Jump to content

Thoughts on M10 after six months


Eric1

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

My layman's impression is that the higher the megapixel count, the more apparent motion blur becomes if hand-held, so a self-defeating evolution.  Is this true?

 

Correct. That is why today's 'digi-kids' want IBIS with everything. I have shaky hands, but I use old fashioned methods like ensuring that the shutter speed has the correct relationship with the focal length. As MP count goes up that equation also has to change, though. Not really a problem with today's higher iSO possibilities. Using film, of course , makes life much more simple, except that it is messy to change iSO in mid-roll.

 

William

Edited by willeica
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Correct. That is why today's 'digi-kids' want IBIS with everything. I have shaky hands, but I use old fashioned methods like ensuring that the shutter speed has the correct relationship with the focal length. As MP count goes up that equation also has to change, though. Not really a problem with today's higher iSO possibilities. Using film, of course , makes life much more simple, except that it is messy to change iSO in mid-roll.

 

William

I think this is the real reason Leica haven't gone in for the giant megapixel sensors (and why Sony seem to hedge by offering both approaches). Even in the modern world of hi iso photography, keeping the shutter speed above the lens length in mm makes a lot of sense.

Edited by antigallican
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

My layman's impression is that the higher the megapixel count, the higher the dynamic range, and thus the softer the image at first sight, at least in the M evolution from 8 to 10.

experience​ rather less movement blur with M10 than with my M9.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is very simple: A motion blur line (or rather ellipsoid) can fall within the diameter of one pixel, and you will not see it. If, however, the pixel count increases thus the pixels will get smaller, and the same motion blur line will be recorded by two, or even three pixels, making it visible as unsharpness.

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

It is very simple: A motion blur line (or rather ellipsoid) can fall within the diameter of one pixel, and you will not see it. If, however, the pixel count increases thus the pixels will get smaller, and the same motion blur line will be recorded by two, or even three pixels, making it visible as unsharpness.

That is an elegant explanation which I shall use!

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is very simple: A motion blur line (or rather ellipsoid) can fall within the diameter of one pixel, and you will not see it. If, however, the pixel count increases thus the pixels will get smaller, and the same motion blur line will be recorded by two, or even three pixels, making it visible as unsharpness.

Well, that’s a nice neat description Jaap . . . BUT . . . You are implying that motion blur is more of a problem with small pixels rather than with high MP . . Of course high mp cameras do have small pixels, but so do small sensor cameras / phones, and they do not suffer the same way.

 

I think there is a lot of assumption and not much knowledge around the subject - for example

M10 - 24mp not much ‘motion blur’

Nikon D810 36mp - much more ‘motion blur because of the high MP’

Nikon D850 45mp - not so much ‘motion blur’

 

It also amuses me that with (usually µ43 cameras) blur is called “shutter slap” and the camera is blamed

With high end cameras it’s called “motion blur” and either the user is blamed for poor technique or else it’s a by product of how wonderful the camera is!

 

. . . And I agree with the OP about the wonderful M10 . . And I also think that 24mp is just about perfect.

 

All the best

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Yes, Jono, but with smaller sensored cameras you will have a smaller register distance (in general), changing the geometry of the motion blur. Thus the motion blur track on the sensor will be shorter at the same angle of movement, compensating for the smaller pixels (all approx, of course)

And of course, things like ergonomics, camera weight, lens weight, balance, etc. will affect the amount of camera movement.

I too think that 24 MP is the sweet spot for 135-format cameras.

 

BTW, the shutter slap with MFT cameras is usually at a single, fast shutter speed, more like a resonance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I also think that for now, 24MP for the M series cameras is about perfect.

 

Heck, I hope the next one is 24MP and has an ISO 25,000 setting that is as clean as the M10 is at ISO 1600. The reason I think that 24MP for the M is great for me is that the M10 is my travel / documentary camera, it is not my primary for lifestyle ad or landscape work, not by a country mile either. 

 

I don't fault those who are asking for more resolution though, I see the differences in a print as small as an 8x10. I have two ads in magazines right now that are double page spreads, one was 24mp and the other 36mp and in that placement, I clearly see more fine detail and color nuance in the 36mp file. 

