colint544 Posted May 8, 2019 Author Share #21 Posted May 8, 2019 Advertisement (gone after registration) 11 hours ago, Peter Kilmister said: When 10 MP was normal we all wanted more MP. 24 MP is optimal. I can live with 24 MP for the rest of my days as it is better quality than analogue film. On medium format I can see the point of 48MP. For 35mm format I can't see the point. 9 hours ago, jakontil said: 47mp is way too much for my personal liking, with sensor size of fullframe, 24 is sweetest spot imho Agreed. In the early days of digital cameras, the goal (aside from great convenience) was to record better quality images than was possible on film. When I got an M Monochrom nearly seven years ago, I could see that, at *only* 18 megapixels, the camera could record considerably more detail than comparable black and white film. And I really like film. So, job done, as far as I'm concerned - the M Mono is my permanent digital camera for personal use. I'm never dissatisfied with it. I've never used a 47MP camera, so perhaps I don't know what I'm missing. I can see that it might be useful for cropping into images, but is it really necessary on a camera with a 24x36 sensor? One way or another, Leica certainly have a knack for making products people desire, whether they really need them or not. 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 8, 2019 Posted May 8, 2019 Hi colint544, Take a look here Upcoming M10X with 47MP?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
dkmoore Posted May 8, 2019 Share #22 Posted May 8, 2019 7 hours ago, david strachan said: So how big are the files from the Q2? ... almost double the size of M10 files I believe, before editing. I use a2018 MacBook pro 75% of the time and Mac desktop the other 25%. I have no issues with 24MPX files but I think working through a few hundred 80MB files would dramatically slow down my computer. If I adopt a larger MP sensor camera I will upgrade computer along with it. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
padam Posted May 8, 2019 Share #23 Posted May 8, 2019 It would make sense, it is just an additional model for those who want it, it would be even more interesting in a Monochrom version, that could certainly challenge medium format resolution at a much more compact size. An M-mount camera with the EVF (and battery) from the Q2 would also make sense as well instead of a direct Type 262 successor, or maybe there is room to make both models. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LBJ2 Posted May 8, 2019 Share #24 Posted May 8, 2019 Some tradeoffs and benefits to both and some large MP FF cameras provide the ability to change image size in-camera. Best of both worlds IMO. When working events that require deliverables with several images, I prefer to work with smaller 24MP files. I find 24MP as implemented in most modern cameras today is more than enough, with plenty of push/pull abilities in post but not too big to slow down logistics. Other applications can be greatly enhanced with more MPs but as always, right tool for the job. As we read the rumor references, M10X is Leica's way of selling more cameras and providing those that need/want more MPs with an alternative. Again I say why not. My budget however would rather have the one higher MP M camera with the ability to limit/increase file size in-camera. But not sure that approach aligns with Leica's business strategy 😉 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
budjames Posted May 9, 2019 Share #25 Posted May 9, 2019 Why doesn't Panasonic just buy Leica and get it over with? Regards, Bud James Please check out my fine art and travel photography at www.budjames.photography or on Instagram at www.instagram.com/budjamesphoto. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
indergaard Posted May 9, 2019 Share #26 Posted May 9, 2019 (edited) 47MP in the Q2 makes somewhat sense when you consider that you cannot change lenses, and so have to resort to cropping quite often. 47MP in an M, with it's ability to change lenses, and it's limitation of dealing with mechanical tolerances for focusing, does not make sense in any way what-so-ever. 28-32MP would be the sweet spot for the M, nothing more. If anything, just keep it at 24 MP and give it a heck of a sensor that performs excellently in regards to dynamic range, high ISO, and has excellent color depth. All of those factors are much more important for image quality than more megapickles. Who wants a noisy 47MP sensor in their M?! I can already imagine the garbage buffering speeds, slow operation on checking focus, overheating from normal use (the M10 already gets warm enough), and crappy battery life. No thanks! Edited May 9, 2019 by indergaard 5 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike3996 Posted May 9, 2019 Share #27 Posted May 9, 2019 Advertisement (gone after registration) A built-in flash in an M camera doesn't sound very Leica-like. Would love if the new M had the gorgeous 47 MP sensor chip, but also provide a "s-RAW" support like some Canons have. That is, optionally enable resolution compression so that you don't have to necessarily work with large files. Wouldn't necessarily buy an EVF-only M camera but then again, there's currently no FF mirrorless body that'd be perfect for adapting all kinds of legacy lenses, not to my standards. M10X could be one, although I doubt. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmradman Posted May 9, 2019 Share #28 Posted May 9, 2019 Pursuing high MP without ability to save RAW files in lossless compressed mode is a bit naughty (lazy) by Leica. Don't know about M10 but last camera that can do it was M240/246, SL601 although 24MP couldn't compress RAWs. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
