M 11 will be around in less than 4 years. The speculations and facts.

[Paulus]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Yes, it is impossible to feel a pixel. Buick learned that over 30 years ago.

.

 

you mean over 70 years ago? 

[Herr Barnack]

How did we get to "bleeding edge technology" all of a sudden - I smell a straw man!

 

Back to innovation:

• removing stupid video
• finally ditching pointless USB (you couldn't even charge with)
• improved weather sealing
• improved sensor
• improved processor
• improved viewfinder
• ditching the crappy EVF in favour of something that at least comparable rather than behind other offerings
• ISO dial
• thinner - though that's arguably retrograde ...

One man's poison ...

 

Regarding bleeding edge technology, the M11 should incorporate an innovation that has heretofore been absent from digital M cameras.  There should be a button that will cause the camera to shoot a stream of extra strength oleoresin capsicum pepper spray at least five meters to disable thieves who would rob us of our mega-dollar M camera and lenses. 

Edited May 3, 2017 by Carlos Danger

[105012]

• replace the metal masks for creating the frame lines with a micro-led or oled display. This would enable single, perfectly sized frame lines for any focal length and distance. Also would enable to display other informations in the viewfinder. This could replace the 7 segment display at the bottom of the viewfinder at the same time. If one would want to be bold, even focus peaking could be shown inside the viewfinder with the display.
• More lenses. Perhaps a 150/f4, some tiny f2.8 lenses. What about a modern collapsible lens, or a true macro lens, a pancake lens?

 

Agree x 2! Personally I am happy with the 135 APO for long focal length on an M using the OVF, but would think that the micro-led/oled display could switch to an in viewfinder EVF mode for longer focal lengths.

[rwnheaney]

I do not care one wit about being "on the bleeding edge of digital camera technology" ... What I want is a camera that presents the use experience of the Leica M which has been honed and refined over the past half century so nicely. Frankly, the M-D and the M10 just as they are now do this well enough for my satisfaction, the M-D with the present M10's viewfinder and NO OTHER CHANGES AT ALL are what I'd like most.

But presumably also with M10 size (thinner) than MD (fatter)?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Edited May 4, 2017 by rwnheaney

[Jager]

Regarding resolution, 24mp or thereabouts is likely to be the ceiling.

 

Until/unless Leica decides to incorporate on-sensor vibration reduction, I wouldn't expect to see anything significantly beyond that.  It seems that 24mp is, indeed, the sweet spot for a camera designed primarily to be used handheld.

 

Some might recall the wailing and gnashing of teeth when Nikon released its 36mp D800.  Images were soft.  They were soft because Nikon, in its hurry to embrace the megapixel arms race, put marketing in front of physics.

 

The M8 had a pixel pitch of 6.87um.  The M9/Monochrom essentially maintained that pixel pitch (actually bumping it a hair to 6.89um).  The M240/M246 dropped considerably, to 5.97um.  The M10 also rings in at 6um.  It would seem that that - ~6um - is the floor.

 

There is no denying the advantages of resolution.  When I look at the 50mp files from my Hasselblad CFV-50c digital back, I'm entranced.  Alas, those benefits come at a cost.  That digital back with its 5.3um pixel pitch requires a tripod (or strobes) in order to consistently realize its resolution.  Yes, I can and do handhold it.  But the keeper rate versus film (which, with its much larger "sensor" area, serves as an analog to a larger pixel pitch) plummets.

 

It's notable that Nikon shoots for marketing braggadocio in its prosumer models, but retains a very conservative 21mp/6.41um pixel pitch in its flagship D5.  There's a reason for that.

 

And it would seem that Leica's engineers have come to the same conclusion.

 

 

 

 

 

[Steve Spencer]

Regarding resolution, 24mp or thereabouts is likely to be the ceiling.

 

Until/unless Leica decides to incorporate on-sensor vibration reduction, I wouldn't expect to see anything significantly beyond that.  It seems that 24mp is, indeed, the sweet spot for a camera designed primarily to be used handheld.

 

Some might recall the wailing and gnashing of teeth when Nikon released its 36mp D800.  Images were soft.  They were soft because Nikon, in its hurry to embrace the megapixel arms race, put marketing in front of physics.

