M10-P or M10R

[hdmesa]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

3 hours ago, Steven said:

@Jeff S

...he went on to say that anyone who is saying that there is no difference with motion blur between the P and the R lied to himself. He told me, again, with extreme confidence, that one MUST raise the shutter speed if one wants to use the R and get the same result as the P...

Just a basic misunderstanding of physics on the part of your Leica dealer. A higher res sensor does not create more motion blur – it just allows you to zoom in farther to get to 100% magnification and see the blur that was already there at lower res but was previously unnoticed by you.

[Advertisement]

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

[elmars]

When everyone talks and reads about heart attack, the waiting rooms get full the next days.

[Jeff S]

33 minutes ago, hdmesa said:

Just a basic misunderstanding of physics on the part of your Leica dealer. A higher res sensor does not create more motion blur – it just allows you to zoom in farther to get to 100% magnification and see the blur that was already there at lower res but was previously un noticed by you.

I wonder if any of those complaining actually made prints, of equivalent size, viewing distance and subject matter, and experienced greater blur with the M10-R at various shutter speeds.

Jeff

[jdlaing]

10 minutes ago, Steven said:

Jeff, I'm sorry to break it to you, but you belong to a rare group in extinction. People don't print anymore. 

Boy are you ill informed and wrong.

[Jeff S]

9 minutes ago, Steven said:

Jeff, I'm sorry to break it to you, but you belong to a rare group in extinction. People don't print anymore. 

This was said about film.  My local college eagerly accepted my still working Epson 3800 when I donated it to their revived and thriving  photo program, film and digital..  I routinely get newsletters promoting print shows, everywhere. And my print collection is still sought after.  Sorry to break it to you.

Jeff

[jdlaing]

Or the experience.

[jdlaing]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

And if nobody printed there wouldn’t be. 3.5 billion dollar online photo printing market in the USA alone. 

[NigelG]

As far as I’m aware by far the largest players in the US photo printing market by revenue are Walmart and Target...and the market includes all “merchandising”. I think the revenue share for “wall-mounted” prints is very very small.

Still weighing up M10-P vs -R myself atm

Edited March 18, 2021 by NigelG

[Jeff S]

17 minutes ago, Steven said:

Let me phrase it another way to try to avoid confusion. 

Being nice, we could speculate that 30% of the people using Leica take photos with the final goal of printing. Being nice. 

However, we can also speculate that around 1% of camera owners in 2021 take photos with the goal of printing. 

I'll go even further and say that more than half of people using Film Cameras today don't print. They create content with the goal of making it consumable on online. 

I suppose none of you missed the NFT mania of last week, and the artist beeple's selling a Jpeg file for 69M. If you ask me, this is a terrible news. This is the proof that we live more and more in a world where PERVERSION rules. But, it's the new reality. The sooner one accepts it, the more are the chances of survival. 

See post #292.  Leica owners are mostly older and richer.  I’m more interested in what the next generations are interested in.  And increasingly they’re returning to film and print.  This will of course always be dwarfed by sharing phone pics of food, but that doesn’t negate its existence or trend. I still enjoy vinyl records, as do many others, even as a smaller audio segment, which was similarly predicted to become extinct.  In fact, turntables and related gear are far more capable than when I was young.

Jeff

 

[hdmesa]

 

1 hour ago, Steven said:

When it's available yes. He told me that MANY MANY people are coming to the store to complain about motion blur and shutter speeds. H wasn't at all surprised. 

A faster processor will not improve sharpness with higher res sensor – it will just churn out the photos faster and make reviewing them faster. I can't seriously believe they told you this.

[hdmesa]

This post and the one after it. Nothing new here – people have been discussing this for some time.

https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1434384/0&year=2016#13594065

Quote

The thing to emphasize for those having trouble understanding why the faster ss claim seems to hold true, is Magnification!
You only need faster shutter speed to change IF you viewing Magnification changes. If two different resolution cameras were to print at the same size, and that size supported the highest quality print from the lower resolution camera, then you will not notice a difference at the same shutter speed because Magnification would be the same.

And:

Quote

To understand this topic, I think it's useful to imagine a perfect image sensor or film with infinite resolution. Once you have this magic sensor, you can start thinking about the maximum perceptible resolution you could obtain based on other constraints that are probably more relevant to this discussion.

For example, even if we had an ideal image sensor or film, our perceptible resolution would be limited by the optical resolution of the lens. Cheap lens, and it really doesn't matter if you had infinite resolution on the sensor.

You can think about freezing motion in the same way. Just translate any motion in the scene to some unit of length/time in x and y directions on the image sensor/film. Who cares about the resolution for the moment?

If something is moving across your image sensor at 1 cm/second, and you want to freeze 1um/second of motion you're going to need a shutter speed of 1/1000 of a second. (ok I know that I'm ignoring digital sampling theory but you get the idea) Who cares what the resolution of your sensor is?  