derleicaman Posted May 9, 2019 Share #29 Posted May 9, 2019 4 hours ago, indergaard said: 47MP in the Q2 makes somewhat sense when you consider that you cannot change lenses, and so have to resort to cropping quite often. 47MP in an M, with it's ability to change lenses, and it's limitation of dealing with mechanical tolerances for focusing, does not make sense in any way what-so-ever. 28-32MP would be the sweet spot for the M, nothing more. If anything, just keep it at 24 MP and give it a heck of a sensor that performs excellently in regards to dynamic range, high ISO, and has excellent color depth. All of those factors are much more important for image quality than more megapickles. Who wants a noisy 47MP sensor in their M?! I can already imagine the garbage buffering speeds, slow operation on checking focus, overheating from normal use (the M10 already gets warm enough), and crappy battery life. No thanks! Don’t know if megapickles was intentional or not, but I love it! 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted May 9, 2019 Share #30 Posted May 9, 2019 Megapickles. I like that. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 10, 2019 Share #31 Posted May 10, 2019 22 hours ago, mike3996 said: A built-in flash in an M camera doesn't sound very Leica-like. Would love if the new M had the gorgeous 47 MP sensor chip, but also provide a "s-RAW" support like some Canons have. That is, optionally enable resolution compression so that you don't have to necessarily work with large files. Wouldn't necessarily buy an EVF-only M camera but then again, there's currently no FF mirrorless body that'd be perfect for adapting all kinds of legacy lenses, not to my standards. M10X could be one, although I doubt. Given the existence of the SL (and, to some extent, the CL) I wonder what your standards are. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmx_2 Posted May 10, 2019 Share #32 Posted May 10, 2019 (edited) And in 10 years we will have a similar post about "47MP is the optimum" vs "Oh, Leica should totally do an M with 94MP, I absolutely need it for my mega art wall prints that I do every day". For me personally I'd prefer if Leica would focus on: *Better clip-on EVF *Better Jpeg (yes, some people actually use these) *Much longer battery time *Heat management *Better low light performance Other than that, the M10 is awesome (and the jpegs aren't that bad, they could just get some improvements). If Leica would increase the resolution it would not come without problems. Just going from 10MP M8 to 24MP M240 made me realize that I had to double all my shutter values to get “tack sharp” pictures and I would imagine that without IBIS you would have to almost double all shutter values again to get sharp pictures on a 47MP M-camera. I’m not against higher resolution in general, for me I use it mostly to crop pictures and 47MP would give me at least 4x crop before I would get any problems for my usage (I rarely print larger than A3). Joakim Edited May 10, 2019 by mmx_2 5 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NRKstudio Posted May 10, 2019 Share #33 Posted May 10, 2019 47mp M10x please. If the Q2 can handle processing, heat and battery and be smaller than the m10p, then I’m sure an m10x can do the same (albeit with some heft to handle the rangefinder). Would love to see some native M glass at 42mp. The S1r does it , but not like an M. Especially at wide angle and in corners. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted May 10, 2019 Share #34 Posted May 10, 2019 In what universe does anybody think you will get a different sensor in a specific model number M body than the one it was designed with? 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NRKstudio Posted May 10, 2019 Share #35 Posted May 10, 2019 32 minutes ago, jdlaing said: In what universe does anybody think you will get a different sensor in a specific model number M body than the one it was designed with? Just semantics really. Bottom line Leica will use the same Q2 sensor with a coverglass added. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike3996 Posted May 10, 2019 Share #36 Posted May 10, 2019 (edited) 7 hours ago, jaapv said: Given the existence of the SL (and, to some extent, the CL) I wonder what your standards are. You know I'd probably be very much at home with a SL but I surely would prefer to see direct dials for ISO, shutter speed, EC. This leaves me currently with Leica M10+ (no state of the art EVF experience, yet), Nikon DF (big; F mount glass only) or a Fujifilm (everything is perfect, except the crop factor takes a good chunk of fun out of legacy wide angles). ☕ Edited May 10, 2019 by mike3996 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sunil Posted May 10, 2019 Share #37 Posted May 10, 2019 On 5/9/2019 at 7:23 AM, jdlaing said: Megapickles. I like that. I relish the thought of more Megapickles. Sounds i-dill to me 1 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dkmoore Posted May 10, 2019 Share #38 Posted May 10, 2019 2 hours ago, NRKstudio said: Just semantics really. Bottom line Leica will use the same Q2 sensor with a coverglass added. Leica used a different sensor for the M10, which came after the Q and SL. Leica may adopt a 47 Megapickle sensor for the M11 but no one knows if it will be the same Q2 sensor. What makes you think the Q2 sensor doesn't have coverglass? 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 10, 2019 Share #39 Posted May 10, 2019 The basic sensor may be the same. But the configuration of the microlenses and filter stack will certainly be different. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
6bit Posted May 11, 2019 Share #40 Posted May 11, 2019 47 MP M10X? Yes please. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.