Why not more pixels in the M camera?/ 36 MP {merged}

[xiaubauu2009]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I would expand that to the use on other Leica cameras with adapter- Leica has gone to great lengths to make the sensors of SL, TL, CL well suited to M lenses.

 

That's cause the sensor is the same with the same thin glass cover. It's essentially the same design....

[Advertisement]

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

[jaapv]

I think it's not just that. The requirement of smaller and smaller sensor pitch means that you have to really fix all those CA in order to get contrasty sharp image...

that's why I said, no matter how good leica lens are, those older 70s~80s lens will not be as good as the modern one.

 

The magic 6micron sensor is there for a reason, it makes leica lens feels better than it is. It is really terrible when adaptor on a GFX 50megapixel sensor with 4. something micron and the 9mm gap between sensor surface and protective glass. 

I would suggest that you take a look in the "Older Glass" threads. Your theory is disproved by the results. Even lenses from the 1950ies onwards resolve well over 80 lp/mm, some up to 300 lp/mm, more than ample for anything technology can throw at them nowadays. Yes, there have been improvements in lens design, more precise calculations, aspherical elements, floating elements, better coatings, other glass types, etc. But nothing that is really of great importance in the pure resolution department.

[jaapv]

That's cause the sensor is the same with the same thin glass cover. It's essentially the same design....

No, it is not the same design. M sensors use shifted microlenses, the SL, for instance, differently shaped microlenses.

[xiaubauu2009]

No, it is not the same design. M sensors use shifted microlenses, the SL, for instance, differently shaped microlenses.

 

 

Ok, I think looking at the CL, TL, there's a chance we can get a 36m sensor with not too much trouble.

 

Exciting. 

 

I am one of those who believe an M lens should only be used on a M. hahahah

[xiaubauu2009]

I would suggest that you take a look in the "Older Glass" threads. Your theory is disproved by the results. Even lenses from the 1950ies onwards resolve well over 80 lp/mm, some up to 300 lp/mm, more than ample for anything technology can throw at them nowadays. Yes, there have been improvements in lens design, more precise calculations, aspherical elements, floating elements, better coatings, other glass types, etc. But nothing that is really of great importance in the pure resolution department.

 

I believe that CA will influence the overall contrast and sharpness of the image and therefore I disagree with that kind of test. And my experience in using them is nothing like what those thread has stated, not even close, but I digress.

 

I hope Leica will use the CL sensor and make a full frame 36mp sensor pretty soon!

Edited March 6, 2018 by xiaubauu2009

[Chaemono]

This is an update from TowerJazz' Q4 2017 earnings report on the foundry's image sensor business. But I'm sure some are aware of this already.    

 

http://image-sensors...s-business.html

 

"For CMOS image sensor we use the 300 millimeter 65 nanometer capability to develop unique high dynamic range and extremely high sensitivity pixels with very low dark current for the high-end digital SLR and cinematography and broadcasting markets.

 

In these developments, we've included are fab 2 stitching technology to enable large full frame sensors. In addition, we developed a unique family of global shutter state-of-the-art pixels ranging from 3.6 micron down to 2.5 micron to note the smallest in the world with extremely high-shutter efficiency using the unique dual light pipe technology already developed at TPS Go for high quantum efficiency and high image uniformity."

[Martin B]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Wrote this originally for the other high MP thread in the M10 forum before both threads were merged:

 

I expressed my opinion already clearly in the other higher MP thread in this forum, but just to add here: I would like to see a M camera with > 36 MP FF resolution. I am currently shooting with 36 MP and love the images created with this higher resolution sensor - and it is not even the latest on the market. I am sure that also Leica will implement newer FF sensors in upcoming M cameras, but I am also believing that they will use technology from 1-2 generations behind what other brands will use in future cameras (no idea why regarding the price of such cameras anyway). Therefore for me I likely will continue with Leica M film only and use alternative options for my digital photography. Going back to 24 MP FF is a no-no for me (I shot with 22 MP FF from 2009 until 2014, and I can clearly tell the difference).

[jaapv]

The thread was merged as people were posting identical messages in both threads.

[JTLeica]

It's a rangefinder lens design, it's not going to be as well performing as those specially design SLR lens on a mirrorless A7RIII particularly the wider end of the lens focal length. I might be a bit harsh about the word 'over-hyphed'. But you are right, they are the best rangefinder lens available in the market. The best there is, but they are not suitable for every kind of body even if you can adapt them.

you said it yourself, they are only good a certain time/condition on an adapted body.... which from my experience, I rather more prefer to use it on the M.... than adapted on anything else.