It's not BECAUSE your sensor is a higher resolution (or even infinite resolution) that you need a particular shutter speed, it's that the higher resolution reveals that something else is the limiting factor - like your lens or your shutter speed. You have this fancy sensor so you start to really blow up your image...now you see the limitations from other factors affecting the image.

Of course, the other side of the equation is that down-sampling algorithms might create additional artifacts depending on how much pixel blur translates to integral multiples of pixels, but I think it's important to understand the part of the issue that is independent from sensor resolution to begin with.

Last analogy:
If you try to take a picture of a speeding bullet at 1/8000 of a second (typical max DSLR shutter speed), would it really matter if you had a 24, 42, or 1000 MP camera? No, because your shutter speed is the limiting factor.

Take a picture of an athlete running though...well now you might want to up the shutter speed to TAKE ADVANTAGE of a greater resolution camera. The higher resolution won't make it blurrier, it just removes it as the limiting factor.

 

 

[Pixeleater]

17 minutes ago, hdmesa said:

This post and the one after it. Nothing new here – people have been discussing this for some time.

https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1434384/0&year=2016#13594065

And:

 

Thanks for sharing. I've set up my M10-R  to shoot at a minimum of 1/250. But the rub is when I increase shutter speed I end up pushing ISO.

Edited March 18, 2021 by Pixeleater

[Jeff S]

More productive and long lasting than the GAS phase common here.

Jeff

[Jeff S]

Just now, Steven said:

Doesn't GAS lasts forever ? Wow, I can have hope again. 

I’m referring to the learning and growth part as a photographer that’s long lasting, not the phase itself. GAS stunts growth IMO.

Jeff

[tom0511]

I dont print much, but if one does not intend to print (or get prints done somewhere else) why even bother with a high resolution camera?

 

Regarding motion blur. You made me curious. I just took the m10r and shot some images at 1/25, 1/60 with 50mm - and quite some of them did show some motion blur, at least at 1/25. I dodnt have a m10(p) any more, so I can not compare the dufference. For fun I also shot same images SL2+50. Eyeopening what IBIS can help at such exposure times.

So I think it makes sense to keepexp time at 1/125 with the m10r to be safe. 

[tom0511]

vor 3 Minuten schrieb Steven:

I really really want to get into printing. The only issue is that I don't know what to do with the prints. With the jpeg files, I can post them online. With the prints, not sure I'll have any use. Anyway, back to M10P vs M10R.....

put it on the wall in your house/apartment. Print small image of family images and give it to your grandma. print medium size good moments of your life and clue it in a photo-book, sit down with a glass of wine on the sofa with your wife and look at it. or make a exhibition! The worst and most boring thing for me is to have to look on images on a iphone.

[Jeff S]

29 minutes ago, Steven said:

I also think it's nice to be future proof. I dont talk about the camera itself, but the files that I will keep in my dropbox for many years to come. 

Heirs are far more likely to shuffle through your  prints (with appreciated notations) than through your digital archives, if you care about that sort of thing.  And while you’re here, people generally appreciate and remember a fine photo and well crafted print more than they do many other forgettable gifts or purchases. (I know there are walls and tables in France; I’ve seen them.) In addition, portfolio print binders can be a good way to organize projects and/or sort work, in a more tangible way than some online collection.  Books, too.

Jeff

Edited March 18, 2021 by Jeff S

[Kwesi]

12 minutes ago, Steven said:

The only issue is that I don't know what to do with the prints.

Hi Steven, Its not so much what you are going to do with the prints but rather what the prints will do to you.

As Jeff had suggested earlier, buy an Epson, get some good paper like a Canson Baryta and print a favorite photo or two. I guarantee it will stop you dead in your tracks and force you to look at your photography like you've never done before. Its kind of like walking down the street looking at your phone and all of a sudden you fall into a manhole. Climbing back to the surface ioffers you so much potential for growth

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Pixeleater]

22 minutes ago, Pixeleater said:

Thanks for sharing. I've set up my M10-R  to shoot at a minimum of 1/250. But the rub is when I increase shutter speed I end up pushing ISO.

Which had me back to reading Sean Reid's excellent comparison tests of the M10-P, M10-R, Q2, and SL2 which demonstrated the M10-P has lower noise levels at every ISO up to 25,000. The lesson for me is that the M10-P would have been the better camera for me in that I value low noise and don't do large prints.

[Jeff S]

Sorry to keep this OT... probably better to move to DPP section.  For the record, I think learning to print well is just as difficult as learning to shoot well.  It’s not ‘plug and play’, magically producing wonderful results.  As always, the best tools remain between the ears... seeing and judgment are key.  The techniques can be easily learned (much more flexible and convenient than darkroom printing), but knowing when, where and to what degree to apply those techniques is the hard part.  And, just like when shooting, the magic doesn’t happen without the proper lighting.

Jeff