This is why I bought an M10R

[helged]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Burned highlights is a pain (for me and others, if not for all); this holds for all sensors I have used up to now (Leica M9, M240 and several derivations thereof, plus SL/SL2, Nikon D500, D850, D5). Of course one (=me) can be more conservative in setting the exposure, but what you gain on one side of the equation is often lost on the other side. So kudos to Leica for bringing the M10-R, M10-M and S3 sensor (*) to the market; if not a game-changer, it's certainly very welcome for me... And thanks for @jonoslack - and others - for highlighting  the problem to the Leica engineers...

(*) Sharing the same sensor.

Edited August 23, 2020 by helged

[Jeff S]

Jono... a bit OT....you mentioned in another thread that you really liked your 50 Summilux ASPH again on the M10-R.  What rendering difference, if any, did the R provide? Do you still use your 50 APO (on the R or otherwise)?

Jeff

[Advertisement]

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

[Chaemono]

Ok, here we go. The M10-P at ISO 200 recovered for what looks like blown highlight details in the cloudy sky. There are links to download the DNGs.

In the first one, EV set to 0 and the camera exposed perfectly to protect details in the clouds by using a shutter speed of 1/4000 sec. In the second one, I thought I'd make things interesting and set EV to +1.333 (😂) which resulted in a shutter speed of 1/1500 sec.

Less compressed JPEGs here: https://www.smugmug.com/gallery/n-pPRdbj/

M10-P + APO 50 Summicron with EV at 0. DNG download here: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g74039410-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=iHZTKhXcJ_rFOndPEu5kIOaMYlYKJjmJSfMnKqAQ1To=

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!

ISO 200 f/4 @1/4000 sec.

M10-P + APO 50 Summicron EV at +1.333. DNG download here: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g364941056-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=VNuIHgFTM4nMQ2X2OuBZFkoPJleydlS8PLGlBbY3a8M=ISO 200 f/4 @1/1500 sec.

[Chaemono]

Now trying to salvage blown out clouds in the second one by pulling the Highlights slider in LR all the way back, in both BTW. If one zooms in close, there are some cloud details missing in the second one, but the starting point is pretty bad for any FF camera, IMO. M10/P does sufficiently well at ISO 200 for me.

Less compressed JPEGs here: https://www.smugmug.com/gallery/n-pPRdbj/

Same as in #43 processed, Highlights -100 in LR

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!

 ISO 200 f/4 @1/4000 sec.

Same as in #43 processed, Highlights -100 in LRISO 200 f/4 @1/1500 sec.

Edited August 23, 2020 by Chaemono

[Kwesi]

On 8/21/2020 at 12:49 PM, jonoslack said:

Well Harry 

Good point (and so do I when I can)

But you couldn't have exposed this properly on the M10, because I already used the maximum possible exposure (ISO 100 at 1/4000th) You might of course argue that you never want to shoot wide open in bright light, or that you could use an ND filter. But 1/2 stop over-exposure will ruin M10 pictures, even at 200 ISO - so the implication here is that you have about 3 extra stops on the M10-R (that's 100 - to 200 ISO plus the 2.35 stops in post processing).

I usually over expose by a half stop with my M10-P and don't have any issues with blown highlights. I wonder if this issue was quietly addressed in the M10-P. In fact the M10-P meters very similarly to the M9 in that it tends to underexpose when there are strong highlights present in the image.

M10-P 28 /2 ASPH, v2  1/1000 @2.0  ISO 200

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!

Edited August 23, 2020 by Kwesi
inserted ISO info

[Kwesi]

One more.

M10-P 50/1.4 ASPH, 1/3000 @2.8 unedited in LR. ISO 200

 

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!

 

Edited August 23, 2020 by Kwesi
Inserted ISO info

[jonoslack]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

6 hours ago, Jeff S said:

Jono... a bit OT....you mentioned in another thread that you really liked your 50 Summilux ASPH again on the M10-R.  What rendering difference, if any, did the R provide? Do you still use your 50 APO (on the R or otherwise)?

Jeff

Hi Jeff

yes, I do absolutely still use the APO on the R . . depends on my mood!

[jonoslack]

Kwesi - Chaemono. I rest my case!

Sadly I wasn't there with My M10-R to help

But I love your yellow chair shot Kwesi.

All the best

[scott kirkpatrick]

Folks, lovely pictures are always possible on nice days with careful exposure.  The claims by those of us smitten by the M10-R are:

-- exposure doesn't have to be as careful, because there is more room up there.  and

-- the noise floor is still way down below if you need to pull detail out of the shadows.

