M11 Where To From Here? [merged thread]

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Sure, I use my 9.8 mm 1.8 Kinoptik lens. Maybe not quite 12 mm, but close enough.  At any rate, I could ask the opposite question at the long end. Extreme use obviously requires appropriate tools.

I don't think that the possibility to use 12 mm equivalent lenses would make the CL a "true CL" for more than a handful of people. How many 12 mm shots were taken on the film CL when it was current? Zero. There was no 12 mm lens in M mount back then.

[jonatdonuts]

Agree, to a certain extent at least. In good light, I saw virtually no difference in terms of the quality and colour rendition of images between the CL and M10, at least as far as what could be attributed to the sensor output alone. I was pretty amazed by this. 

 

However, there was a noticeable difference in low light and high contrast situations. The M10 still has better latitude in terms of dynamic range and better ISO performance at 6400, at least to my eye looking at A2 prints. For those doing very low light shooting and making relatively large prints, full frame is still the way to go, but give it another 3-4 years and I think APSC would have closed that gap.

 

Give it another 10 years, and smartphones, through 'computational photography', may already be where full frame sensors are right now...

 

 

 

Sensor size is of no interest. Sensor quality counts - and it is hard to differentiate between M10 and CL.

[helged]

Agree, to a certain extent at least. In good light, I saw virtually no difference in terms of the quality and colour rendition of images between the CL and M10, at least as far as what could be attributed to the sensor output alone. I was pretty amazed by this. 

 

However, there was a noticeable difference in low light and high contrast situations. The M10 still has better latitude in terms of dynamic range and better ISO performance at 6400, at least to my eye looking at A2 prints. For those doing very low light shooting and making relatively large prints, full frame is still the way to go, but give it another 3-4 years and I think APSC would have closed that gap.

 

Give it another 10 years, and smartphones, through 'computational photography', may already be where full frame sensors are right now...

 

 

Yes, in favourable light conditions, the CL shines. But there is - generally speaking - more room for pp adjustments without pixel degradation on images from a FF sensor. And a MF sensor is, again, even more forgivable, with further improved tonal graduations and sharpness. Add differences in the dof and the transition into and out of focus - and the end result between cropped and larger-sized sensors are visible (for many, if not for the general public). That being said, the compactness of the CL and the optical qualities of the T-lenses are impressive. And if images are being taken with the CL because of its compactness, but not with a larger-sized system as the S, the preferred system is quite obvious.

[jaapv]

Agree, to a certain extent at least. In good light, I saw virtually no difference in terms of the quality and colour rendition of images between the CL and M10, at least as far as what could be attributed to the sensor output alone. I was pretty amazed by this. 

 

However, there was a noticeable difference in low light and high contrast situations. The M10 still has better latitude in terms of dynamic range and better ISO performance at 6400, at least to my eye looking at A2 prints. For those doing very low light shooting and making relatively large prints, full frame is still the way to go, but give it another 3-4 years and I think APSC would have closed that gap.

 

Give it another 10 years, and smartphones, through 'computational photography', may already be where full frame sensors are right now...

In this context it is interesting to compare the usable dynamic range, AKA exposure latitude.

 

 

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[jonatdonuts]

Wow. Though for my use, and personal bias for what constitutes a usable image for print, the M10 raw files feel like they have 1 to 2 stops more advantage while processing in lightroom, but the fact that the CL matches (and is very close to) the M10 is impressive. 

 

Another thing that the graph reaffirms is that I'm already at the point of saturation when it comes to hardware needs with the M10. Apart from (significantly) increasing the battery life, and addressing the needs of other photographers for viewfinder improvements (inbuilt diopter, customisable framelines, and switchable EVF to OVF that doesn't compromise on quality), all of which I feel would be a reasonable and considerate gesture by Leica, I don't know what else they can do...

 

 

In this context it is interesting to compare the usable dynamic range, AKA exposure latitude.

 

 

 

dr.png

[Chaemono]

Some comparison shots CL + 35 Summilux-TL vs. M10 + 50 Noctilux (same settings, some with the Noctilux on the CL) in the link below. The M10 combo is impressive in terms of low light performance and DR but mainly because of the Noctilux which is a stunner. There is something about the way it sucks up any available light even or especially when stopped down a bit. My favorite low light combo. A Kolari modified α7R II/III with the 50 Noctilux will beat it but hopefully Leica will announce a BSI 40+ MPx sensors either for their M mount or L mount cameras at some point - very soon for the L mount, I think.