 

The M8 had a pixel pitch of 6.87um.  The M9/Monochrom essentially maintained that pixel pitch (actually bumping it a hair to 6.89um).  The M240/M246 dropped considerably, to 5.97um.  The M10 also rings in at 6um.  It would seem that that - ~6um - is the floor.

 

There is no denying the advantages of resolution.  When I look at the 50mp files from my Hasselblad CFV-50c digital back, I'm entranced.  Alas, those benefits come at a cost.  That digital back with its 5.3um pixel pitch requires a tripod (or strobes) in order to consistently realize its resolution.  Yes, I can and do handhold it.  But the keeper rate versus film (which, with its much larger "sensor" area, serves as an analog to a larger pixel pitch) plummets.

 

It's notable that Nikon shoots for marketing braggadocio in its prosumer models, but retains a very conservative 21mp/6.41um pixel pitch in its flagship D5.  There's a reason for that.

 

And it would seem that Leica's engineers have come to the same conclusion.

 

There are two simple solutions if handholding is an issue. First, as I think we all recognize it is simple enough to increase the shutter speed for the shot. It is not hard to get sharp shots with a 36mp sensor handheld if you shoot at 1/2X focal length for most people. Second, you can always downsize a bigger file to 24mp and it will have exactly the same handhold ability.  For those times you can use  the 36mp, like when high shutter speeds are easy or on a tripod the extra mp would help, and for those times handhold would cause an issue you can just downsize to 24mp. I see no reason at all that using a camera primarily handheld should limit the resolution. 

The problem with a few people (and it was mainly a tempest in a teapot among some forum participants and not a widespread issue -- the camera has sold very well and has high ratings of satisfaction) had handholding the Nikon D800 is that they simply didn't adjust to the higher mps by increasing the shutter speed. This is really a user problem and not a camera problem.

Oh, and by the way the reason the Nikon D5 is 21mp is because this camera is used for things like sports Nikon wants very high frames per second and the limitation is computing power and not handhold ability. You just can't push enough data with camera's current computing power for more mp if you want to keep the fps up. That has and will change as computing power in cameras improves. In 8 years as computing power increase fully expect a 36mp D7.

[wlaidlaw]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Regarding resolution, 24mp or thereabouts is likely to be the ceiling.

 

Until/unless Leica decides to incorporate on-sensor vibration reduction, I wouldn't expect to see anything significantly beyond that.  It seems that 24mp is, indeed, the sweet spot for a camera designed primarily to be used handheld.

 

Some might recall the wailing and gnashing of teeth when Nikon released its 36mp D800.  Images were soft.  They were soft because Nikon, in its hurry to embrace the megapixel arms race, put marketing in front of physics.

 

The M8 had a pixel pitch of 6.87um.  The M9/Monochrom essentially maintained that pixel pitch (actually bumping it a hair to 6.89um).  The M240/M246 dropped considerably, to 5.97um.  The M10 also rings in at 6um.  It would seem that that - ~6um - is the floor.

 

There is no denying the advantages of resolution.  When I look at the 50mp files from my Hasselblad CFV-50c digital back, I'm entranced.  Alas, those benefits come at a cost.  That digital back with its 5.3um pixel pitch requires a tripod (or strobes) in order to consistently realize its resolution.  Yes, I can and do handhold it.  But the keeper rate versus film (which, with its much larger "sensor" area, serves as an analog to a larger pixel pitch) plummets.

 

It's notable that Nikon shoots for marketing braggadocio in its prosumer models, but retains a very conservative 21mp/6.41um pixel pitch in its flagship D5.  There's a reason for that.

 

And it would seem that Leica's engineers have come to the same conclusion.

 

While no fan of the Sony A series FF mirrorless cameras, they seem to manage their 40MP sensors pretty well. Extra pixels confers "crop-ability" and more flexibility on an image in PP. However if more pixels would be at the expense of extra noise, I would understand sticking with 24 but extending the usable ISO even further. I wonder if there might be a middle ground of say 34MP with noise a bit less than the M10, for the next generation of sensor. The problem Leica has is that with its volumes, it is going to be very lucky to get the "bleeding edge" of sensor technology. Sometimes they can surprise us with things like the retina resolution EVF on the SL, which I think I am correct in saying, that nobody has yet surpassed. Having an M240, an M10, though an improvement in some areas, was not enough to tempt me. Would an M240 successor (I do use video occasionally) with the same 24MP but other improvements tempt me? I slightly doubt it. So in the end, more pixels may be needed to tempt repeat customers like me, into the dealers. 

