with the SL/Q sensor - not even a common manufacturer . . .

Leica did advertise the fact that the Max sensors of the M (Typ 240) and the S were jointly designed with CMOSIS but the sources of any other sensors remained a mystery. It is well known that Leica used Sony sensors in their X and T/TL series cameras and we all have a good idea who makes the sensors of the Q and SL, but Leica refuses to confirm any hunches.   So for all intents and purposes it is a Leica sensor. Yes, we all know that Leica doesn’t manufacture sensors but any praise or critici

I understand the SL and Q have the same sensor, being more updated than my M262's sensor.  I called the Leica store today in Washington DC and I was told by someone there the new M10 has yet another sensor that may be superior to the Q (and SL) sensor, because it allows for the very high ISO 50,000 rating for the M10.  Regarding color and white balance differences between the Q and M10 sensor and processor, I wish I could read a thorough review of that analysis.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The SL and Q sensors are very similar, but not the same. They're from the same sensor family, however.

 

The M10 sensor is new: Jono's report suggests it can achieve about a half stop more ISO compared to the SL and about two stops more ISO than the typ 240 sensor (presuming about the same noise, of course). And of course, Leica has continued tuning color, as they have throughout the M8, M9, M240, SL, and M262 introductions. It is likely that the M10 produces the best color yet.

 

It is important to realize, however, that these differences are relatively subtle, like between the typ 240 and typ 262, or typ 262 and SL. If you work with raw capture, they're easily overshadowed by how you prefer your color balance and saturation to be set.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The SL and Q sensors are very similar, but not the same. They're from the same sensor family, however.

 

The M10 sensor is new: Jono's report suggests it can achieve about a half stop more ISO compared to the SL and about two stops more ISO than the typ 240 sensor (presuming about the same noise, of course). And of course, Leica has continued tuning color, as they have throughout the M8, M9, M240, SL, and M262 introductions. It is likely that the M10 produces the best color yet.

 

It is important to realize, however, that these differences are relatively subtle, like between the typ 240 and typ 262, or typ 262 and SL. If you work with raw capture, they're easily overshadowed by how you prefer your color balance and saturation to be set.

 

 

 

Having seen the photos in Jono's M10 review it looks to me as though the skin tones in the photos of his little girl are more natural than I'm accustomed to seeing. I've always found the M240 and even SL magenta a little intrusive, not just in my photos, and never come up with a formula that reliably and consistently manages it. Sometimes I just cannot get it quite right in PP at all. This could be one area in which the new sensor is definitively superior to its predecessors, or it could be wishful thinking on my part.

Edited by Peter H
Link to post
Share on other sites

Having seen the photos in Jono's M10 review it looks to me as though the skin tones in the photos of his little girl are more natural than I'm accustomed to seeing. I've always found the M240 and even SL magenta a little intrusive, not just in my photos, and never come up with a formula that reliably and consistently manages it. Sometimes I just cannot get it quite right in PP at all. This could be one area in which the new sensor is definitively superior to its predecessors, or it could be wishful thinking on my part.

Not sure how much can be achieved in firmware but wouldn't it be upon Leica to provide "natural colour" fix for M240 and older M digital models?
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have high hopes that Leica's emphasis that the new sensor is better optimized for M wide angles will better control edge colors. I've passed on the 240 series and SL as users seem to have more edge issues than the M9, needing corrections in post.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Erwin Puts says M10 is SL sensor with new NR algorithms. I tend to believe him.

 

But, if ISO6400 is now "clean", which we will see once many people are using the camera, that's a big improvement. One wonders if the older cameras could be updated, but won't be, for obvious reasons.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Erwin Puts says M10 is SL sensor with new NR algorithms. I tend to believe him.But, if ISO6400 is now "clean", which we will see once many people are using the camera, that's a big improvement. One wonders if the older cameras could be updated, but won't be, for obvious reasons.

I'm pretty sure that he's wrong about this - Sean Reid also says that the sensor is not related to the SL in his review. Leica are not talking about the source of the sensor, but they are emphasizing that it is a brand new sensor for the M - I'm almost certain that it has nothing to do with the SL / Q sensor at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What exactly makes a sensor 'new' rather than a derivative of a previous/existing one ? 

 

I'm sure it has plenty in common with the SL/Q sensor ....... but will have been optimised for the peculiarities of M lenses.

I don't think it has anything at all to do with the SL/Q sensor - not even a common manufacturer . . .

Link to post
Share on other sites

If Leica's way to give specs is the same as before, 100 ISO is the base, not a "pull" option. If so, is an appreciable step on 240... I have never bought ND filters, but recently happened to me several situations in which I would have liked to have one...

Edited by luigi bertolotti
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure that he's wrong about this - Sean Reid also says that the sensor is not related to the SL in his review. Leica are not talking about the source of the sensor, but they are emphasizing that it is a brand new sensor for the M - I'm almost certain that it has nothing to do with the SL / Q sensor at all.

Andreas reports the same after talking to Leica people at the event in Wetzlar.

 

(Mr. Puts is very often wrong.)

Edited by UliWer
Link to post
Share on other sites

Any news regarding the actual manufacturer?

 

CMOSIS/STmicro used specific technology to create the large aperture which made the M240-sensor suitable for M-lenses without using tricks like offset microlenses.

3 years later the SL was still not able to do the same - so we can suspect this technnology is not openly available to many sensor suppliers.

 

There are two scenarios:

a) Leica is "ashamed" of the new supplier because it is somehow related to the mass market

somebody in the marketing department thinks making suppliers public weakens their own brand position even if it's exclusive (I just experienced this very same behaviour in my job)
Link to post
Share on other sites

The "Max"-sensor for the M (240) was designed by Leica. They were proud to report that they have all rights of the sensor design, which would make them independant of producers in in the future. CMOSIS did only build the sensor but was not the designer.

 

So I am surprised that they now are very hush about the new design. They neither speak of their "own" design nor do they tell if there was anybody else involved. Perhaps this non-information policy is caused by different approaches to their different systems. Maybe they want to avoid any discussion about which sensor is better or more advanced: their own one or one bought from third parties.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...