Upcoming M10X with 47MP?

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Not really weird. The M10 was delayed for over a year for technical problems in the prototype phase.

[Jeff S]

3 hours ago, dkmoore said:

Especially if they add back in video and (hopefully not) a built in EVF. I imagine the new processor version will be seen first in the S3. Weird that Leica announced this camera almost a year ago and still....crickets...

S3 was announced having new sensor and color array, better reds/skin tones, but same processor.

Jeff

[250swb]

9 hours ago, magixaxeman said:

 

However I can't for the life of me see why Leica would put IBIS in an M camera.

If all else is equal a higher resolution sensor will detect smaller movements of the camera, this showing as slight image blur when pixel peeping. Anybody hand holding a camera is moving it when the shutter is pressed, the question is at what point this becomes critical to sharpness. It is a fact that image stabilisation starts to become even more important as pixels increase. So a photographer can pick up a lower megapixel camera and get a sharp image, and they pick up a high mp camera and get image blur, but their movement is the same between both. This is precisely why the old mantra of 'I can hand hold my Leica M2 at 1/8th of a second' becomes a redundant general rule at the point when sensors started to out resolve film. 

[jaapv]

6 hours ago, Jeff S said:

S3 was announced having new sensor and color array, better reds/skin tones, but same processor.

Jeff

S3 is big enough to handle the heat

[Jeff S]

1 hour ago, jaapv said:

S3 is big enough to handle the heat

Yes, but could also indicate lack of commitment and investment into the S system as it’s currently configured.  Keep up with the Joneses on MP, provide an incentive for current users to upgrade, but no need to stretch beyond that. Of course the optimist will feel incremental change is all that’s needed in an already capable machine, or that maybe the delay is due to some new and bigger changes.  In either case, I’ll be interested in the price point and market positioning.

Jeff

Edited July 23, 2019 by Jeff S

[dkmoore]

16 hours ago, jaapv said:

Not really weird. The M10 was delayed for over a year for technical problems in the prototype phase.

I guess what I meant was that it felt like a rushed announcement that didn’t seem to serve a purpose other than to maybe keep  some S users hanging on. 

Ultimately, although off topic, the new Hassy pricing will negatively impact Leica more than any other camera brand release  has impacted leica of similar product levels. That is my prediction at least. 

[dkmoore]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

13 hours ago, Jeff S said:

S3 was announced having new sensor and color array, better reds/skin tones, but same processor.

Jeff

I had heard recently (good resource) that the processor may change or be updated but I would take that with a grain of salt. 

Ill be at leica NJ and will see if I can get some info (probably not as they are stingy with info). 

[Photoworks]

On 7/22/2019 at 9:20 AM, pico said:

Why?

Because older lenses are calculated for Film camera that resolve about 20MP

Canon came out with all new lenses and the difference is night and day.

 

[pico]

5 minutes ago, Photoworks said:

Because older lenses are calculated for Film camera that resolve about 20MP

I do not recall any traditional film photography practice using MP metrics. LP/mm was most common.

[fatihayoglu]

On 6/9/2019 at 3:28 PM, Luke_Miller said:

The amount of visible motion blur in an image is determined by the number of sensor pixels that record it.  So a low resolution sensor with large pixels might contain the camera motion within a single pixel and it would be invisible at 100% view.  Alternatively a high resolution sensor, with smaller pixels, would record the same camera motion over several adjacent pixels.  This would make it very obvious at 100% view.  I use 100% view when sharpening and applying other edits, so I see it regularly.  And one of my primary uses of my high-resolution Nikon is for cropping (much like the Q2).  I prefer to reduce camera weight by using primes, which means that often I must crop to get the composition I want.  Cropping can bring the motion blur into view in the smaller, cropped image.

It is true that a 50% view (or smaller) of a high resolution image will typically mask minor camera shake and I occasionally use images with camera shake in web galleries where it can't be seen.  But I try to avoid, or at least minimize it. That means stabilized lenses, or shutter speeds of 1/2 x focal length or higher with the DSLR.