 

To deny that higher MP counts play into image quality even in smaller sizes would be the same as saying that there is no point to Apple's Retina displays. The difference is clear or else why would they bother?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember not long ago when 12 MP was considered ideal. Maybe we just habituate to the latest average or median level. Or pixel peeping has changed the playing field in this age compared to print output from years past.

 

I'm still happily in the print world, at small/medium sizes, so an M8.2 (10.3 MP) or an M10 is perfectly capable of fine prints if the rest of the workflow, and the picture, are up to the task.

 

Jeff

Link to post
Share on other sites

what you did not mention is, that smaller sensors have smaller shutters.

System mass, shutter mass, size, built and dampening is a main technical factor.

This is why some people use a motor drive on their DSLR´s, or take the big pro models

The M10 is a heavy beast, what helps to avoid shutter shake as well. Compared to my other cams,

I have the impression that its rubber arrangement is "cruising around the sensor".

 

Agree with the 24Mp for actual 135mm cams

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember not long ago when 12 MP was considered ideal. Maybe we just habituate to the latest average or median level. Or pixel peeping has changed the playing field in this age compared to print output from years past.

 

Perhaps this issue of greater motion blur with higher pixel density should have its own thread.

 

Let's first state the problem, conditions, presumptions.

 

Jeff's phrase (my bolding) is the first point to consider. When pixel peeping we change the effective viewing distance to an irrelevant extreme that means nothing when viewed in a practical sense such as full screen or a print. Viewing distance is critical.

Edited by pico
Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeff's phrase (my bolding) is the first point to consider. When pixel peeping we change the effective viewing distance to an irrelevant extreme that means nothing when viewed in a practical sense such as full screen or a print. Viewing distance is critical.

 

I tend to agree.  With my 36mp D810 I find that even with shutter speeds of 1/twice the focal length I regularly see camera shake in the images at 100% view.  But at the images sizes I normally use it is not visible. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember not long ago when 12 MP was considered ideal.

I look at it like this. You tend to take better photographs with a camera that you actually enjoy using. Sure there are technical limitations imposed on images shot with specific sized sensors but in all honesty at even 18MPixel you can get a pretty big print (24" x 16" say). Comparing prints from different cameras side by side is possible (I have done it), but its not really about the difference a few MPixels make in a reasonably sized print, its about content. And there are many other variables besides MPixels which can affect print quality. If the differences are only visible on screen when pixel peeping then they aren't going to be apparent to many as few will view an image in this way other than the photographer. Quantifying the differences MPixel make is subject to an awful lot of variables and few will define their requirements in terms of these.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope Leica will not fall in the "more megapixels" trap. They simply can't compete with Sony, Nikon et al  in this area

 

 

A "better", more ergonomic, responsive camera, that would feel like an extension of your eye, however, would differentiate Leica enough to justify its price tag, IMHO.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

A "better", more ergonomic, responsive camera, that would feel like an extension of your eye, however, would differentiate Leica enough to justify its price tag, IMHO.

 

I'm not sure how you could make a design which has been 'iconic' for 60years+ more ergonomic .......

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure how you could make a design which has been 'iconic' for 60years+ more ergonomic .......

 

Well, maybe it was not the best choice of words, but what I wanted to say was ergonomic in the sense that the camera doesn't get in your way, rather it feels as an extension of your eyesight

Edited by horosu
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, maybe it was not the best choice of words, but what I wanted to say was ergonomic in the sense that the camera doesn't get in your way, rather it feels as an extension of your eyesight

 

Well so far the Leica M series are the best I have found in this respect. I don't really expect perfection in any camera so I'm happy enough with my Leica rangefinders as they are.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure how you could make a design which has been 'iconic' for 60years+ more ergonomic .......

 

Ah, adding an EVF, adjustable diopter in the eyepiece and a hinge on the bottom plate for starters, would help.

If we can put men on the moon Leica could easily do all of the above.

 

The Leica Kool-Aid Brigade can save your breath - do the above and call it M-10b and all the "RF" experience folks can keep the rangefinder M's and feel all warm and fuzzy.

  • Like 1
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.

×
×
  • Create New...