marknorton Posted August 7, 2006 Share #21 Posted August 7, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) I'll take an M8, thanks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted August 7, 2006 Posted August 7, 2006 Hi marknorton, Take a look here M8 Megapixels. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
lct Posted August 7, 2006 Share #22 Posted August 7, 2006 Philip, I don't know the Sony AFAIC but it has a AA filter if i'm not wrong and we know that the DMR is sharper than the D200 already so what's your point if i may ask? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
like_no_other Posted August 7, 2006 Share #23 Posted August 7, 2006 Lct, my point is - message no 16 - to discuss M8, megapixels and their impact on sharpness - one important argument to buy a Leica. The OP tried to gather supportive information to make a buying decision between a C... camera and the Leica M8. So I brought the comparative view to existing 10 Mpix models into the discussion. It's best to compare 10 Mpix to 10 Mpix. I'm not sure if Leica hasn't built-in an AA filter into the M8 but I know that other manufacturers don't hesitate improving image quality in upcoming models. As for Sony I can say that its first DSLR is simply designed to produce high resolution /sharp images even compared to Nikon's D200. Therefore I'm not sure if it is correct to assume that the M8 will be the sharpest camera out there for years. Beside that, just like Wilfredo I think about buying a M8 for my M lenses. Best regards Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted August 7, 2006 Share #24 Posted August 7, 2006 OK Philip and my point is that the M8 has no AA filter and that it will be sharper than any other 10 Mpix camera with AA filter. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted August 7, 2006 Share #25 Posted August 7, 2006 Megapixels is not the whole history, but they are important. Leica needs to pay attention to dynamic range, noise... I would like to print A3 at 300ppp (6lp/mm), and that means 16MP. I would like to have more pixel density and, in that manner, less aliasing problems. The Bayer mosaic reduces the real detail captured. To sum-up, Leica has made the best choice, considering different and contradictory goals (resolution, noise, aliasing, dynamic range) and the current state of the technology. However, it is very likely that in the not so distant future, multilayer sensors without low-pass filters and 16MP will be available, and I would like to replace the entire "digital back" of the camera. LCT has pointed to an interesting possibility: easy upgrading of the electronic parts of the camera. A clever design would allow this: mount, rangefinder and shutter in one module, and sensor, processor, batteries, SD socket and LCD in a datachable and separated module. Not only replacement would be possible: we could clear the sensor easily (the DMR allows this too)! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted August 7, 2006 Share #26 Posted August 7, 2006 OK Philip and my point is that the M8 has no AA filter and that it will be sharper than any other 10 Mpix camera with AA filter. Bigger sensor implies higher contrast. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rvaubel Posted August 8, 2006 Share #27 Posted August 8, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) Megapixels is not the whole history, but they are important.Leica needs to pay attention to dynamic range, noise... I would like to print A3 at 300ppp (6lp/mm), and that means 16MP. I would like to have more pixel density and, in that manner, less aliasing problems. The Bayer mosaic reduces the real detail captured. To sum-up, Leica has made the best choice, considering different and contradictory goals (resolution, noise, aliasing, dynamic range) and the current state of the technology. However, it is very likely that in the not so distant future, multilayer sensors without low-pass filters and 16MP will be available Just because a better sensor will become avaliable in the future doesn't mean that an old camera will automatically become obsolete. That is if it has adequate resolution, sensativety, and dynamic range for your needs. For instance, my RD1 has alll of the above and I don't except to chuck it because of the introduction of the M8. In fact, I hope the M8 has better ISO values than the RD. That more important to me than more megapixels of resolution. Actually the form factor of a digital rangefinder is the most important feature once you get up to the level of performance of the RD1. Don't get me wrong, I want the M8 as much as the next RF guy but I expect to be using it till it wears out. I shoot the RD1 at 1000 frames/month so a 5-10 year lifespan for the M8 would be in the ballpark for me. Rex Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
