Pass by 24 megapixel pleas

[wildlightphoto]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

If you were a professional, you would not be advocating something that is unnecessary and expensive

Believe me, there is no need for more than 24 mpix in 35mm format except for some rare very special cases. Anything that needs higher resolution is a domain of Medium Format.

 

 

On this side of the pond I've heard 'Believe me' too often with nothing to back it up.  We call it 'all hat, no cowboy'.  I find that a claim of "Anything that needs higher resolution is a domain of Medium Format" is an over-simplification.  Aren't there times when composition requires more crop than zooming with the feet will allow?  The extra resolution of more pixels comes in handy.

[rafikiphoto]

On this side of the pond I've heard 'Believe me' too often with nothing to back it up.  We call it 'all hat, no cowboy'.  I find that a claim of "Anything that needs higher resolution is a domain of Medium Format" is an over-simplification.  Aren't there times when composition requires more crop than zooming with the feet will allow?  The extra resolution of more pixels comes in handy.

I certainly found that with my Canon 5DS R on a recent safari in Botswana.

[Advertisement]

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

[mmradman]

If you were a professional, you would not be advocating something that is unnecessary and expensive

Believe me, there is no need for more than 24 mpix in 35mm format except for some rare very special cases. Anything that needs higher resolution is a domain of Medium Format.

Irakly, you are fine photographer, saw your website. With respect to Mp count you are right to a point and I concur, 24Mp is ample for many situations.

 

You perpetuate typical Leica angle; For one cost of higher Mp is none, outside Leica universe, of course. As I mentioned latest D850 cost less than discounted SL and produces 14 bit compressed lossless files same size as SL. I still prefer SL as I prefer manual focus and hoard M and R lenses otherwise quality of D850 file would be very tempting.

 

As for cost of lenses typical Leica filter cost nearly as much as very competent Nikkor 50mm f1.8 AF-D.

Edited October 29, 2017 by mmradman

[mgrayson3]

I've seldom seen a better "six blind men and an elephant" thread. Everyone hits the limits in a different place, and so sees that as the crucial point to change. My own limit is "take more pictures", so anything that makes me want to pick up a camera and go outside is good.

 

I completely understand "It's a business - cost matters", and that point is NOT incompatible with using Leica. Anyone who shoots wildlife in general and birds in particular needs pixels, and pixels/mm^2 on the sensor. But most BIF photographers need high ISO and great, not just good, AF ( Doug, you are amazing at MF, and I wish you a compact 100MP solution ASAP).

 

My friend, the portrait photographer uses an S, but since getting into video, uses the SL a lot more, and no customer has ever noticed the drop in MP. Some of his most popular works are badly misfocused - and it just doesn't matter, because he connects with his subjects. (My piano teacher, to convince me on this point, played a section of the Chopin G-minor Ballade MISSING EVERY NOTE and it sounded better than most recordings, because it was Music. Don't try this at home.)

 

I'm rambling.

 

Matt

[Irakly Shanidze]

On this side of the pond I've heard 'Believe me' too often with nothing to back it up.  We call it 'all hat, no cowboy'.  I find that a claim of "Anything that needs higher resolution is a domain of Medium Format" is an over-simplification.  Aren't there times when composition requires more crop than zooming with the feet will allow?  The extra resolution of more pixels comes in handy.

 

In more than 20 years of taking pictures for clients, I have yet to encounter a situation in my own work where composition would require cropping more than 10-15% of the image. The only exception is ad agencies, because art directors "want freedom", and this is exactly where Medium Format is called for.

 

Of course, it all depends on one's workflow, subject matter, etc., and your situation may be completely different. That is why I am not giving recommendations, just expressing my opinion.

[Irakly Shanidze]

Irakly, you are fine photographer, saw your website. With respect to Mp count you are right to a point and I concur, 24Mp is ample for many situations.

 

You perpetuate typical Leica angle; For one cost of higher Mp is none, outside Leica universe, of course. As I mentioned latest D850 cost less than discounted SL and produces 14 bit compressed lossless files same size as SL. I still prefer SL as I prefer manual focus and hoard M and R lenses otherwise quality of D850 file would be very tempting.

 

As for cost of lenses typical Leica filter cost nearly as much as very competent Nikkor 50mm f1.8 AF-D.

