Upcoming M10X with 47MP?

[RexGig0]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, dkmoore said:

Whatever the show is that goes on in September in the US is what I meant. I could google it but I am feeling lazy.

Photo Plus Expo, in NYC? That is probably the biggest such event, in the USA, and is late October. It has been on my bucket list, for a while.

https://www.photoplusexpo.com/

Edited August 1, 2019 by RexGig0

[Jeff S]

1 hour ago, dkmoore said:

Whatever the show is that goes on in September in the US is what I meant. I could google it but I am feeling lazy.

Photokina was September, but is moving to May.  May, 2019 was skipped due to the proximity to the last Photokina in September 2018, with the next show May, 2020.  But it’s in Germany.

Jeff

Edited August 1, 2019 by Jeff S

[jdlaing]

1 hour ago, dkmoore said:

Whatever the show is that goes on in September in the US is what I meant. I could google it but I am feeling lazy.

 

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!

[RexGig0]

Leica does not appear on the exhibitor list at the Photoplus Expo site.

[dkmoore]

5 hours ago, jdlaing said:

 

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!

I needed 10 of these today..low motivation day.   

[jdlaing]

9 minutes ago, dkmoore said:

I needed 10 of these today..low motivation day.   

We’re gonna need some motivational inspiration.

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!

[Photon42]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 8/1/2019 at 6:44 PM, Jeff S said:

The M, like the S and SL, seem to be close to a 4 year major upgrade cycle.  That would place an M11 around January 2021.

Jeff

 

On 8/1/2019 at 6:52 PM, adan said:

Putting the Q2 (or even the Q) sensor into an M camera is not a simple swap.

M sensors need a special microlens layer to counteract vignetting with the interchangeable-M wide lenses.

The Q sensor is a "bespoke" unit designed around/for the 28mm f/1.7 lens (and vice-versa). Can't just be popped into an M without significant reworking and testing -  and reworking of the other electronics (A/D converter, buffers, etc.) to handle the larger files. Any more than a Sony or Canon sensor could just be plugged into an M camera.

There may well be a 47-Mp Leica M - eventually - but it won't be just transplanting an "available" sensor.

I know all that, guys 😶 Just trying to think out of the box a bit. Maybe an M10M sells better with more MP. Of course there is much more than just the sensor. However, the SL2 is around the corner, will very likely have >40 MP and potentially some micro lens tweaking for M glass. Why not catch two birds with one stone and develop both M and SL2 requirements in parallel. Sure i may be wrong. But somehow for me it sounds at least possible to see an M10M with >40MP sensor. I do not think however they will omit the LCD ...

[jdlaing]

If the sensor, and therefore the image engine, were changed it would no longer be an M-10.

Leica really doesn’t do that. They change some firmware, buffers, cosmetics. 

[fatihayoglu]

I think Leica will stick to the idea when they were moving from M240 to M10, which is leave the unnecessary things behind, stick to the soul of M, make it perform better in its use.

so what does it mean, more than half of the M users don’t need (maybe don’t want) 47MP sensors because those who print their pictures have other cameras which does that specific job better. Also high MP sensor creates other technological problems such as heat and confined and close space of M10 creates a barrier for it. Certainly then can make the body thicker but I don’t think users will be happy with that idea. Also an OVF is the souls of M and they will never move from that position.

during the history of M, it was never technologically the best camera of its time so it won’t be tomorrow as well

so developing a sensor which has better DR, lower base ISO, a sensor which won’t create too much heat (because heat equals noise) would be priorities for Leica R&D department.

[jaapv]

11 hours ago, fatihayoglu said:

because those who print their pictures have other cameras which does that specific job better.

Huh?  Are you saying that Leica M images are somehow inferior when printed? I'm sure there are a few users who would disagree...🙄

[scott kirkpatrick]

Here's a scary, non-traditional thought. 

The M9, M240 and M10 have shown that small rangefinder-focused lenses with edge to edge sharpness and Leica's special rendering can be made to work with some heroic efforts at the surface of the digital sensor:  Offset microlenses, IR filters which are as thin as possible, but not too thin (M8, remember), and no other cover glass to make the optical path to the sensors at the edges of the image too long to permit good focus when wide open.  This was hard to extend to the M10, with its 6 micron pixel dimensions, and will be much harder for pixels with dimensions about 4 microns, which are used in the 48-64 MPx generation of "full-frame" sensors.  Since that seems to be the next wave of affordable sensors, and Leica's needs are a small part of the market, parts of the solution may have to be hidden in the firmware. 

Since the resulting images get reduced for 99% of all presentations, and heavily processed in uprezzing software for the rare huge print, this makes sense to me.  But you would have to torture Leica execs to get any such admission out of them.  Because, they know well that the debate would quickly devolve into one set of greybeards saying "interpolation always degrades resolution -- all my precious beach sand edge detail will be lost!"  At the same time, other greybeards will say that because of Nyquist's Theorem and the power of the Fast Fourier Transform, nothing that was really there in the original world that you view has been lost., which is true, but not going to convince very many people.