etrigan63 Posted August 8, 2006 Share #28 Posted August 8, 2006 I am hoping that the M8 will have more pixels than my Canon 1D Mk II (which I am trading in for an M8) but more important is low light performance (low noise) and dynamic range. I am betting that Leica's obsession with thoroughness will get us a machine that will meet those needs otherwise they would have done this years ago, Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted August 8, 2006 Share #29 Posted August 8, 2006 Just because a better sensor will become avaliable in the future doesn't mean that an old camera will automatically become obsolete. That is if it has adequate resolution, sensativety, and dynamic range for your needs. For instance, my RD1 has alll of the above and I don't except to chuck it because of the introduction of the M8. In fact, I hope the M8 has better ISO values than the RD. That more important to me than more megapixels of resolution. Actually the form factor of a digital rangefinder is the most important feature once you get up to the level of performance of the RD1.Don't get me wrong, I want the M8 as much as the next RF guy but I expect to be using it till it wears out. I shoot the RD1 at 1000 frames/month so a 5-10 year lifespan for the M8 would be in the ballpark for me. Rex The problem is you pay a lot of money for a Leica lens, and you would like to exploit its capabilities at full. R. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wilfredo Posted August 8, 2006 Author Share #30 Posted August 8, 2006 Here's a used M7 in Excelent + condition that only sold for $1800.00 on E-bay (go to URL below). Six months ago this would have sold for a good $2300.00. Is this a sign of things to come? I paid $3300.00 for a brand new M7 less than a year ago. Given what seems to be an emerging drop in price for a used M7, I will be keeping my M7. I would be throwing money away by selling it used at a loss of $1500.00. I'm comforted by the fact that I still prefer to shoot certain Black & White photography with film vs.digital. Cheers, WIlfredo+ eBay: Leica M7 .72 Camera, black body only, EXC+ (item 140014401424 end time Aug-06-06 14:38:14 PDT) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted August 9, 2006 Share #31 Posted August 9, 2006 Wilfredo: All I can add here is this. I have pictures made with: Digilux 2 5 Mpixel with "Leica" zoom Epson R-D1 6 Mpixel with Leica prime lenses Sony R1 10 Mpixel with "Zeiss" zoom DMR 10 Mpixel with Leica prime lenses While the Sony R1 improves in fine detail slightly over the 5/6 megapixel cameras, pictures made with the various Leica lenses clearly show smoother and richer tonalities, more natural skin, better 'bokeh" etc. Especially when converted to B&W. Once one hits double-digit (10+) Mpixels (and assuming reasonably competent software engineering by the manufacturers), pixel-count really becomes pretty insignificant compared to lens quality. I'd rather use "12-megapixel" lenses (i.e. Leica) on a 10-megapixel sensor than "4-to-8 megapixel" lenses (i.e. the vast majority of Canon/Nikon/Minolta-Sony) on 11/12/17 Mpixel sensors. As to economics and your M7 - I understand. But one auction does not a market make. My Leica dealer would probably have paid nearly that for an M7 and expected to make a profit re-selling it. However, Leica DOES have a rebate of $500 on at the moment for M7/MP cameras, (effective new price $2800) which may be softening the used market a bit. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted August 9, 2006 Share #32 Posted August 9, 2006 But surely you buy a Leica to keep? e bay prices are/should be significantly lower than a dealers price as you are buying 'sold as seen'. Buy from a dealer, you'll pay % more but with the benefit of a g'tee etc. I expect to get a bargain if I buy from e bay. It makes up for the disappointment when you receive the item to find its not quite as good as you expected/has something missing/needs repair!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wilfredo Posted August 9, 2006 Author Share #33 Posted August 9, 2006 The price I mentioned of $2300.00 for a minty used M7 was an E-bay price just a few months ago. I've bought Leicas on E-bay (M6 and MP) with no problems. I've sold them with no problems, then I decided to go for a spanking brand new M7. I can see how the $500.00 Leica rebate on the M7 would affect prices - thanks Leica for a late rebate, where were you when I could have used it? Any way, que sera, sera. I'm wondering if Leica is offering these rebates because they too will be getting out of the analogue camera business? On another note, I have to say that I do prefer the skin tones I get with Leica analogue equipment especially in Black and White photography. Happy Shooting, Wilfredo+ Benitez-Rivera Photography Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.