Do D850 pictures taken with Nikkor 50/1.8 look as good as Leica SL shots with almost any Leica lens? If they were, Nikon would be my system of choice. Since they do not, despite all those formidable megapixels, I'm fine with Leica's low resolution sensor philosophy

 

Ok, let's get technical. Cost is not only in cameras and lenses. My time is valuable (for me, at least). Anything that saves me time also costs money. I wasn't super happy with performance of a stylish but sluggish Mac Mini i7 and decided to upgrade, mainly because of video. Running a business with profit margins getting slimmer every day means being super aware of your price/performance ratio, and that includes every single piece of equipment used in prodiction. So...

Now I work on my pictures and videos on a 9-year-old Mac Pro 3,1 with 8-core 3.16GHz dual processor setup, 32GB RAM and, most importantly, NVidia GTX 980 Ti GPU, which is the fastest GPU this machine can take. I spent whooping $460 to build this system buying every single part on eBay. Since this is a still photography thread, let's not talk about video. Working with 24mpix M10 and SL files is a breeze. Files from S006 are noticeably heavier on the system, and pictures from my brief romance with Sony a7R take approximately twice as much time for Lightroom to digest.

If I wanted the same system performance with 42mpix files, I would need a better GPU, which would be either Nvidia GTX 1080 Ti, which thanks to all this bitcoin mining craze would shake me down for at least $1000, or AMD Radeon Vega 64 for about 50% more. Naturally, it would require a computer with a faster PCI-e bus, which would force me to get Mac Pro 2012 and set me back for $3500.

So, here, do the math: by switching to a cheaper and "better" Nikon D850 and Nikkor 1.8/50 lens, I would save $2500 and incur additional expenses of at least $4500. As a result, $2000 would buy me an optically inferior system requiring working on every single shot to make it look remotely similar to what I am getting from Leica lenses without any need for post-production except some minor contrast/exposure adjustments. What a great deal! )))))

[graphlex]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On this side of the pond I've heard 'Believe me' too often with nothing to back it up. We call it 'all hat, no cowboy'. I find that a claim of "Anything that needs higher resolution is a domain of Medium Format" is an over-simplification. Aren't there times when composition requires more crop than zooming with the feet will allow? The extra resolution of more pixels comes in handy.

“All hat, no cattle” is the usual formulation.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[lx1713]

I've to concur.

On a recent shoot together with a friend with his Nikon. I had to process his files as it was my client. Considering the output could come pretty close to my SL files it was quite an achievement for Nikon. No complains there. But I had to adjust multiple adjustments to achieve what is just a the basic luminance adjustment with the SL files. It's just a big drain in time.

 

There are things that a Nikon is just better so it's again a matter of trade-offs but optics is where the SL shines.

 

Having shot at the same location with my Canons, I just prefer the SL files and even the Nikon ones at the final output.

[pico]

24 megapixels is the ideal ratio for a full frame sensor.

Anything more lowers pixel quality, is susceptible to camera shake,

and leads to more diffraction at smaller f stops.

The last assertion requires explanation. More diffraction on a high pixel density sensor

does not necessarily mean lower resolution than a less pixel dense sensor.

Edited October 29, 2017 by pico

[mmradman]

Do D850 pictures taken with Nikkor 50/1.8 look as good as Leica SL shots with almost any Leica lens? If they were, Nikon would be my system of choice. Since they do not, despite all those formidable megapixels, I'm fine with Leica's low resolution sensor philosophy

Ok, let's get technical. Cost is not only in cameras and lenses. My time is valuable (for me, at least). Anything that saves me time also costs money. I wasn't super happy with performance of a stylish but sluggish Mac Mini i7 and decided to upgrade, mainly because of video. Running a business with profit margins getting slimmer every day means being super aware of your price/performance ratio, and that includes every single piece of equipment used in prodiction. So...

Now I work on my pictures and videos on a 9-year-old Mac Pro 3,1 with 8-core 3.16GHz dual processor setup, 32GB RAM and, most importantly, NVidia GTX 980 Ti GPU, which is the fastest GPU this machine can take. I spent whooping $460 to build this system buying every single part on eBay. Since this is a still photography thread, let's not talk about video. Working with 24mpix M10 and SL files is a breeze. Files from S006 are noticeably heavier on the system, and pictures from my brief romance with Sony a7R take approximately twice as much time for Lightroom to digest.

If I wanted the same system performance with 42mpix files, I would need a better GPU, which would be either Nvidia GTX 1080 Ti, which thanks to all this bitcoin mining craze would shake me down for at least $1000, or AMD Radeon Vega 64 for about 50% more. Naturally, it would require a computer with a faster PCI-e bus, which would force me to get Mac Pro 2012 and set me back for $3500.

