Leica M11 - your next camera? {MERGED}

[UliWer]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I think the comparison between booting times of the M9 and later M models is very theoretical. At its time the M9 was criticized for being too slow. It did certainly not boot instantly. The M10 of course is not better, probably a fraction of a second slower. And people who remember their M6 or MP shooting instantly certainly never had to wind up the film. I wonder why there was ever a demand for a motorized M - though I doubt that the motor reacted instantly. 

Perhaps a new model will be a fraction of a second quicker.  I am sure we will see the exposures saved by this fraction in due time. Though I am also sure it will be too slow for many. 

[LocalHero1953]

10 minutes ago, UliWer said:

I think the comparison between booting times of the M9 and later M models is very theoretical. At its time the M9 was criticized for being too slow. It did certainly not boot instantly. The M10 of course is not better, probably a fraction of a second slower. And people who remember their M6 or MP shooting instantly certainly never had to wind up the film. I wonder why there was ever a demand for a motorized M - though I doubt that the motor reacted instantly. 

Perhaps a new model will be a fraction of a second quicker.  I am sure we will see the exposures saved by this fraction in due time. Though I am also sure it will be too slow for many. 

The comparison of the M9 and M240 is not theoretical - it was instantly noticeable when I sold my M9 and bought a M240. There were long threads at the time on just this subject.

[Advertisement]

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

[SrMi]

1 hour ago, Steven said:

Then it's not real life (to me). 

Are you saying that color and noise (the topic discussed) change when subjects move in frame?

[Steven]

30 minutes ago, SrMi said:

Are you saying that color and noise (the topic discussed) change when subjects move in frame?

No. I’m saying that shutter speeds, ISO values, and hand stability change when moving moving subjects are involved in an uncontrolled, unpredictable environment (which is what I describe as real life).  
 

My shooting style usually involves moving subjects while I’m not completely still myself. My images at 25k iso on the sl2 are perfect. My images at 6400 on the M10R are borderline acceptable. 12k is garbage. I don’t understand how that’s even a debate to you. 

Edited October 20, 2021 by Steven

[SrMi]

4 minutes ago, Steven said:

No. I’m saying that shutter speeds, ISO values, and hand stability change when moving moving subjects are involved in an uncontrolled, unpredictable environment (which is what I describe as real life).  
 

My shooting style usually involves moving subjects while I’m not completely still myself. My images at 25k iso on the sl2 are perfect. My images at 6400 on the M10R are borderline acceptable. 12k is garbage. I don’t understand how that’s even a debate to you. 

You understand that color degradation and noise depend on the exposure, not on ISO?

It is difficult (impossible?) to objectively compare two cameras in an uncontrolled and unpredictable environment.

 

[Steven]

5 minutes ago, SrMi said:

You understand that color degradation and noise depend on the exposure, not on ISO?

It is difficult (impossible?) to objectively compare two cameras in an uncontrolled and unpredictable environment.

 

It’s not difficult. I’ve done it. The SL2-S wins. 
 

If I go out one night with my SL2S, I can get any shot I want, without sacrifices. 
With the M10R, I have to work around constraints. And a lot of shots might be missed. 
 

Don’t get me wrong, I love my M10R, and I’m ok to take it out with me at night. Once I’m out, I don’t think about it, I shoot, I make it happen. After all, I take my MP with me at night, so why couldn’t I take the M10R! 
 

But this conversation started from two things: 1. Someone said there’s not much to improve with the m11 in the low light department. I disagreed with this. 2. I’ve been curious to try the M10M as a low light M alternative to my M10R. And I think it’s pretty obvious that the M10M destroys the M10R in low light situations. Although they shouldn’t be compared. 

Edited October 20, 2021 by Steven

[SrMi]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

44 minutes ago, Steven said:

It’s not difficult. I’ve done it. The SL2-S wins. 
 

If I go out one night with my SL2S, I can get any shot I want, without sacrifices. 
With the M10R, I have to work around constraints. And a lot of shots might be missed. 
 

Don’t get me wrong, I love my M10R, and I’m ok to take it out with me at night. Once I’m out, I don’t think about it, I shoot, I make it happen. After all, I take my MP with me at night, so why couldn’t I take the M10R! 
 

But this conversation started from two things: 1. Someone said there’s not much to improve with the m11 in the low light department. I disagreed with this. 2. I’ve been curious to try the M10M as a low light M alternative to my M10R. And I think it’s pretty obvious that the M10M destroys the M10R in low light situations. Although they shouldn’t be compared. 

I plan to take both cameras out in low-light and compare the output. I will not be shooting moving subjects as they do not have relevance to the image quality.

[adan]

You don't have to shoot moving subjects - you simply need to use a shutter speed appropriate to moving subjects (1/250th-1/4000th).

And thus an ISO appropriate to photographing moving subjects, in low light with a fast shutter speed.

