jaapv Posted February 18, 2018 Share #361 Posted February 18, 2018 Advertisement (gone after registration) You should ask Sony that because their lenses are a bit sh!t. This is really funny coming from a Leica user. Sony is the name on the cameras nowadays, Minolta was the company that was incorporated into the Sony group to start their photographic section. Minolta was the company that gave Leica their R series cameras and taught Leica how to build zoom lenses... That is why posts stating "Sony knows nothing about cameras and lenses" are so vacuous. 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 18, 2018 Posted February 18, 2018 Hi jaapv, Take a look here Why not more pixels in the M camera?/ 36 MP {merged}. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
apertur Posted February 18, 2018 Share #362 Posted February 18, 2018 When I tried A7R I realized how sensitive high MP are regarding shuttershock or any kind of movement. Minimal shutterspeed in RX1RII with 42 MP is higher than on the 24 MP predecessor because of that - and that is with leaf shutter. Also, RF accuracy sets limits in regard of MP. Higher MP on SL would be super but not on M. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted February 18, 2018 Share #363 Posted February 18, 2018 I shoot at the exact same settings with the exact same adjustments in post and have offered to provide the raw files. It’s a leading question (a question that suggests the particular answer or contains the information the examiner is looking to have confirmed) for the readers of this thread. Doesn’t surprise me. The user gets the answer he or she deserves. Well I simply take photographs in the real world and not comparisons -I use gear relevant to the work I'm doing. FWIW (I rarely promote such things but I'll make an exception here) I've just had two photographs 'highly commended' in an international photo contest (Underwater Photographer of the Year) - both were shot on a Sony A7II, one with the 50 macro the other with the 28/2 fitted with the w/a conversion lens - the three judges are well respected in their genre, but if you know better regarding the ability of these cheaper Sony lenses then so be it. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaemono Posted February 18, 2018 Share #364 Posted February 18, 2018 (edited) I don't think anyone is expecting miracles. Personally, I would welcome a better dynamic range that at least competes with Fuji aps-c sensors. I understand the physical challenges with regards to higher MP - the dynamic range is something that should be immediately improved imo. Right now the sensor is "less than" not just because of resolution, but also because of the dynamic range and low light capabilities. In decent, even light, it's wonderful, but Leica has never been about finding optimal lighting.@pgk, congratulations on your awards. I know nothing about it. But I know something about statements like the one above that keep repeating over and over again despite evidence to the contrary. It’s the Energizer bunny phenomenon, I guess. And I’m not just a Leica user, I’m obviously also a Sony user. https://www.smugmug.com/gallery/n-Jfdr66/ https://www.smugmug.com/gallery/n-x8Mwmw/ Edited February 18, 2018 by Chaemono Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted February 18, 2018 Share #365 Posted February 18, 2018 Not sure to follow your Energizer and wool comparisons, Chaemono, let alone "sh!t lenses" but you were kidding i guess. You have posted so many excellent images that i feel a bit lost sorry. May i ask what your conclusion is? Just curious. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaemono Posted February 18, 2018 Share #366 Posted February 18, 2018 (edited) May i ask what your conclusion is? Just curious.Conclusion? Don’t be a party pooper. The fun is just starting. Edited February 18, 2018 by Chaemono Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted February 18, 2018 Share #367 Posted February 18, 2018 Advertisement (gone after registration) I mean seriously? 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaemono Posted February 18, 2018 Share #368 Posted February 18, 2018 If you mean seriously, you should ask Leica, Blackstone, and the owner. I’m just in it for the fun. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted February 18, 2018 Share #369 Posted February 18, 2018 Conclusion? Don’t be a party pooper. The fun is just starting.Not really. More like repeating circles. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted February 18, 2018 Share #370 Posted February 18, 2018 If you mean seriously, you should ask Leica, Blackstone, and the owner. I’m just in it for the fun. But i don't understand what you mean sorry... Never mind. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jared Posted February 18, 2018 Share #371 Posted February 18, 2018 D Yea, you are missing something - I'd love to not use my other high mp bodies and just use my M. I personally know a few others that feel this way. At this point, the only reason I own other bodies is for the sensor. I am not a gearhead, I do not like carrying around things. I would happily pare down my whole kit to the M if the sensor were up to it (for both my own larger printed work and my clients' needs), but right now it isn't. What is it about the sensor in, for example, the M10 you find “not up to it”? Is it the megapixel count per se? Or other issues? I’m not suggesting you are wrong, just wondering what, specifically, you see in your images that you can’t get out of an ‘M’? You mentioned “larger printed work.” At about what print size do you start to see noticeable differences? And is it resolution related? Or dynamic range? Color separation and accuracy at higher ISO’s? I’m curious as to your experiences. For me, I don’t see any benefit to a higher megapixel count in an ‘M’ body. At least not as things stand. It’s a camera designed for handheld shooting and rangefinder focus. Those characteristics don’t lend themselves to super high resolution images. More dynamic range, sure. Less thermal noise, absolutely. Even better high ISO performance, definitely. But I am happy with 24 megapixels on the kM’. Not certain I would bother with 42 megapixels on this particular camera even if it came with no or minimal cost in other areas. Perhaps on the SL which is what I typically use for landscapes. In any event, I’d love to know what you are seeing in your larger prints that makes you shoot a different camera for those images. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgh Posted February 18, 2018 Share #372 Posted February 18, 2018 (edited) D What is it about the sensor in, for example, the M10 you find “not up to it”? Is it the megapixel count per se? Or other issues? I’m not suggesting you are wrong, just wondering what, specifically, you see in your images that you can’t get out of an ‘M’? You mentioned “larger printed work.” At about what print size do you start to see noticeable differences? And is it resolution related? Or dynamic range? Color separation and accuracy at higher ISO’s? I’m curious as to your experiences. For me, I don’t see any benefit to a higher megapixel count in an ‘M’ body. At least not as things stand. It’s a camera designed for handheld shooting and rangefinder focus. Those characteristics don’t lend themselves to super high resolution images. More dynamic range, sure. Less thermal noise, absolutely. Even better high ISO performance, definitely. But I am happy with 24 megapixels on the kM’. Not certain I would bother with 42 megapixels on this particular camera even if it came with no or minimal cost in other areas. Perhaps on the SL which is what I typically use for landscapes. In any event, I’d love to know what you are seeing in your larger prints that makes you shoot a different camera for those images. I've gone through it a lot elsewhere in the forum. The dynamic range is about 1.5-2 stops less in my experience, and the resolution basically means that my Sony print at 28x42 inches will look as good or sometimes even a bit bit better than my Leica print does at 20x30. I tend to prefer 28x42 inch prints for the work I'm doing now (and even up to 42x63), and I shoot a lot in dynamic light, so the highlight clipping and also the specific look of the retained highlights of the Leica can be problematic here. Even at the largest size, the Sony sensors hold up. I don't need or want MF because of what these sensors can do in a smaller/lighter/less expensive kit. I've said before, it's akin to maybe a 10-15% practical difference in terms of sensor quality, but it's one that matters often enough for me that it can be frustrating. Lots of people here insist it doesn't matter, and for them maybe it doesn't. For me it can make a difference between a successful and unsuccessful file. I'd rather shoot with my M all the time, but it's not really feasible. There is also the issue that some of my clients now will just not accept less than 36 mp files. I think that's a little silly on their part, but I do what they ask. Edited February 18, 2018 by pgh Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted February 18, 2018 Share #373 Posted February 18, 2018 When I tried A7R I realized how sensitive high MP are regarding shuttershock or any kind of movement. Minimal shutterspeed in RX1RII with 42 MP is higher than on the 24 MP predecessor because of that - and that is with leaf shutter. Frankly, I do not believe motion is more conspicuous with greater pixel counts unless one is viewing on a monitor at 1:1 - an entirely impractical practice. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaemono Posted February 18, 2018 Share #374 Posted February 18, 2018 (edited) Not sure to follow your Energizer and wool comparisons,... Ok, I understand your question now. They are not comparisons or analogies. One user here noticed some wool in another user's ears and that's when it finally clicked. This thread seems to have been infiltrated by bots that keep repeating the same crap over and over, again. It's not real people who post these messages. These bots are being controlled by little pink bunnies that keep going and going if one sticks enough batteries in their butts. Of this much I'm sure. Who would stick batteries in furry pink bunny butts, you will ask. The answer is I don't know, but I suspect it's G Master. https://www.smugmug....llery/n-x8Mwmw/ https://www.smugmug....llery/n-Jfdr66/ https://www.smugmug....llery/n-9FSKSS/ https://www.smugmug....llery/n-9J3jzS/ http://www.towerjazz.../2017/1030.html Edited February 18, 2018 by Chaemono Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted February 18, 2018 Share #375 Posted February 18, 2018 It's just that besides your fortunate ownership and photographic skills, i don't understand what your pictures tend to demonstrate exactly. I am certainly missing something but i don't know what sorry . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaemono Posted February 18, 2018 Share #376 Posted February 18, 2018 i don't understand what your pictures tend to demonstrate exactly. I am certainly missing something but i don't know what sorry .Oh, no, I forgot to mention it. The pictures are for the pink bunnies. Just don’t look. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lucerne Posted February 18, 2018 Share #377 Posted February 18, 2018 The story of "the emperor's new clothes" is circulating in my head! 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tailwagger Posted February 18, 2018 Share #378 Posted February 18, 2018 The story of "the emperor's new clothes" is circulating in my head! That is truly scary as after yesterdays rounds, I came within a hair's breath of posting the final paragraph or so. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted February 18, 2018 Share #379 Posted February 18, 2018 The story of "the emperor's new clothes" is circulating in my head! I was thinking pots and kettles.... Jeff 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted February 19, 2018 Share #380 Posted February 19, 2018 Frankly, I do not believe motion is more conspicuous with greater pixel counts unless one is viewing on a monitor at 1:1 - an entirely impractical practice. That is probably more or less correct (viewing at 50% or 67% might still make some motion visible; it just depends on which apples and oranges are being compared). However, it means that those who want more pixels in order to make bigger prints (as repeatedly stated on this thread) will not get the full benefit of all their extra pixels unless they take extra care to avoid motion blur. Just as they will not get the full benefit of the extra pixels if they use an inferior lens, or fail to correctly calculate DoF for the larger print size, and so on. More pixels (especially if used to make bigger prints) are more revealing of detail in the subject - but they are also more revealing of any technical flaw, be it camera shake or any other source of blur. Imaging is always a chain, and while a sensor with more pixels will improve one link in the chain (the sensor itself), it just means the other links (lens quality, camera steadiness, focus accuracy, DoF) become the weak links, for there will always be a weakest link. 6 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now