 

Wilson

[jmahto]

Regarding resolution, 24mp or thereabouts is likely to be the ceiling.

 

Until/unless Leica decides to incorporate on-sensor vibration reduction, I wouldn't expect to see anything significantly beyond that. It seems that 24mp is, indeed, the sweet spot for a camera designed primarily to be used handheld.

 

Some might recall the wailing and gnashing of teeth when Nikon released its 36mp D800. Images were soft. They were soft because Nikon, in its hurry to embrace the megapixel arms race, put marketing in front of physics.

 

The M8 had a pixel pitch of 6.87um. The M9/Monochrom essentially maintained that pixel pitch (actually bumping it a hair to 6.89um). The M240/M246 dropped considerably, to 5.97um. The M10 also rings in at 6um. It would seem that that - ~6um - is the floor.

 

There is no denying the advantages of resolution. When I look at the 50mp files from my Hasselblad CFV-50c digital back, I'm entranced. Alas, those benefits come at a cost. That digital back with its 5.3um pixel pitch requires a tripod (or strobes) in order to consistently realize its resolution. Yes, I can and do handhold it. But the keeper rate versus film (which, with its much larger "sensor" area, serves as an analog to a larger pixel pitch) plummets.

 

It's notable that Nikon shoots for marketing braggadocio in its prosumer models, but retains a very conservative 21mp/6.41um pixel pitch in its flagship D5. There's a reason for that.

 

And it would seem that Leica's engineers have come to the same conclusion.

Solution is to stitch. It is easy to get 50mp files by stitching three 24mp frames of slightly longer lens (40mm to 28mm fov, 90mm to 60mm fov). Of course it works only for limited scenes but I will happily carry M for landscapes over Hassy.

[fsprow]

Really interesting discussion.  I have a Hasselblad H6D - 100c (100MP) camera.  It has a large sensor (53.4 x 40mm) and 4.6 x 4.6um pixels.  I have found that I can get equivalent results between tripod and carefully hand held (and it's pretty heavy!) if my shutter speed is 1/250 or higher.  The resolution and color quality is amazing under those conditions and with a CMOS sensor not difficult to use at high ISO's in most cases.

Edited May 4, 2017 by fsprow

[Paulus]

There are two simple solutions if handholding is an issue. First, as I think we all recognize it is simple enough to increase the shutter speed for the shot. It is not hard to get sharp shots with a 36mp sensor handheld if you shoot at 1/2X focal length for most people. Second, you can always downsize a bigger file to 24mp and it will have exactly the same handhold ability.  For those times you can use  the 36mp, like when high shutter speeds are easy or on a tripod the extra mp would help, and for those times handhold would cause an issue you can just downsize to 24mp. I see no reason at all that using a camera primarily handheld should limit the resolution. 

The problem with a few people (and it was mainly a tempest in a teapot among some forum participants and not a widespread issue -- the camera has sold very well and has high ratings of satisfaction) had handholding the Nikon D800 is that they simply didn't adjust to the higher mps by increasing the shutter speed. This is really a user problem and not a camera problem.

Oh, and by the way the reason the Nikon D5 is 21mp is because this camera is used for things like sports Nikon wants very high frames per second and the limitation is computing power and not handhold ability. You just can't push enough data with camera's current computing power for more mp if you want to keep the fps up. That has and will change as computing power in cameras improves. In 8 years as computing power increase fully expect a 36mp D7.

 

Or place the camera on a stone:   http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/252668-the-sunset-thread-open-for-all/?p=3184679

[visoflex]

No video for me on the M11, keep that for a separate

240 based product line.

 

What I would like is a one frame viewfinder. Correct frame for the lens in use at the time. With electronic frame lines, this should not be beyond the whit of man.

[Eric1]

I would like to see the cursive Leica logo back on the top plate, 36mp, and autofocus option. I think it's inevitable that future M's will increase mp's and add autofocus option.

[Jeff S]

No video for me on the M11, keep that for a separate

240 based product line.

 

What I would like is a one frame viewfinder. Correct frame for the lens in use at the time. With electronic frame lines, this should not be beyond the whit of man.

The frame lines on the M10 are still mechanical; only the illumination of them is electronic (rather than through the former exterior window).