[michaelbrenner]

When attempting night street photography, the complexity of attempting to get a non-blurry shot increases dramatically if the photographer moves himself or rotates or tilts or yaws the camera as the shutter is released.  Much better, even if walking for example when an opportunity suddenly arises, to pause momentarily to capture the action using a stationary platform (as much as is possible when free-handing a camera).  Even so, when targets are moving around under low light, it is what it is.  Also, it goes without saying that one's distance estimates need to be spot on when using wide apertures in a sometimes feeble attempt to capture the subject in the associated very narrow depth of field.  Street photography, especially at night when things tend to be a bit more quiet, does not lend itself to a "spray and pray" approach.  One click may (and often does) go unnoticed, but a whole stream of clicks instantly draws unwanted attention and wrecks the mood and scene.

 

[dkmoore]

5 hours ago, adan said:

Chris, as a working pro earning his living with a Leica, you'll always have my respect.

But pictures from a literally "stage-managed" situation just don't impress me. Especially with the DoF of a fingernail, and with 95% of the picture (including the human faces) having all the texture and depth of melted ice-cream.

And yet still so dark that my wife asked "What are they? I can't see anything."

Try photographing some real addicts in real motion in the real nightime under a real railroad bridge  - preferably with enough focus-depth and exposure to provide a powerful record of the situation and the people - not just mood. Then let's talk about the ISO required.

This sounds like a terrible idea in today’s world. I sincerely wish you health and well being. 
 

 

[michaelbrenner]

For Leica, to me the human brain (of the photographer) is the "computer".  Forget about all the fancy bells and whistles of the more common brands.  Leica has done a very wise thing:  keep it simple and be the very best at what you can do, capturing the moment.  When the photographer gets lighting and settings and composition, it is the lens's responsibility to make a proper "drawing" and camera's responsibility to create a suitable DWG file (the canvas and paints).  Leica's minimalist philosophy has worked very well for over 100 years.  All those fancy bells and whistles are extraneous at best and unnecessarily distracting at worst, the sole exception being the EVF, which although it has certain benefits for sure, is nevertheless not a critical piece of equipment.

 

Here are a few basics I brainstormed for the M11.  Of course the list is far from exhaustive and your mileage may differ.  Please feel free to offer remarks or add to the list... 8-)

*  better performance of the higher ISOs so that motion blur is eliminated (via the associated shorter shutter times) of moving subjects under lowlight conditions and of even motion inadvertently caused by the photographer

*  lower base ISO so we can get beautiful bokeh even under bright conditions without having to grab an ND filter

*  a (much) quicker reaction time would be very desirable.  The camera should instantly wake up upon half press of the shutter release and ought to wake up quickly enough so that even if the camera has gone to sleep that if the photographer quickly deploy it and snaps a shot, the camera can make the capture with zero shutter lag.  There is no reason instant reaction time should not be possible with a Leica when all manual settings have been preset and ought to be possible if even some automatic functions such as ISO or shutter speed are in use (with the usual center-weighted metering of course).

*  better photo quality - colors, white balance, plasticity and so on

*  improved compatibility of the older Leica lenses, especially in the older wide angle lenses

*  clearer optical viewer with improved rangefinder with ability to use under low contrast or low light conditions

*  better consistency when using auto modes

*  more detail captured in a way to enhance the capture rather than make it look clinical

[nwphil]

I would be happy with a true B - bulb mode without the silly noise reduction or the ability to turn it off

[elmars]

vor 7 Stunden schrieb Tailwagger:

Engineering or sales? Perhaps it was a misunderstanding or BS, dunno. 

[CAVEAT In my case, 40+ years in software, many of years of it spent in operating systems, virtualization, firmware and on multiple processors... none of it in camera development admittedly, but comp theory is comp theory, silicon is silicon. Things, especially with modern multi-core hardware, virtual addressing etc, are a bit more complicated than one can possibly articulate in a paragraph or three. So I'm simplifying. I'm assuming the M9 microprocessor being minimally a dozen years old was not an overly sophisticated one. Is it ARM or something else? dunno. If anyone actually knows some of the details, I'd be interested in hearing them.]

Processors get their instructions from memory. That memory might persist across power cycles or not.  On power up, outside of how to interpret and execute an op code (instruction), they essentially know nothing.  About the only thing they do know is the starting location of memory to read the first op code from and place it into an instruction register to begin execution.  When you cycle power on, the CPU reads from that predetermined location and starts executing whatever it finds there. That is booting. Everybody does it. The CPU executes the first instruction, updates itself to point into memory at the next instruction, reads in the next opcode, executes it, and does this forever until you shut off the power or halt it. From there, what happens, how much gets done and how long it takes is totally dependent on the software being run and the jobs it has to do.