I regularly shoot my Ms in lower light situations and having to use higher shutter speeds in a high resolution M would limit my shooting.  Faster lenses would  reduce DOF and make focusing more of a challenge, but not affect the shutter speed issue which is driven by focal length.  I'm reasonably proficient in the use of flash, which is a solution, but Leica M flash performance tends to limit my use.

I have seen a video from a well knows gear reviewer that, he also experience this motion blur with high megapixel camera where he doesn’t have that issue with lower megapixel camera. (He was reviewing new Sony 61MP camera.)

my question would be, how higher amp sensor would affect zone focusing on Leica lenses. While on film, zone focusing yields acceptable results, with digital sensors, it is advised to use next f stops, ie if you plan to use zone focusing for f8, it’s been said that the zone within f/5.6 markers will have acceptable sharpness. What are your thoughts on this, ie higher MP sensor would affect zone focusing further or not.

[pico]

8 hours ago, fatihayoglu said:

on film, zone focusing yields acceptable results, with digital sensors, it is advised to use next f stops, ie if you plan to use zone focusing for f8, it’s been said that the zone within f/5.6 markers will have acceptable sharpness.

That's not true. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

Edited July 25, 2019 by pico

[Jon Glass]

1 hour ago, pico said:

That's not true. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

Doesn't sound right to me either.  DOF is a function of the aperture and focus distance...I don't know why a megapixel count would alter that.

[jaapv]

Nor I, however, the higher precision of the sensor might define the existing sharpness falloff slightly more.

[Jeff S]

Depth of field is calculated the same whether film or digital, as Michael Reichmann once wrote...

https://luminous-landscape.com/dof/

Short excerpt...

Digital Vs. Film, and What About Medium & Large Format

There was a query in October, 2001 on my Discussion Forum as to whether Depth of Field was calculated any differently for digital Vs. film. The answer is, no. There is no difference whosesoever. DOF doesn’t care about the recording media type or size, though a lower COF is used for medium and large format, since the amount of magnification to make a decent sized print is much less than for 35mm.

I was curious to see what COF different manufacturers used. Regrettably this is not a spec that many lens manufacturers provide. So, using a DOF program I checked the DOF scales of a few of the different manufacturer’s lenses that I have available and reverse engineered them. I found that Canon and Leica both use 30 L/MM, and my Schneider lenses on the Rollei 6008 use a figure of half that, 15 L/MM‚ which is reasonable since a 6X6cm frame if enlarged 5X would provide a roughly 12″ X 12″ print, about twice as large as the 5X7″ standard for 35mm. The Mamiya 7’s lenses also use 15 L/MM as do the Schneider lenses for the Hasselblad ArcBody.

The Fuji lenses on the Hasselblad XPanuse 30 L/MM. This makes sense because the XPan can be used as a normal 35mm camera, but when used in panoramic mode, the way most people use it, the extra COF means a much more stringent DOF calculation. A good thing in my books.

I was pleasantly surprised that the 105mm lens on my Fuji 617 also appears to use a COF of 15 L/MM. This negative size is essentially half of a 5X7″, so I expected it to be even lower than the medium format standard.

 

Jeff

Edited July 25, 2019 by Jeff S

[Peter Kilmister]

I agree. Use a pin hole camera made from an old cardboard box and record the result on light-sensitive film or a digital phone and the result is the same ... except you have to use chemicals to develop and print the result if using film. The physics of light makes no difference between the two. The techniques differ but that's it.

[250swb]

21 hours ago, fatihayoglu said:

my question would be, how higher amp sensor would affect zone focusing on Leica lenses. While on film, zone focusing yields acceptable results, with digital sensors, it is advised to use next f stops, ie if you plan to use zone focusing for f8, it’s been said that the zone within f/5.6 markers will have acceptable sharpness. What are your thoughts on this, ie higher MP sensor would affect zone focusing further or not.

