M 246 vs. M10 M?

[kengai]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I recently rediscovered the beauty of b&w.
I like contrast, pure whites and strong blacks.
Having said that, do you think there are appreciable differences in printing, 20x30, between a file generated by the 246 and the new M10 M?

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[shirubadanieru]

 :p 

[a.noctilux]

See also

Jager's "three Monochrom comparing" with link

[Herr Barnack]

7 hours ago, kengai said:

...do you think there are appreciable differences in printing, 20x30, between a file generated by the 246 and the new M10 M?

A 70% increase in sensor resolution will result in a 70% increase in image quality at a given print size, as long as the person doing the file processing and the person doing the printing are both up to their respective tasks.

  And that's before we get to the fact that the M10 Monochrom's sensor started with a clean sheet of paper and was designed from scratch for black and white.

For making fine B&W prints, theM10 Monochrom is the way to go.

Edited March 4, 2020 by Herr Barnack

[SrMi]

8 hours ago, Herr Barnack said:

A 70% increase in sensor resolution will result in a 70% increase in image quality at a given print size, as long as the person doing the file processing and the person doing the printing are both up to their respective tasks.

  And that's before we get to the fact that the M10 Monochrom's sensor started with a clean sheet of paper and was designed from scratch for black and white.

For making fine B&W prints, theM10 Monochrom is the way to go.

I am not certain that you will get 70% better image quality with M10M if you are printing where 24Mp is plenty enough.

Most people who own/owned both M246 and M10M prefer M10M. M246 is apparently still a great camera (I never owned one). Sean Reid has published some observations on M246 vs M10M (subscription site).

If money is not an issues, then M10M is the way to go.

[Jeff S]

8 hours ago, Herr Barnack said:

A 70% increase in sensor resolution will result in a 70% increase in image quality at a given print size, as long as the person doing the file processing and the person doing the printing are both up to their respective tasks.

  And that's before we get to the fact that the M10 Monochrom's sensor started with a clean sheet of paper and was designed from scratch for black and white.

For making fine B&W prints, theM10 Monochrom is the way to go.

Made up math.  And the M10M sensor is a Bayerless version of the anticipated M10R sensor, both derived from the S3.

 

 

Jeff

Edited March 5, 2020 by Jeff S

[Herr Barnack]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

2 hours ago, Jeff S said:

Made up math.  And the M10M sensor is a Bayerless version of the anticipated M10R sensor, both derived from the S3.

 

 

Jeff

🙄

Your argument is not with me but with my calculator.

It insists - and repeatedly - that the M10 Monochrom's 40.89 megapixel sensor is indeed a 70% increase in pixel count compared to the M246 and its 24 megapixel sensor. 

I am inclined to agree...

Edited March 5, 2020 by Herr Barnack

[SrMi]

1 hour ago, Herr Barnack said:

I will let you argue with my calculator. 

It insists repeatedly that the M10 Monochrom's 40.89 megapixel sensor is indeed a 70% increase in pixel count compared to the M246 and its 24 megapixels.  🙄

The image of 24mp and 40Mp sensors is often scaled down to the same resolution when printing. 

[Jeff S]

55 minutes ago, Herr Barnack said:

🙄

Your argument is not with me but with my calculator.

It insists - and repeatedly - that the M10 Monochrom's 40.89 megapixel sensor is indeed a 70% increase in pixel count compared to the M246 and its 24 megapixel sensor. 

I am inclined to agree...

Not my point.. it’s your equation that states resolution equals image quality, let alone on a direct percentage basis, let alone at any print size. Damn, who knew that I could improve all my 8x10 prints just by getting a higher MP camera?  No wonder there’s a MP race.

Jeff

Edited March 5, 2020 by Jeff S

[mmradman]

6 hours ago, Herr Barnack said:

🙄

Your argument is not with me but with my calculator.

It insists - and repeatedly - that the M10 Monochrom's 40.89 megapixel sensor is indeed a 70% increase in pixel count compared to the M246 and its 24 megapixel sensor. 

I am inclined to agree...

The calculator is just a dumb device, dividing 41 by 24 will tell you that 41 is 70% bigger than 24, but do you know what does it mean in context of the image sensor?

Here is a clue...

The area of the sensor is product of two linear dimension, long and short length of the above sensor.  Total number of pixel is given for the entire sensor or area.

AREA [mm2]  = Long Side [mm] x Short Side [mm]

Any image sensor resolution improvement comparing two sensors is done by comparing linear increase.

[Jeff S]

And we haven’t even touched on the effects of pixel size, sensor size, varying PPI, viewing distance, etc when considering print quality.  Not all pixels are created equal. 

Jeff

 

 

[Mr Fjeld]

I wonder how perception and evaluation works? Can a photo be 70% better based on pixels alone? I print a lot in 50 x 70 cm format, and when the focus is spot on it is just pure magic to look at - and I use an M246. I suspect the M10M is better in most respects compared to the M246, but I would love to see just how big this "leap in quality" is?

Edited March 5, 2020 by Mr Fjeld

[Jager]

Bear in mind that if you're not using a RIP - a Raster Image Processor... but are printing directly from Photoshop, Lightroom, C1, or any of the other "conventional" editing programs - once you're feeding the print driver its native resolution (360 PPI for Epson printers; 300 for HP and 300/600 for Canon), you'll not get any additional quality by bringing a bigger file.  That bigger file will allow you to print larger, at the same qualitative level, but it will not give you more detail, better tonality, or any of the other characteristics we like to point to as making a print "better."

