lucerne Posted March 2, 2018 Share #441 Posted March 2, 2018 Advertisement (gone after registration) No Again a topic about M10 megapixels?. No. It’s not about how many is good. I’m trying to establish whether forum members are truly interested in revealing why they need increased pixels and what they will do with their images files. Personally, I think that the prospect is hype and very few really want to go through the process in the short term, of changing equipment and purchasing stronger processing systems and increased storage. Let’s just see. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 2, 2018 Posted March 2, 2018 Hi lucerne, 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!
pgk Posted March 2, 2018 Share #442 Posted March 2, 2018 I've stuck 2 x M9s together - problem solved. 6 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lucerne Posted March 2, 2018 Share #443 Posted March 2, 2018 It is too little, my customers demand 37.5. So,are you telling us that your customers want 37.5 from a Leica system? Would they know which 37.5 system the image had been shot on. Do we all have to have such large files. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrian Lord Posted March 2, 2018 Share #444 Posted March 2, 2018 More interested in going to good locations and improving my compositions. I don't want to see duff pictures in even more detail! 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted March 2, 2018 Share #445 Posted March 2, 2018 36MP is so 2013. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lucerne Posted March 2, 2018 Share #446 Posted March 2, 2018 36MP is so 2013. I’ll count that as “indifferent” right now, and you’ll be waiting for 100mp. That’s fine! Thanks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted March 2, 2018 Share #447 Posted March 2, 2018 Advertisement (gone after registration) Y'all need a Pixel Shmoo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lucerne Posted March 2, 2018 Share #448 Posted March 2, 2018 Y'all need a Pixel Shmoo. Thanks Pico. I’m sure I know your feelings on this topic. Another indifferent. Your opinion counts. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DES Posted March 2, 2018 Share #449 Posted March 2, 2018 Nikon will have a 120 MP camera by then, you'll have the same problem. Good point....but you have to draw the line somewhere. 36 MP just find and dandy thanks. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted March 2, 2018 Share #450 Posted March 2, 2018 Well, I draw the line at 24 . Actually the 18 of the M9 do me just fine. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomB_tx Posted March 2, 2018 Share #451 Posted March 2, 2018 Y'all need a Pixel Shmoo. I remember having plastic Shmoo toys, and indeed some of these discussions are about as relevant. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herr Barnack Posted March 2, 2018 Share #452 Posted March 2, 2018 It is too little, my customers demand 37.5. Maybe you need better informed customers... 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lucerne Posted March 2, 2018 Share #453 Posted March 2, 2018 (edited) I remember having plastic Shmoo toys, and indeed some of these discussions are about as relevant.Couldn’t agree more. But please bear with me. This thread is a means to an end. Does anyone “really”want more.Look at the responses. Edited March 2, 2018 by lucerne Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tailwagger Posted March 2, 2018 Share #454 Posted March 2, 2018 In real world, useful information terms Fuji Velvia 50 roughly gives the same usable information as a 10MPixel camera. How do I know? I've used both for scientific underwater photography. From my actual tests a Canon 5D yields marginally more usable info the a Velvia 50 transparency. Others may disagree but this is my own finding using the same lens. Just curious, but is your conclusion drawn from print to print comparisons, or scan to dng? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted March 2, 2018 Share #455 Posted March 2, 2018 (edited) Couldn’t agree more. But please bear with me. This thread is a means to an end. Does anyone “really”want more. I asked my guardian fairy for one wish: endow screen-slave art directors with common sense. She said, "I gotta pass that upstairs. There are always unintended consequences. Hope you don't have stock in Mercedes Benz." Edited March 2, 2018 by pico 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted March 2, 2018 Share #456 Posted March 2, 2018 Just curious, but is your conclusion drawn from print to print comparisons, or scan to dng? Raw files from the Canon, transparency and loupe/microscope/scan - I tried! I was looking at fin ray numbers on dorsals of small fish. They could be made out on the 12MPixel files from the Canon but not on the Velvia transparency. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tailwagger Posted March 2, 2018 Share #457 Posted March 2, 2018 Raw files from the Canon, transparency and loupe/microscope/scan - I tried! I was looking at fin ray numbers on dorsals of small fish. They could be made out on the 12MPixel files from the Canon but not on the Velvia transparency. Thanks, its just something I've always wondered about. I remain curious about how things play out if one goes old school, enlarges and prints vs. our now classic inkjet digital print. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Printmaker Posted March 2, 2018 Share #458 Posted March 2, 2018 Couldn’t agree more. But please bear with me. This thread is a means to an end. Does anyone “really”want more. Look at the responses. After working with cameras that produce 300+ MB and the Leica S2 camera, I'd like to have more MP. 36 would be perfect (for me). Just yesterday I was doing a bit of consulting and the topic of leasing or purchasing a Hasselblad H6d multi shot came up. Now that's looking at 400 MB files. Of course that camera's intended purpose is to generate files of a sufficient size and quality to feed into a 64 inch printer. In other words, the H6D MS is a highly specialized tool. However, 24 MB is plenty horse power if your intended print size is under 13x19 and 36 MB is perfect if your intended print size is 20x30 inches. Yes, I know you can push smaller MP capturers to much larger sizes... and they may look fine (to you) but for the best quality prints you need the appropriate MP for the intended print size. If you do not have the MP, your computer or printer fills in the missing pixels. So if you shoot with fewer MPs and print big you need to let the machines guess the color and live with missing details. We think nothing of dropping $3,000 to $10,000 on high resolution lenses so why fight the need (of some) for high resolution files? The next SL would be the perfect time to introduce a 36 MP camera. But then Leica would need bump their S line to the same 50 & 100 MB their competition is offering. 6 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lucerne Posted March 2, 2018 Share #459 Posted March 2, 2018 (edited) Printmaker. That’s an honest and revealing answer. Thanks. You aren’t fixated on the idea of the M body and sensor being updated, but higher mp in SL. You would be happy with a larger body if the sensor met your technical requirement. Have I interpreted your response correctly.. Edited March 2, 2018 by lucerne 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgh Posted March 3, 2018 Share #460 Posted March 3, 2018 No. No. It’s not about how many is good. I’m trying to establish whether forum members are truly interested in revealing why they need increased pixels and what they will do with their images files. Personally, I think that the prospect is hype and very few really want to go through the process in the short term, of changing equipment and purchasing stronger processing systems and increased storage. Let’s just see. This has been answered ad nauseum elsewhere - so I am not sure that your question is sincere. To the eyerolls of most everyone here I'm guessing, I would actually at least prefer 42 at this point, but the highlight clipping/dynamic range issue would also have to be resolved. I would like that in the M. The reason - I consistently print large, and I prefer to shoot with the M. Right now I own sony cameras as well, and shoot with them more than I'd prefer because of the need for the resolution. I also have a few clients that need 36 mp (they used to only use medium format shooters). I don't shoot MF anymore, and with the technology now would not need to. I did shoot MF at 40 mp CCD sensor, but once the newer 35mm cameras with high res came about there's no way I'm going back to that cumbersome and costly way of shooting. I've been at 40 mp for about 7 years now and while of course I wouldn't mind more, I find that 40 mp - or thereabouts - is much more adequate for my day to day needs, and that actually hasn't changed for quite awhile. I would never buy an SL, because the Sony cameras do what that camera does as well or better in most areas, with higher resolution, dynamic range, and for half the price. The point of the M is high IQ in a small package. If you give up the small package, the number of good options you have increases significantly. 2 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