I wouldn't want to disagree with the concensus so far, DOF always works the same way. But the question arises in my mind whether it is the design of the sensor that means a larger f/stop is preferred when using some lenses with some sensors. For example the typical compact camera system is based largely around telecentric lenses so the sensor is designed to accommodate this. The angle of light traveling through a traditional lens will be less acute at f/5.6 than at f/8, meaning some telecentrically biased sensors will possibly yield a sharper image overall. 

What brought this to mind is Peter's comment above about pinhole lenses. I well remember pinhole experiments between my m4/3 camera and full frame M9, and the results from the m4/3 were far inferior technically (evenness across the field of view, sharpness, etc.) not because the m4/3 sensor was in any way technically inferior (within it's own system), but because it was designed for telecentric lenses with photosites unable to accurately pick up the very acute angle of light from the f/128 pinhole. By all accounts Nikon with the Z6 and Z7 took this into account and made a telecentric sensor with an optimum stack height meaning the problem doesn't exist or is at least mitigated with 'traditional' lenses. You can imagine this was a priority with Nikon because just like Leica they have a vast range of older lenses and they know their photographers still use them every day.

Edited July 26, 2019 by 250swb

[fatihayoglu]

16 hours ago, pico said:

That's not true. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

DoF is calculated on a standard way however acceptable sharpness is a different concept. For sure, DoF is same for a lens whether it is on film or digital sensor however acceptable sharpness might change I think. Maybe not.

 

the difference of acceptable sharpness between film and digital was defined by somebody on a different subject, I’ll look for it,

Edited July 26, 2019 by fatihayoglu

[Cronilux]

I‘ve heard from a quite reliable source, that the next M will have 41mp.

[RexGig0]

For what it is worth, when my wife, who has a 47MP Nikon D850, decided that she wanted a Nikon Z camera, she chose the 24MP Z6, rather than the 47MP Z7. Money was not the deciding factor; we are not wealthy, but the price difference between a Z7 and Z6 was not a make-or-break factor. If I recall correctly, low-light performance, for nature photography, was the most significant consideration. She is the more-experienced photographer, by far, with decades of experience, whereas I did not start becoming serious about photography until 2009 or 2010, so she is the better example.

I use three systems, and see my 50MP Canon 5Ds R and 47MP Nikon D850 as specialized tools. The 5Ds R, in particular, seems to be virtually welded to one of my EF 100/2.8L Macro lenses. I carry 24MP Leicas, for people and general images, and 16MP to 20MP Nikons, for birds, action, and low-light, much more often.

There is, certainly, a segment of the market that wants high-resolution sensors, but for others, there is more to life than MP. I hope that Leica makes the best decisions, for its long-term relevance in the camera marketplace.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[fatihayoglu]

19 hours ago, RexGig0 said:

For what it is worth, when my wife, who has a 47MP Nikon D850, decided that she wanted a Nikon Z camera, she chose the 24MP Z6, rather than the 47MP Z7. Money was not the deciding factor; we are not wealthy, but the price difference between a Z7 and Z6 was not a make-or-break factor. If I recall correctly, low-light performance, for nature photography, was the most significant consideration. She is the more-experienced photographer, by far, with decades of experience, whereas I did not start becoming serious about photography until 2009 or 2010, so she is the better example.

I use three systems, and see my 50MP Canon 5Ds R and 47MP Nikon D850 as specialized tools. The 5Ds R, in particular, seems to be virtually welded to one of my EF 100/2.8L Macro lenses. I carry 24MP Leicas, for people and general images, and 16MP to 20MP Nikons, for birds, action, and low-light, much more often.

There is, certainly, a segment of the market that wants high-resolution sensors, but for others, there is more to life than MP. I hope that Leica makes the best decisions, for its long-term relevance in the camera marketplace.

I agree, I hope Leica will keep it to 24-30MP zone but improve DR, which to me much more important. Or lower the base ISO to 50/64. That will help us to use fast lenses without filters