So the M10 Monochrom, with its 7864 x 5200 native DNG pixel dimensions, could give you a theoretical maximum print size, at maximum quality, of 21.84" x 14.44" on, say, an Epson P800.  While the M246, with its 5976 x 3992 pixels would give you 16.60" x 11.09."

I say theoretical, because optimizing the number of pixels you send to your printer isn't the whole story.  Pixel pitch - the actual size of each camera pixel - matters.  And the pixels from the M10M are smaller than on the M246.  Not to mention that the dithering and interpolation algorithms embedded in today's print drivers are very, very good.  Which is to say, you may not be able to distinguish a print made at 240ppi versus the same print made at 360ppi.  But, in any case, you've tapped out your print driver once you've given it 360ppi.

As I mentioned earlier, if you're using ImagePrint or a similar RIP, this print driver maximum doesn't apply.  A RIP interfaces directly with your printer and typically uses more sophisticated algorithms.  But the concept remains... there is a PPI limit beyond which you're not going to get any better quality.

The M10M is a better camera than the M246 in nearly every qualitative area.  It is a notably better camera.  But we're talking nuance here.  Not a profound technological leap.

 

 

[kengai]

could you kindly tell me where to download the data sheets for the three monochrom?

[a.noctilux]

1 hour ago, kengai said:

could you kindly tell me where to download the data sheets for the three monochrom?

Informations are on Leica website:

link for technical data of M10 Monochrom

the other Monochroms can be choosen under "SUBCATEGORY"

[bayernfan]

An interesting discussion.  I found myself at this crossroads two days ago, deciding between the M246 , M10M, and possibly the SL.  

The images from all three cameras are superlative, however, it came down to value for me.  Several Leica stores are offering the M246 (new in box) with Leica EVF2, Leica every-ready case and a 2-year warranty for $4995.  Some are even including an extra battery to sweeten the deal.  

For those of us that do not need the latest and greatest in technology, this seems like excellent value.  I see used M246 cameras are ranging from $4200 to $5200.  Why not grab a brand new one (with accessories) for $5k even?  When it comes time to sell, the loss shouldn't be too substantial.

[mediumformula]

3 minutes ago, bayernfan said:

An interesting discussion.  I found myself at this crossroads two days ago, deciding between the M246 , M10M, and possibly the SL.  

The images from all three cameras are superlative, however, it came down to value for me.  Several Leica stores are offering the M246 (new in box) with Leica EVF2, Leica every-ready case and a 2-year warranty for $4995.  Some are even including an extra battery to sweeten the deal.  

For those of us that do not need the latest and greatest in technology, this seems like excellent value.  I see used M246 cameras are ranging from $4200 to $5200.  Why not grab a brand new one (with accessories) for $5k even?  When it comes time to sell, the loss shouldn't be too substantial.

You can prob get a decent condition used one for around $3500. 

[bayernfan]

5 minutes ago, mediumformula said:

You can prob get a decent condition used one for around $3500. 

I bet you can, but it probably be a little rough around the edges.  Given the cost of repair, I'm willing to spend a bit more to get a new camera with full warranty.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[bayernfan]

I should also mention that if you purchase from a Leica store outside of your state, there is no sales tax and the shipping is free.  For those considering the purchase of a new M246, this seems like an excellent opportunity.  My camera arrives tomorrow, I look forward to sharing thoughts and photos! 

Edited March 20, 2020 by bayernfan

[John Black]

After 4+ years with the M-246 and printing on 24" and 17", the biggest differences I see with the M10 Monochrom -

•  Much more latitude in cropping room courtesy of the 40 MP vs 24 MP
•  The M10M's images are brighter in the mid-tones (makes my processing easier)
•  "Noise pitch" is finer (with the M10M)
•  Less banding at high ISO; M-246 showed it starting ~10K; M10M shows it ISO ~40-50K
•  Better highlight retention (the added DR range vs the M-246)
•  More ISO range is wonderful

How does that play out in prints?  It's difficult to quantify because I'd need to go back in time and re-take some M-246 pix with the M10M and compare side by side.  I'd say the M10M prints look a bit crisper, a bit better defined.  They seem higher quality - cleaner.  It's kind of like somebody magically added more clarity to images.  That said, I great image from the M-246 is still going to look great in print too.  I definitely didn't lose anything by upgrading to the M10M.  There's nothing I miss about the M-246.  Operationally, there are significant benefits with the M10M -

•  Quieter, smoother shutter
•  2.36 MP EVF
•  The live view magnification box can be moved around in anywhere
•  Shooting handheld with the EVF is viable (not much shutter lag)
•  Touch screen
•  M10 generation is bit thinner, feels better in the hand to me.

If money is a non-issue, I vote for the M10M.  If somebody wasn't sure about Monochrom and just wanted to test the waters, the M-246 is a much easier pill to swallow.  I'm not going to say anything bad about the M-246.  I used it for years and took 1000s of images with it.  Learned so much with it.  Still learning.  I love my M10M - which is good because we probably won't see a M11M until 2024 or 2025