Unveiling M11?

[84bravo]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

8 hours ago, Artin said:

It makes perfect sense, given the fact that there is no chance of Zoom lenses for the M , the quality of the Fast lenses available for the M..... 60mpx will make the platform into a very versatile imaging system. the ability to crop with a 60mpx sensor will be a huge game changer. I wish IBIS was part of this new platform but as it is I am very excited so far.

I can say that it put my venture into the Nikon Z system on hold. 

I have found this to be the best thing about the M10-R with 40mp. The ability to make dramatic crops from a 50mm f1.4 asph is a very valuable asset for me. I can see where I will eventually get the M11 for just that reason alone.

[84bravo]

On 12/15/2021 at 4:51 PM, SrMi said:

Quoting Jim Kasson (again):

Almost all comments about highlight clipping and rolloff in raw files can be traced to exposure variations, often caused by the metering systems of the cameras involved.

The only way to avoid clipping is to underexpose, aka, metering variations.

That has not been my experience shooting an M10-P and an M10-R side by side with the same manual exposure. The M10 makes a very good file, but the M10-R does handle the highlights better and easier to tame. I only shoot DNG.

[SrMi]

15 minutes ago, 84bravo said:

That has not been my experience shooting an M10-P and an M10-R side by side with the same manual exposure. The M10 makes a very good file, but the M10-R does handle the highlights better and easier to tame. I only shoot DNG.

The exposure setting (aperture, shutter speed) and ISO may be the same, but there are variations inside the camera how that setting is handled.

[84bravo]

Just now, SrMi said:

The exposure setting (aperture, shutter speed) and ISO may be the same, but there are variations inside the camera how that setting is handled.

But this is not a reflection of metering. 1/125 at f8 and 100 ISO is the same exposure with any camera.

[SrMi]

10 minutes ago, 84bravo said:

But this is not a reflection of metering. 1/125 at f8 and 100 ISO is the same exposure with any camera.

ISO 100 means different thing on different cameras.

[84bravo]

1 minute ago, SrMi said:

ISO 100 means different thing on different cameras.

I get what you're saying, but that does not seem to be the case if the same photo is taken with the same exposure settings with the two different cameras and the photo is otherwise identical. If ISO 100 is under exposing on the R to better recover highlights, say ISO 64 for example, then the rest of the image should be under exposed as well. That has not been my experience. However, if the software or algorithm is different to compensate for the highlights, then that may be why the highlights are better. But ISO 100 is ISO 100.

[AlanD]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

31 minutes ago, 84bravo said:

I get what you're saying, but that does not seem to be the case if the same photo is taken with the same exposure settings with the two different cameras and the photo is otherwise identical. If ISO 100 is under exposing on the R to better recover highlights, say ISO 64 for example, then the rest of the image should be under exposed as well. That has not been my experience. However, if the software or algorithm is different to compensate for the highlights, then that may be why the highlights are better. But ISO 100 is ISO 100.

That’s not true.  If you open up a RAW file as a LINEAR file, then yes, the rest of the image may in fact be underexposed.  Any astrophotography tool or Rawdigger tool will work.

But a tone curve is applied by default, and is embedded in the DNG

https://www.adobe.com/content/dam/acom/en/products/photoshop/pdfs/dng_spec_1.4.0.0.pdf

 

 

[84bravo]

5 minutes ago, AlanD said:

That’s not true.  If you open up a RAW file as a LINEAR file, then yes, the rest of the image may in fact be underexposed.  Any astrophotography tool or Rawdigger tool will work.

But a tone curve is applied by default, and is embedded in the DNG

https://www.adobe.com/content/dam/acom/en/products/photoshop/pdfs/dng_spec_1.4.0.0.pdf

 

 

I think we're saying the same thing...

[SrMi]

26 minutes ago, 84bravo said:

I get what you're saying, but that does not seem to be the case if the same photo is taken with the same exposure settings with the two different cameras and the photo is otherwise identical. If ISO 100 is under exposing on the R to better recover highlights, say ISO 64 for example, then the rest of the image should be under exposed as well. That has not been my experience. However, if the software or algorithm is different to compensate for the highlights, then that may be why the highlights are better. But ISO 100 is ISO 100.

If the camera is set at ISO 100 but exposes at actual ISO 64, it does not mean that the image will be darker than the ISO 100 image shot with another camera. 

 

The camera processes the data that is read from the sensor before it writes it to the card. The processing can include:

• Lifting shadows and mid-tones.
• Adding an S curve to the highlights.
• Instructing raw converters to apply Baseline Exposure Compensation. 
• etc

 

E.g., the measurement of the Olympus cameras shows that they 'underexpose' by one stop to preserve highlights. So the images are not darker because of that.

 

The most important thing is that you know how your camera works and what you must do (or not) to get a good exposure. For example, with M10-P, you likely have to apply negative EC and correct in the post to get the same highlight preservation as with M10-R.

[fotografr]

Would this be the appropriate time to start a new thread on "Wish List For The M12?" 

[Jeff S]

11 minutes ago, fotografr said:

Would this be the appropriate time to start a new thread on "Wish List For The M12?" 

I’m sure if we did, there would be multiple competing threads….

Jeff

[fotografr]

28 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

I’m sure if we did, there would be multiple competing threads….