Now, it's possible the M9 has some NVRAM that saved some critical state on shutdown new models don't (we know there is at least some state saved as your configuration persists) or even the entire running OS image, so that when coming back up it could do what is known as a warm boot to speed things up. But no doubt all the other Ms have some NVRAM as well  given their user configs survive power cycling (though not firmware updates which is an important clue as to whats going on).  Anyhoo, if you turn the camera off, spin the dial from 1/30" to 1/1000, when restarted, to shoot at 1/1000" not 1/30", the system needs to read the state of that dial. It can't assume its at the same setting it was when the system was powered done. So some things can't be persisted across boots.  Beyond that something has to tell the CPU the address of the IO port for the memory card, something has to know how to write and read from it, let alone tell if its actually present. Something has to know how to read the position of the shutter speed dial and use that info to control the shutter speed.  And if it's in A mode, the code has to examine the light meter output, the EV setting and calculate a shutter speed.  It has to know how to read out the sensor info and when, how to process it into raw or jpeg, etc.  detect that a rear button was pressed, know which one, how it was configured and then do the right thing, like display the last image by reading it in and displaying it. And if there was a bug in how any of that information was accessed or handled, you have to be able to update that code to fix the problem. There's an updatable OS in there that gets modded when you install new firmware.  And that aint hardware. That's why I doubt what the gentleman told you or at least how you're interpreting what he/she said. 

My guess is that its far more likely that the real reason why the M9 booted more quickly was that the 240 cpu wasn't all that much more powerful and with fewer pixels, both sensor and display, less memory to init, fewer tables to populate, no live view, no EVF,  no e-level to calibrate, multiple metering modes (?), etc. the M9 just was a much simpler system requiring far fewer instructions to get up and running. Simplistically, even if the 240 processor was twice as fast, but it had 10x to 20x the amount of work to accomplish to get the camera up, it would be 5x -10x slower. You wouldn't notice 1/2" to boot, but  3-5 seconds? 

Theres no free lunch. The more sophisticated the feature set, the more coding required. The more code, the more has to be initialized, the more memory has be cleared on startup, the more sub systems have to get reset. Unless the process/memory performance improves sufficiently the more time it's going to take.  And we know, at least in the case of the M10, that power and heat and reduced battery size were central design issues which likely means that the processor speed was relatively conservative to what might have been possibe without such constraints. Whether the M11 can address any of this, we'll see. 

Thank You! Now I understand some things but others not. Why do older things awake suddenly, while newer need there time? The older radios from my father start playing immediately, but the DAB radio needs some seconds?

[SrMi]

4 hours ago, adan said:

You don't have to shoot moving subjects - you simply need to use a shutter speed appropriate to moving subjects (1/250th-1/4000th).

And thus an ISO appropriate to photographing moving subjects, in low light with a fast shutter speed.

Not sure to which post you replied. When comparing two cameras, one needs to use same exposure in order to determine which one is better at low light. It does not matter which shutter speed you pick.

[adan]

I was replying to your post right above mine, announcing your proposal to make a test.

In the context of the discussion to which you replied to Steven, the real issue is not low light per se, but high-ISO performance

Faster, action-stopping shutter speeds even in low light require high ISOs, and so that is one way to make sure the test applies to the issue at hand.

The question is not which camera does better in low light - at ISO 200 and an 8-second exposure on a tripod. It is which camera does better in low light - at ISO 8000-50000 at hand-holdable shutter speeds.

So long as that is what is tested, all is good.

Edited October 21, 2021 by adan

[LocalHero1953]

I don't have a M10R so cannot comment on its performance in low light, but the image I posted earlier is an example of where I would like to shoot at a faster shutter speed with less image degradation. In this case a mono gritty image with movement blur suits how it will be used (publicity for a play on social media) but a sharp image with less noise, in good colour, at ISO 25,000 would be good to have. 

[chris_tribble]

11 hours ago, adan said:

.Try photographing some real addicts in real motion in the real nightime under a real railroad bridge  - preferably with enough focus-depth and exposure to provide a powerful record of the situation and the people - not just mood. Then let's talk about the ISO required.

Valid! I’m not going to argue against higher and better high ISO. Bill Brandt might have been able to get his shots of miners with the film stock of the day, but I’m sure he would have used better tools if they’d been to hand. If there’s an M11 which is class leading in high iso and has advantages performance-wise over the M10 then I’m sure it will be a roaring success.

[jaapv]

3 hours ago, elmars said:

Thank You! Now I understand some things but others not. Why do older things awake suddenly, while newer need there time? The older radios from my father start playing immediately, but the DAB radio needs some seconds?

My old radio needs time for the tubes to warm up...

[LocalHero1953]

3 minutes ago, jaapv said:

My old radio needs time for the tubes to warm up...

So do I. I'm on my second coffee.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[jaapv]

4 hours ago, nwphil said:

I would be happy with a true B - bulb mode without the silly noise reduction or the ability to turn it off

If it were silly... There is no other effective way to eliminate hot pixels from long exposure without destroying resolution but a dark frame second exposure - ask anybody who has to take images of the night sky, for instance. Any after-exposure software that wipes out hot pixels wipes out stars. Yes, it would be a good idea to be able to turn it off , if only to convince people that it is effective  - but you would not like the output in comparison.