 

I don't need to read reviews of them as I have owned most of the modern one.. maybe except the 50AA which I know is very good... but like I said, only work best with the M... and that's not because it's inferior design, but it's more 'specific' design.

Yes agreed 100% those great lenses are not so great on A7 cameras. I found that the 28 Lux, 90 Cron were great, but not many else.

 

My point was however, take any of those lenses with a New Digital M and compare to their SLR or Mirrorless counterparts and they generally outperform them. Making them the best lenses on the market. Sure they might not all be the #1 but there are all close.

 

50 APO and 50 Noct are regarded the very best 50 lenses of their type

There are ver few 28 F1.4 lenses around, and maybe no 21mm lenses.

The 50 Lux is probably the best performing 50 around, alongside the Otus and Sigma.

90 APO is the same for a 85/90.

 

I didnt mean to chuck these on a Sony and they will be the same.

[JTLeica]

I believe that CA will influence the overall contrast and sharpness of the image and therefore I disagree with that kind of test. And my experience in using them is nothing like what those thread has stated, not even close, but I digress.

 

I hope Leica will use the CL sensor and make a full frame 36mp sensor pretty soon!

 

The CL sensor is fine... But there is noticeable noise at 3200 ISO, however I shot 12800 ISO on the M10 and it looked comparable. I wouldnt want to sacrifice 2 stops for a small increase in resolution.

[jaapv]

Sensor noise is more noticeable on a smaller sensor, if only because of the difference in magnification. In theory it should be in the order of 1.5-2 EV values worse than the larger pixel and larger sensor M10, which is approximately what you found. The processing pipeline can make a difference as well. So I would not worry on this account.

In real life the CL does even better than expected, with good postprocessing it will be about one stop behind the M10.

[jonatdonuts]

The M was designed as a street and photo documentary camera. Of course, it can be used for almost any other purpose, and people have done so with fantastic results. But if we are to accept that, for the majority of its users, 24MP is more than enough to print high quality work, then I can't think of a significant way Wetzlar can improve upon the M10. Maybe bring back the battery life, add 2 more stops of usable ISO performance, and perhaps change the front top button to a rewind lever so I stop accidentally pressing it.

 

But other than those minor (and pedantic) points, the M10 is absolute magic.

[jdlaing]

Sensor noise is more noticeable on a smaller sensor, if only because of the difference in magnification. In theory it should be in the order of 1.5-2 EV values worse than the larger pixel and larger sensor M10, which is approximately what you found. The processing pipeline can make a difference as well. So I would not worry on this account.

In real life the CL does even better than expected, with good postprocessing it will be about one stop behind the M10.

Magnification?

 

What magnification are you speaking of?

[LocalHero1953]

The thread was merged as people were posting identical messages in both threads.

With one blow you have doubled the signal-to-noise ratio on the forum.

[jaapv]

Magnification?

 

What magnification are you speaking of?

Sensor size...

[Nordvik]

Can someone upload a rawfile from A7R III and/or D850 together with the same motiv taken with the same focal length on M10? I would like to see the differences between the sensors we have today together with the lenses we have today in a print.

 

For me more MP would be better, but I am not so sure that the M10 is so far behind Sony/Nikon as some others believe when we look at a print.

[Nordvik]

Like this: https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/281809-m10-vs-m9-for-big-prints/page-2?do=findComment&comment=3463260

[jdlaing]

Sensor size...

There’s no magnification there.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Nordvik]

There’s no magnification there.

I guess you do not do prints.

[jaapv]

There’s no magnification there.

There is.

It is thus: In this thread we are postulating a 36 MP full-frame sensor, using the (excellent) technology from the 24 MP CL sensor.

Pixel pitch will be the same for both sensors, S/N ratio will be the same from the individual pixels. However, due to the 1.5x crop of the APS-C sensor, you will need to enlarge the image more to obtain the same print. This will enlarge sensor noise as well, which will be magnified by 1.5 EV value relative to the Full-Frame version.

 

This is exactly the same thing that happened when the APS-H sensor of the M8 got replaced by the Full Frame M9 sensor. Sensor technology remained the same, pixel pitch remained the same, yet noise levels dropped by one EV value. All due to the lesser magnification from the larger sensor.

 

As the newest generation sensors claim a better per-pixel  S/N ratio too, probably by the use of more pure materials, we can expect another 1/2 EV improvement in S/N ratio, improving a hypothetical Full-Frame 36 MP sensor of the next generation by 2 EV values better noise performance over the CL, which bodes well for the usable Dynamic Range (but is not the same thing ).