So, here, do the math: by switching to a cheaper and "better" Nikon D850 and Nikkor 1.8/50 lens, I would save $2500 and incur additional expenses of at least $4500. As a result, $2000 would buy me an optically inferior system requiring working on every single shot to make it look remotely similar to what I am getting from Leica lenses without any need for post-production except some minor contrast/exposure adjustments. What a great deal! )))))

Let me say it for the 3rd time; D850 14 bit compressed lossless NEF files are same size as SL DNG files. Note for anyone wondering where is the snag, there isn’t one, raw files for both systems are at maximum resolution.

 

As computers processing speed is related to file size same processor should process both files at similar speed, no?

[Irakly Shanidze]

Let me say it for the 3rd time; D850 14 bit compressed lossless NEF files are same size as SL DNG files. Note for anyone wondering where is the snag, there isn’t one, raw files for both systems are at maximum resolution.

 

As computers processing speed is related to file size same processor should process both files at similar speed, no?

 

 Processing speed is related to the number of pixels, not to the size of a compressed file, provided the processor is fast enough to make the decompression time negligible.

 

Having said that, Lightroom has a capability to work on a proxy file, which speeds it up quite a bit, but it takes forever to generate those files for every shot in a batch.

 

And let me say this for the second time, there is a real reason why some people prefer Leica optics for commercial work.

Edited October 29, 2017 by Irakly Shanidze

[pico]

As computers processing speed is related to file size same processor should process both files at similar speed, no?

Processing speed is measured independently. Leica's processors are rather slow.

[mmradman]

Processing speed is related to the number of pixels, not to the size of a compressed file, provided the processor is fast enough to make the decompression time negligible.

 

Having said that, Lightroom has a capability to work on a proxy file, which speeds it up quite a bit, but it takes forever to generate those files for every shot in a batch.

 

And let me say this for the second time, there is a real reason why some people prefer Leica optics for commercial work.

I am not disputing or discussing quality of Leica lenses, it is given, use them myself. However you can’t discount other for just being cheap or non Leica, it is fair to say that majority of commercial and non commercial work worldwide is shot on optics other than Leica.

 

Now, I always thought file size is key parameter when discussing computer performance, after all it is only ones and zeroes.

[mmradman]

Processing speed is measured independently. Leica's processors are rather slow.

Are you referring to camera or computer processor? I gather Leica processor is likely to be generation behind, however SLs EVF is still market leader.

[Reciprocity]

Do D850 pictures taken with Nikkor 50/1.8 look as good as Leica SL shots with almost any Leica lens? If they were, Nikon would be my system of choice. Since they do not, despite all those formidable megapixels, I'm fine with Leica's low resolution sensor philosophy

 

Ok, let's get technical. Cost is not only in cameras and lenses. My time is valuable (for me, at least). Anything that saves me time also costs money. I wasn't super happy with performance of a stylish but sluggish Mac Mini i7 and decided to upgrade, mainly because of video. Running a business with profit margins getting slimmer every day means being super aware of your price/performance ratio, and that includes every single piece of equipment used in prodiction. So...

Now I work on my pictures and videos on a 9-year-old Mac Pro 3,1 with 8-core 3.16GHz dual processor setup, 32GB RAM and, most importantly, NVidia GTX 980 Ti GPU, which is the fastest GPU this machine can take. I spent whooping $460 to build this system buying every single part on eBay. Since this is a still photography thread, let's not talk about video. Working with 24mpix M10 and SL files is a breeze. Files from S006 are noticeably heavier on the system, and pictures from my brief romance with Sony a7R take approximately twice as much time for Lightroom to digest.

If I wanted the same system performance with 42mpix files, I would need a better GPU, which would be either Nvidia GTX 1080 Ti, which thanks to all this bitcoin mining craze would shake me down for at least $1000, or AMD Radeon Vega 64 for about 50% more. Naturally, it would require a computer with a faster PCI-e bus, which would force me to get Mac Pro 2012 and set me back for $3500.

So, here, do the math: by switching to a cheaper and "better" Nikon D850 and Nikkor 1.8/50 lens, I would save $2500 and incur additional expenses of at least $4500. As a result, $2000 would buy me an optically inferior system requiring working on every single shot to make it look remotely similar to what I am getting from Leica lenses without any need for post-production except some minor contrast/exposure adjustments. What a great deal! )))))

 

 

Not sure why your profit margins are slipping but as a full timer who has shot for 33 years mine along with work overall are rising quite a bit in the past several years. I don't own the SL, have no interest in it but I do own the M10, a full blown Nikon system that includes the new D850 and even a capable medium format system. There is no doubt that my Leica M glass can handle more than 24MP but for that particular platform, I am ok with it at 24MP and I am glad they stuck with it and improved the high ISO image quality. 