Jeff

Maybe we should just skip straight to the M13. I wonder if Leica will make an M13, or of they'll follow the lead of hotels that don't have a 13th floor? 

[Jeff S]

25 minutes ago, fotografr said:

Maybe we should just skip straight to the M13. I wonder if Leica will make an M13, or of they'll follow the lead of hotels that don't have a 13th floor? 

Maybe a good time to introduce the built in EVF version.  

Jeff

[fotografr]

8 minutes ago, Al Brown said:

Therer are some possible concerns whether Leica Camera will be around for M13 (expected launch: in about 10 years).

Those concerns have been around since before the launch of the M8.

[thrid]

 

I have a love / hate relationship with the internal M10 metering system. More often than not it works far, far better than it should, but it is a fairly 'dumb' system and is easily fooled resulting in blown out highlights etc.

As an example all it takes is someone close to camera in a black jacket etc to throw off the system. 

So, I went back to using a handheld light meter for a lot of my shooting.

Luckily the M10 ASA settings correlate to those on my Sekonic. As an example 400asa on the M10 meters the same as on the light meter. As a result middle gray is always where it is supposed to be and I estimate that on average I have gained 1-2 stops in the highlights. I have the M10 permanently set to -0.3 stops exposure compensation, so I have a little extra cushion at the top. 

Overall this approach works great in bright sunlight or snow, high contrast situations etc. and overall I feel like I have regained control over what is being exposed for.

 I still used the internal meter on aperture priority in flat lighting situations, but frankly I'm really favoring my hand held meter. It's not really a big deal for me since I shot like that with meterless film cameras for the past 30 years and after a while you simply remember what to set the camera at given the lighting conditions.

One added benefit is that I chimp a lot less, unless I'm checking the exposure for a very tricky lighting situation, like shooting into the sun etc.

 

I'm looking forward to the M11. 60MP is a little overkill for what I do, but maybe Leica will keep the M10 and M11 in production at the same time. Many companies now have a tiered product lineup that with low and hires models available. The M10 sensor is going to be a viable choice for a few years to come, so there is no reason for Leica to be a one trick pony.

Personally I would take an increase in dynamic range over MP any day of the week. My dream is that Leica builds a 24 or 36MP sensor with bracketed dual gain readouts (one gain reading for low/ mid and a second simultaneous read for the highlights that are combined on the fly) that would result in an obscene amount of DR. Basically give me the sensor architecture of an ARRI Alexa movie camera in a still camera...

[overexposed]

12 hours ago, fotografr said:

Maybe we should just skip straight to the M13. I wonder if Leica will make an M13, or of they'll follow the lead of hotels that don't have a 13th floor? 

its more likely they will use a different name for the M14 for the asian market

[fotografr]

14 minutes ago, overexposed said:

its more likely they will use a different name for the M14 for the asian market

Good point. Also, for the American market the M15 would not be well received.

Edited December 18, 2021 by fotografr

[Adam Bonn]

There are various different systems to measure ISO (like there is with temperature, velocity, area etc), so ISO xyz on one camera isn’t necessarily the same as another

The various raw softwares will apply various things to your raw file behind the scenes too

Also, the camera can manipulate/amplify the signal at ADC, for example to extend the apparent iso range &/or manage signal to noise

Re the M10 (non-R) iso 100 isn’t 100 it’s a pull, so highlights will never be as recoverable as a true native base iso. In fact according to DxO the measured iso of the m10 at iso200 is 105 (their measured iso 100 is 89), so any highlight recovery comparisons with the m10 should be done with the iso set to 200 imo…

Perhaps someone has already done a 10R iso 100 V M10 iso 200 test? Dunno..

The highlight improvement on the 10R will be down to the aforementioned improvements in the chip, and possibly the associated ADC pipeline.

 

Edited December 18, 2021 by Adam Bonn

[SrMi]

7 hours ago, Adam Bonn said:

There are various different systems to measure ISO (like there is with temperature, velocity, area etc), so ISO xyz on one camera isn’t necessarily the same as another

The various raw softwares will apply various things to your raw file behind the scenes too

Also, the camera can manipulate/amplify the signal at ADC, for example to extend the apparent iso range &/or manage signal to noise

Re the M10 (non-R) iso 100 isn’t 100 it’s a pull, so highlights will never be as recoverable as a true native base iso. In fact according to DxO the measured iso of the m10 at iso200 is 105 (their measured iso 100 is 89), so any highlight recovery comparisons with the m10 should be done with the iso set to 200 imo…

Perhaps someone has already done a 10R iso 100 V M10 iso 200 test? Dunno..

The highlight improvement on the 10R will be down to the aforementioned improvements in the chip, and possibly the associated ADC pipeline.

The improvements in chip and ADC pipeline typically improve read noise, not highlights. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Adam Bonn]

14 hours ago, SrMi said:

The improvements in chip and ADC pipeline typically improve read noise, not highlights. 

That’s a 100% valid comment.

Let’s take the IMX071 Sony chip

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!

Boy that guy sure has been in a lot of cameras huh?

Exactly the same chip, exactly the same performance?

Nope!

Of course physical improvements in the ADC and associated pipeline will have a positive impact on performance.

But the way that chip’s data is amplified and processed based on decisions taken by the designers of the system it’s implemented within has a massive impact.