[fatihayoglu]

1 hour ago, jaapv said:

Huh?  Are you saying that Leica M images are somehow inferior when printed? I'm sure there are a few users who would disagree...🙄

No, of course I don’t mean that. To print larger you need a higher MP camera. At least to print larger than a smaller sensor camera. Then there are cameras which does that job much better than Leica M, within the Leica portfolio, that’d be S series. Let’s say you’ll print 100m x 50m, a huge poster. The file from a PhaseOne 150MP camera will look much better than Leica M 24MP camera. This is precisely what I mean. M does not need to be everything like a Swiss Army knife but should be the best what it does best.

also lets not forget that, a higher MP camera can jeopardize, S3 or SL2 market share. I’m quite sure Leica would like us to buy 2 separate systems rather than 1

Edited August 3, 2019 by fatihayoglu

[magixaxeman]

17 hours ago, Photon42 said:

Just trying to think out of the box a bit. Maybe an M10M sells better with more MP.

Why would they need to increase the sensor size? a 24mp Mono sensor has approx 3 times the resolution of a 24 mp colour sensor due to just recording luminance, therefore there's no bayer filter to worry about that splits the pixels between RGB where each group of four pixels is split so 1 records red, another records blue and two record green.

So in effect our 24mp colour sensors resolution is far inferior to that of a 24mp monochrome sensor, therefore the colour sensor would benefit the most from an increase in resolution.

[Steve Ash]

vor 15 Minuten schrieb fatihayoglu:

...To bring big you need a higher MP camera. ..

To print big I do not need a higher MP camera than my Leica M10. I need more and bigger walls only. That is my limitation.

Regards,

Steve

[FrozenInTime]

10 minutes ago, scott kirkpatrick said:

Since the resulting images get reduced for 99% of all presentations, 

I can't remember the last time I said, I wish I had higher resolution  ; but wishing  for more dynamic range and bit depth is a daily thought.

It seems to me the M line should be about reportage and uncontrolled lighting ; leaving the pursuit of further optical perfection and resolution to the SL.

[fatihayoglu]

9 minutes ago, FrozenInTime said:

I can't remember the last time I said, I wish I had higher resolution  ; but wishing  for more dynamic range and bit depth is a daily thought.

It seems to me the M line should be about reportage and uncontrolled lighting ; leaving the pursuit of further optical perfection and resolution to the SL.

+1

[budjames]

On 8/1/2019 at 2:12 PM, RexGig0 said:

Photo Plus Expo, in NYC? That is probably the biggest such event, in the USA, and is late October. It has been on my bucket list, for a while.

https://www.photoplusexpo.com/

I've been attending PhotoPlus Expo in NYC every year since the show began. I used to work for Hope Industries, a now out of business manufacturer of photography processing equipment. We had a booth at the show every year and ran a one hour photo system on the show floor for more than a few years. I left the industry in 1993, but I still attend the show as "daddy's day off" for one day. I live outside Philadelphia, so it's about a 2 hour drive to NYC.

For the past two years, Leica has not had a booth at the show. Instead, they run photowalks and gear demos out of their SoHo store.

The photos exhibited at various booths are amazing. In particular, Epson always has a great display of large prints. My other system manufacturer, Fujifilm, has a large booth which is usually packed.

It's a lot of fun for people who love photography. Highly recommended.

Regards,
Bud James

Please check out my fine art and travel photography at www.budjames.photography or on Instagram at www.instagram.com/budjamesphoto.

[jaapv]

2 hours ago, magixaxeman said:

Why would they need to increase the sensor size? a 24mp Mono sensor has approx 3 times the resolution of a 24 mp colour sensor due to just recording luminance, therefore there's no bayer filter to worry about that splits the pixels between RGB where each group of four pixels is split so 1 records red, another records blue and two record green.

So in effect our 24mp colour sensors resolution is far inferior to that of a 24mp monochrome sensor, therefore the colour sensor would benefit the most from an increase in resolution.

Because the quality of a large print is not so much determined by the amount of detail (beyond e certain level, of course) as by the quality of the detail that is rendered. Detail that the viewer cannot see will mostly not impact the impression he has when viewing the print, however, edge contrast and presence of the available detail will.

That means that, even with the same MP count, a medium format print  will look better because of the larger and better rendering sensels.
Equally it means that a lower-res sensor may give a better looking large print than the same format higher resolving sensor because the sensels cannot reachtthe same level of microcontrast and transitions. Looking at 100% blown up images on a monitor will not show this effect as a computer screen is something quite different from a print (discrete pixel resolution vs. dithered ink spots, for instance)

[scott kirkpatrick]

1 hour ago, jaapv said:

Because the quality of a large print is not so much determined by the amount of detail (beyond e certain level, of course) as by the quality of the detail that is rendered. Detail that the viewer cannot see will mostly not impact the impression he has when viewing the print, however, edge contrast and presence of the available detail will.

That means that, even with the same MP count, a medium format print  will look better because of the larger and better rendering sensels.
Equally it means that a lower-res sensor may give a better looking large print than the same format higher resolving sensor because the sensels cannot reachtthe same level of microcontrast and transitions. Looking at 100% blown up images on a monitor will not show this effect as a computer screen is something quite different from a print (discrete pixel resolution vs. dithered ink spots, for instance)

How much of the difference in impact between a large print from an MF image and one from a FF or smaller image is due to the fact that the print with more fine scale detail looks interesting both as a whole and when approached closely so that you view parts of it?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[jaapv]

Now that is completely dependent on the subject and viewing intent.