So it should now be possible to have nice puffy and textured clouds, rich saturated colors in the beach furniture, and still see the dog sleeping under the tree.

Edited August 24, 2020 by scott kirkpatrick

[scott kirkpatrick]

Just for grins, here's how I would process the first of Chaemono's exposures in C1.  I liked the moody sky, didn't find anything interesting in the grassy bank:

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!

L1002725 

There's a blue band around the hull of the boat, but no name, so I left that dark.

Edited August 24, 2020 by scott kirkpatrick

[Chaemono]

vor 4 Stunden schrieb scott kirkpatrick:

Just for grins, here's how I would process the first of Chaemono's exposures in C1.  I liked the moody sky, didn't find anything interesting in the grassy bank:

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!

L1002725 

There's a blue band around the hull of the boat, but no name, so I left that dark.

I needed to brighten them up in order to see if pulling back the highlights all the way in both would reveal an equal amount of detail in the clouds. 

[250swb]

With this talk of increased dynamic range we very close or at the point that when you normally squint to deal with the high dynamic range of a scene in real life your camera now deals with it, and maybe falsifies it.

The more cameras defeat the human eye the more we go back to the old and much maligned HDR threads, how authentic is your photography if your camera goes beyond what a human can see?

Sure we can say images have always been manipulated, but today this is going beyond human interaction with the environment, it is faking what you see, faking what you'd normally squint at, and messing with your brain. We always talked about the latitude of film, but DR nowadays is going well beyond that, if you ever thought 'I'd like to capture a high DR scene with all its extremes' be assured your camera will automatically make it look flat and normal. So be careful what you wish for with current and future technology.

[jonoslack]

4 minutes ago, 250swb said:

With this talk of increased dynamic range we very close or at the point that when you normally squint to deal with the high dynamic range of a scene in real life your camera now deals with it, and maybe falsifies it.

The more cameras defeat the human eye the more we go back to the old and much maligned HDR threads, how authentic is your photography if your camera goes beyond what a human can see?

Sure we can say images have always been manipulated, but today this is going beyond human interaction with the environment, it is faking what you see, faking what you'd normally squint at, and messing with your brain. We always talked about the latitude of film, but DR nowadays is going well beyond that, if you ever thought 'I'd like to capture a high DR scene with all its extremes' be assured your camera will automatically make it look flat and normal. So be careful what you wish for with current and future technology.

Ah yes - but it's the post processing which brings up the HDR (certainly in the pictures above). I don't know what the Dynamic range of the human eye is (although I'm sure there are buckets of theories) but I'm sure it's a great deal more than the 14 stops or so of the M10 and M10r. . . Worth mentioning that in the original post I wasn't talking about Dynamic range anyway, I was talking about highlight recovery (which isn't the same thing). 

[LocalHero1953]

The human eye doesn't take a scene in all in one go, all at one exposure. It looks at different bits at a time, adjusting exposure for each one. The camera has to take a shot at a single exposure. A camera still can't do the equivalent of what the eye does. So, next technological leap: variable exposures in one shot, on different parts of the sensor!

Edited August 24, 2020 by LocalHero1953

[250swb]

1 hour ago, jonoslack said:

Ah yes - but it's the post processing which brings up the HDR (certainly in the pictures above). I don't know what the Dynamic range of the human eye is (although I'm sure there are buckets of theories) but I'm sure it's a great deal more than the 14 stops or so of the M10 and M10r. . . Worth mentioning that in the original post I wasn't talking about Dynamic range anyway, I was talking about highlight recovery (which isn't the same thing). 

I take your point, but I don't think photography should be about chasing your tail with every new development. Put it this way, if you think the DR of the M10R is a game changer and worth spending many thousands of dollars on (or losing many thousands in trade in), where does that put everybody's older photographs? You, like many other 'influencers', are on the path to obliterate previous work done by photographers by implying it's not now good enough, but you can do better, buy the M10R. 

It's a disgusting attitude to take, and if it isn't then write a blog about why a photograph by HCB or Koudelka is crap given it clearly doesn't conform to your current expectations of where photography has a ceiling? Be bold, why was a grainy low tech photograph great, and why isn't it great anymore?