 

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/66999-anatomy-of-the-leica-m8-framelines/

 

Jeff

Edited May 23, 2017 by Jeff S

[jdlaing]

The frame lines on the M10 are still mechanical; only the illumination of them is electronic (rather than through the former exterior window).https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/66999-anatomy-of-the-leica-m8-framelines/

Jeff

I believe they were on the M240 as well.

[Jeff S]

I believe they were on the M240 as well.

Of course.... my link to the M8 anatomy is because it hasn't changed.

 

Edit....If you mean the internal illumination, yes that began with the M240.

 

Jeff

Edited May 23, 2017 by Jeff S

[Paulus]

In the interview with Stefan Daniel :

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-aktuell/2017/01/leica-m10-interview/?utm_source=luf170201&utm_medium=E-Mail

 

He says two important things: The Leica M 11 will get into production sooner than the interval M 240 - M 10. ( 17:00 - 20:00 minute ). 

 

Also it will be called M 11. 

The Leica M will always be the best camera for M lenses, hence the new sensor of the M 10. 

 

The development of the M 11 has not started, but we are welcome to speculate. Leica will read the speculations and act accordingly, using the Leica user Forum like one easy marketing tool. 

This gives us , not only means to influence the development of the M 11, but also gives us responsibility. 

 

 

Some (factual) speculations:  

 

The M 11 will be the same "33,7 mm"  size body.  

 

The Leica MP 10 will be sooner as expected ( if it will come ).

 

The iso knob will stay as part of the philosofy : you can prepare the camera for action without looking on the menu. 

 

 

My wishes at the moment: none. 

 

Sensor could be a 56 Mp sensor. 

 

The M10 still on a 70 per day assembling rate. 

 

M 240 will stop being made? ( at least not at this moment ) . 

[leetmode]

The option to turn of LENR...

[pgh]

Regarding resolution, 24mp or thereabouts is likely to be the ceiling.

 

Until/unless Leica decides to incorporate on-sensor vibration reduction, I wouldn't expect to see anything significantly beyond that.  It seems that 24mp is, indeed, the sweet spot for a camera designed primarily to be used handheld.

 

Some might recall the wailing and gnashing of teeth when Nikon released its 36mp D800.  Images were soft.  They were soft because Nikon, in its hurry to embrace the megapixel arms race, put marketing in front of physics.

 

The M8 had a pixel pitch of 6.87um.  The M9/Monochrom essentially maintained that pixel pitch (actually bumping it a hair to 6.89um).  The M240/M246 dropped considerably, to 5.97um.  The M10 also rings in at 6um.  It would seem that that - ~6um - is the floor.

 

There is no denying the advantages of resolution.  When I look at the 50mp files from my Hasselblad CFV-50c digital back, I'm entranced.  Alas, those benefits come at a cost.  That digital back with its 5.3um pixel pitch requires a tripod (or strobes) in order to consistently realize its resolution.  Yes, I can and do handhold it.  But the keeper rate versus film (which, with its much larger "sensor" area, serves as an analog to a larger pixel pitch) plummets.

 

It's notable that Nikon shoots for marketing braggadocio in its prosumer models, but retains a very conservative 21mp/6.41um pixel pitch in its flagship D5.  There's a reason for that.

 

And it would seem that Leica's engineers have come to the same conclusion.

My thousands of sharp, hand held pictures from my  645D, D800, A7rII (the only one with stabilization) and Rx1rII disagree. The 645D was the hardest to get sharp handheld, but still not really a problem. Hell, I hardly ever use a tripod. If anything you can do 1/1.5-2 focal length if you want. No big deal. 

 

A 40 mp M would be great, and completely useable. It's not Leica's priority, fine - but if you're getting to pure IQ - Leica still isn't at the top. If 24 mp was truly a ceiling you wouldn't see the success of these other cameras. 

Edited August 12, 2017 by pgh

[wlaidlaw]

If it was either/or, I would rather have IBIS (5 axis) rather than more pixels. Ideally of course both. My suspicion is that then next big technical advance will either be curved sensors or a move away from Bayer pattern, with its inevitable compromises. Curved sensors, of course would require different lenses as the M lenses are carefully designed to produce a plane image. However, in all this, I want an update for the M240 not the M10. 

 

Wilson

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[LocalHero1953]

I would accept more pixels, but would rather stay at 24mp if higher resolution limited improvements to noise, dynamic range and high ISO colour.