 

https://www.smugmug.com/gallery/n-9X3ZVp/

Edited April 27, 2018 by Chaemono

[Martin B]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Sure, I use my 9.8 mm 1.8 Kinoptik lens. Maybe not quite 12 mm, but close enough.  At any rate, I could ask the opposite question at the long end. Extreme use obviously requires appropriate tools.

I don't think that the possibility to use 12 mm equivalent lenses would make the CL a "true CL" for more than a handful of people. How many 12 mm shots were taken on the film CL when it was current? Zero. There was no 12 mm lens in M mount back then.

 

I agree that for long lenses the cropped sensor format is advantageous - a style of shooting which I don't do. Most Leica M/CL users likely level off at the 90 mm FL anyway. Then I belong to the "handful" of people using ultra-wides with M mount. Funny why Cosina-Voigtlander releases then all kind of 10, 12, and 15 mm MF lenses in E- and M-mount if there is only minor demand...from what I am reading, many use them. Anyway, I moved away from APS-C sensor in 2009 to full frame sensors and will never go back again (also why I don't consider getting into Fuji MLC cameras). 

Edited April 27, 2018 by Martin B

[Havamal]

I would like to have a knob (Leica III style) at the front for the white balance: Auto, Day light, Cloudy, Shadow, Gray card and Manual. The others may not fit a tiny knob.

[Gelatino]

With a luminous red dot 

[jaapv]

Both M11 threads have been merged.

[IkarusJohn]

In this context it is interesting to compare the usable dynamic range, AKA exposure latitude.

 

 

 

dr.png

Source?

[JTLeica]

+1. The original Leica CL was 35 mm film format like all other M cameras (obviously). To use the same serial name CL is misleading IMO since the cropped sensor does not cover the 35 mm frame. I suspect it was done also to avoid in-house competition with the M10. 

 

So you want an M with an EVF then? Or are you saying that you want AF lenses, the size of an M?

[Martin B]

So you want an M with an EVF then? Or are you saying that you want AF lenses, the size of an M?

 

I am currently not interested in any digital Leica camera - name it M10 and its digital predecessors, SL, or CL etc for multiple reasons I have expressed earlier. Not interested in AF lenses either.  

[6bit]

ISO dial should be much easier to work.

 

Long exposure needs a rework.

[jaapv]

I am currently not interested in any digital Leica camera - name it M10 and its digital predecessors, SL, or CL etc for multiple reasons I have expressed earlier. Not interested in AF lenses either.  

Which makes one wonder what your interest in forums about digital Leica cameras is about, let alone  the purpose of rather polarizing posts.

[jdlaing]

Exactly.

[Martin B]

Which makes one wonder what your interest in forums about digital Leica cameras is about, let alone  the purpose of rather polarizing posts.

 

Still having some little hope that Leica could improve here for better fit what I would prefer. But this likely will only happen if another shareholder like a big electronics company jumps in and changes things from scratch. As I stated before, the value for Leica should be in what people criticize and want to have changed rather than applauding. 

[jaapv]

That is a strange remark. Leica is closely related to Panasonic in a technical sharing agreement and buys their sensors from companies like Sony and Towerjazz. How big can you get?

Another thing is that experts agree that their sensors are amongst the best on the market for the purpose intended, so you are really barking at ghosts. Coming here and stridently posting your preferences is rather ineffective as they are certainly not universally shared.

[Martin B]

That is a strange remark. Leica is closely related to Panasonic in a technical sharing agreement and buys their sensors from companies like Sony and Towerjazz. How big can you get?

Another thing is that experts agree that their sensors are amongst the best on the market for the purpose intended, so you are really barking at ghosts. Coming here and stridently posting your preferences is rather ineffective as they are shared by few.

 

The FF sensors are not from Sony. Leica still does not disclose to my knowledge the manufacturer of them. Rumors state it is a mid-size electronics company based in Europe. We had this discussion before, and regarding FF sensor capability we disagree. But hey, if people buy them for $$$$ and are happy, why not - not my problem   

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[jaapv]

Well, judging by your posts, it appears to pose a serious problem...

The CL is by Sony, the SL by Towerjazz. The M10 is uncertain, but possibly by Towerjazz (49% Panasonic) as well. I don't think there are more advanced fabs in the world.