[Jeff S]

I wonder if the forums Henri hung out on felt the same way about glass plates. Ansel was always looking for ‘improvements’ (changes) in technology, even embracing the coming of digital.  Old and new can co-exist; film is making a bit of a comeback, reintroduced in some US photo programs.  Choice is good.  What’s bad IMO is anyone determining that their gear/approach is necessarily right or wrong for someone else.

Jeff

[FlashGordonPhotography]

52 minutes ago, 250swb said:

I take your point, but I don't think photography should be about chasing your tail with every new development. Put it this way, if you think the DR of the M10R is a game changer and worth spending many thousands of dollars on (or losing many thousands in trade in), where does that put everybody's older photographs? You, like many other 'influencers', are on the path to obliterate previous work done by photographers by implying it's not now good enough, but you can do better, buy the M10R. 

It's a disgusting attitude to take, and if it isn't then write a blog about why a photograph by HCB or Koudelka is crap given it clearly doesn't conform to your current expectations of where photography has a ceiling? Be bold, why was a grainy low tech photograph great, and why isn't it great anymore?

I don't think it means that at all. Advances in technology don't always make what went before obsolete. Sometimes they just increase the range of what is possible.

For example. Using Leicas fastest lenses wide open during the day often requires the use of ND filters. Having a higher shutter speed range or more DR in a sensor can reduce the need to use these filters. Same shot is possible but modern technology makes it less frustrating.

Also it should be noted that the DR of the M10R has been available for years already. Cameras with larger sensors have this level of DR and more for half a decade at least.

And, having a different DR is really like having a b&w sensor or a fixed lens or a different format ratio. The amount of opportunities is still infinite but they're different to each other. The technology in the camera can help or hinder different images. With a wider DR available we can look at the world a little differently as we seek out wide DR opportunities. When I pick up my PenF my photos don't get better or worse than those from an M10R or X1D. But they sure are different.

Gordon

[Tailwagger]

Whether one places similar value to Jono's on the 10-Rs treatment of highlights is compared to the M10 is, of course, a personal assessment. I happen to agree with him, but to think that better handling of highlights is the only reason to applaud the arrival of the R is a rather narrow view of the camera's capabilities. Here is another, rather obvious, one. 

I was on my daily walk this morning when I came around a corner and noticed a black dot perched atop a local church steeple. The longest lens I happened to have was a 50mm. In the past, I would have just moved on, but given the added resolution of the R, I decided to take a few shots just to see what I could pull in post. The following is a 4x5 landscape crop (~21.5MPx)  from a portrait shot, essentially the top half of the photograph. Could this rather extreme crop have been done with the previous sensor? Of course, but with the 10-R one retains virtually the same resolution as the 10 uncropped; more than enough for a substantial print. Is this particular shot so valuable that had it been missed it would have been a tragedy? Obviously not, but I'm glad I was at least afforded the opportunity to attempt it. Who knows, perhaps the next time things will be more life and death.  Some might care less about such things, but it's another example of the added flexibility the R offers and why for some folks it could be worth trading up. 

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!

  

[Ko.Fe.]

Well, it is good M10R files are highly recoverable. Any digital M has not effective auto-metering by its metering limitations. 

I've been in trouble with street photos and M metering.  

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Mikep996]

Re the human eye's dynamic range...I just had to look it up! SO... I  just read that the eye has a dynamic range of 46+ f stops.  BUT, as 250SWB pointed out, it cannot see all those f stops of dynamic range at the same time.  So, in that sense, a photograph that shows shadow detail as well as highlight detail is "fake" because you cannot actually see those f-stop details in real life at the same instant.  The static f stop range of the eye - that is the max dynamic range you can see without the eye adjusting is between 4 or 5 f stops!  IOW, if your eye is looking at "shadow detail," that "eye setting" would dramatically blow out the highlights. 

Personally, the shadow detail/blown highlight thing has never been a concern for me.  For color images I was 'raised' on slide film where I pretty much always exposed for the highlights and the shadows fell wherever they fell.  Digital is the same - except that it's easy to pull up some shadow detail if you want.  BUT, to me, doing more than a touch of that can make a photo rather bland/flat-looking.   Though I don't do it much, I do like the concept of a lot of good MPs to be able to crop as per Tailwagger's pic. Heck, I guess that's the reason the Leica Q2 is a genuine hit!  Re that, some folks make much of the fact that at the 75mm 'focal length' the Q2 has only around 7MP of resolution...but some of the best pics I have yet taken with a digital camera were with my 6MP Nikon/85mm lens...  

Edited August 25, 2020 by Mikep996