 

As for higher MP being a better bet only in medium format, I think you might want to actually own and use those systems in full fashion before discounting how powerful a tool they are. The D850 is absolutely incredible, and yes, I am having to update some of my lenses but that is the cost of doing business and my accountant likes it when I have deductions like that. I see a lot of unnecessary if not uninformed bashing of brands outside of Leica on this forum and I have to say, it is highly off putting. The center of the photo universe is not Leica, it just one tool of many that can allow a photographer with intrepid vision to achieve a goal. By the way, if the other poster meant the Nikon 50mm 1.8G, for just a hair over $200 new, that lens is crazy sharp, it shows easily on the D850 how good it really is. To me, that is super cheap insurance on a shoot when it is in the kit as a tiny backup to my Zeiss 50. 

 

But if you want to keep smoking and getting high off the thought that the new D850 paired with top shelf glass is somehow inferior to either your SL system or several medium format systems in terms of going big for clients who need seriously big for POP displays and corporate decor, keep right on inhaling sir. 

 

And as for a computer upgrade costing $3,500, in having spent triple that this year on a new system that has several RAID volumes totaling 160TB, I don't know what to say other than Profit Margin bud.

Edited October 29, 2017 by Reciprocity

[mmradman]

Not sure why your profit margins are slipping but as a full timer who has shot for 33 years mine along with work overall are rising quite a bit in the past several years. I don't own the SL, have no interest in it but I do own the M10, a full blown Nikon system that includes the new D850 and even a large medium format system. There is no doubt that my Leica M glass can handle more than 24MP but for that particular platform, I am ok with it at 24MP and I am glad they stuck with it and improved the high ISO image quality. 

 

As for higher MP being a better bet only in medium format, I think you might want to actually own and use those systems in full fashion before discounting how powerful a tool they are. The D850 is absolutely incredible, and yes, I am having to update some of my lenses but that is the cost of doing business and my accountant likes it when I have deductions like that. I see a lot of unnecessary if not uninformed bashing of brands outside of Leica on this forum and I have to say, it is highly off putting. The center of the photo universe is not Leica, it just one tool of many that can allow a photographer with intrepid vision to achieve a goal. By the way, if the other poster meant the Nikon 50mm 1.8G, for just a hair over $200 new, that lens is crazy sharp, it shows easily on the D850 how good it really is. To me, that is super cheap insurance on a shoot when it is in the kit as a backup to my Zeiss 50. 

 

But if you want to keep smoking and getting high off the thought that the new D850 paired with top shelf glass is somehow inferior to either your SL system or several medium format systems in terms of going big for clients who need seriously big for POP displays and corporate decor, keep right on inhaling sir.

 

I was thinking exactly 50mm 1.8G. Sample pictures I took were amazingly gvood even at max aperture.

[Reciprocity]

I was thinking exactly 50mm 1.8G. Sample pictures I took were amazingly gvood even at max aperture.

 

 

It's no Leica 50mm 1.4 Asph but it is a great little lens that still is able to hold it's own even on the D850, I think that is pretty telling. 

 

I dont mean to come off inline with the rancor I see on here, which probably means I need to limit my time on here ( I had a guy REALLY piss me off in another thread by his sarcastic tone ). But I just don't get how so many people come off as telling other people what to do, to want and what to have camera makers aspire to. If the person who started this thread wants the next SL to be more than 24MP, more power to them. 

 

Leica makes some of the best glass in the world, 24MP is not a heck of a lot and I see upping the MP count being a logical step that I am sure Leica strongly considers in products down the line to best utilize that glass.

Edited October 29, 2017 by Reciprocity

[pico]

Reciprocity has too many good points to object.

 

It is important to know how well Leica could achieve 40Mb+. Certainly their lenses can handle it.

So, it is all about their sensor and photo-tronics (to invent a word).

Edited October 29, 2017 by pico

[pico]

Are you referring to camera or computer processor? I gather Leica processor is likely to be generation behind, however SLs EVF is still market leader.

 

Camera, of course - you know - where capture, buffering, processing occurs.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Kamyar]

Maybe I have to say some points. The power of mp or sensor or brand, these do not photograph. The elegance of seeing and choosing the right technique for light and expose can be photographed. Even in photography with the mobile. But in light engineering, shadows, and colors, leica cameras and lenses are the first letter. The numbers are for the market. I've been cinematography and photography for more than 20 years, I did not know the digital leica, and since I had to pay a lot of money over other brands, I asked you to share my experience with me. Talking is great here