Jump to content

Unveiling M11?


Ba Erv

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor 29 Minuten schrieb Jeff S:

The S3, with 64 MP, will potentially yield nicer prints, at equivalent sizes, than a 60-ish MP M11.

Do You have a technical reason for this? In film times this was true because a larger negative has more information („Megapixel“). But in Your example we have the same account of information. But of course the different lenses with their different focal length make a difference. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, elmars said:

Do You have a technical reason for this? In film times this was true because a larger negative has more information („Megapixel“). But in Your example we have the same account of information. But of course the different lenses with their different focal length make a difference. 

S3 has a larger sensor than M10, which significantly contributes to better image quality. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, elmars said:

Do You have a technical reason for this? In film times this was true because a larger negative has more information („Megapixel“). But in Your example we have the same account of information. But of course the different lenses with their different focal length make a difference. 

I don’t know what a technical reason would be, but I do find the medium format digitals seem to have smoother transitions (less abrupt transition as an image moves from shadows to highlights) and more colour depth (ie, more shades of the same colour). All seem - to my eyes - to combine to generate a smoother, gentler, more 3D and less digitally-processed looking image compared to 35mm full frame. I’m not sure that megapixels are simply about fine detail only, presumably they also provide more data for (say) colour transitions that yield the benefits I discuss above? Finally, even if the megapixels are the same, a bigger sized sensor also means a smaller enlargement factor for any given print size, which might additionally help.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

9 minutes ago, elmars said:
42 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

The S3, with 64 MP, will potentially yield nicer prints, at equivalent sizes, than a 60-ish MP M11.

Do You have a technical reason for this? In film times this was true because a larger negative has more information („Megapixel“).

IMO, the same happens for digital sensors, it's about the size. Because there are smartphones with 102MP ( as the GFX100S) with 11,648 x 8,736 file dimensions.Yes, but the sensor is 1/1.33"... No comparable for prints. Please, correct me if I'm wrong

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Dennis said:

 

IMO, the same happens for digital sensors, it's about the size. Because there are smartphones with 102MP ( as the GFX100S) with 11,648 x 8,736 file dimensions.Yes, but the sensor is 1/1.33"... No comparable for prints. Please, correct me if I'm wrong

My point was about larger size; there’s no substitute for light gathering ‘real estate’, film or digital. (One of my pet peeves is when folks use the term ‘bigger sensor’ to mean greater MP).  And, as noted, I (sometimes) see the difference in tonal gradations and transitions when shooting with larger formats.  
 

Jeff

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Artin said:

Actually there is more to it then just real estate, yes no doubt Larger sensor do have a definite advantage if all things are equal, but a medium format sensor from technology years gone by does not compare to current sensors. We have seen some current full frame cameras producing detail and dynamic range that will trump medium format sensors from the last generation. Like I said it will be very interesting to see what kind of IQ the M11 deliver 

Never said that real estate is all that matters (that would be silly given obvious gains in tech), but that there still is no substitute for more light gathering real estate; it matters. The M10-R and M10-M achieved this (by about 10%) by moving supporting sensor electronics.

Jeff

Edited by Jeff S
Link to post
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, jaapv said:

You know I am allergic to that pseudo-concept, Jeff ;) 

Well, Stefan Daniel described it that way by adding the word ‘photons’ when he explained the M10-R/M10-M sensor improvements.

Jeff

Edited by Jeff S
Link to post
Share on other sites

Please excuse me for asking the following if already covered.

When the sensor footprint is the same for 40 MP or 24 MP, how do pixel size and density on the same real estate affect the ability to capture light and recover highlights in PP? I use the M10-R and do not print large images. Many have commented that the M10-R has superior highlight recovery compared to the M10-P. I recognize that there are probably other factors in their respective technology that contribute, but interested in your POV.

I'm very curious to see how the M10R sensor compares to the M11 sensor.

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Pixeleater said:

Please excuse me for asking the following if already covered.

When the sensor footprint is the same for 40 MP or 24 MP, how do pixel size and density on the same real estate affect the ability to capture light and recover highlights in PP? I use the M10-R and do not print large images. Many have commented that the M10-R has superior highlight recovery compared to the M10-P. I recognize that there are probably other factors in their respective technology that contribute, but interested in your POV.

I'm very curious to see how the M10R sensor compares to the M11 sensor.

As noted, Stefan Daniel explained that the M10-R and M10-M sensors (derived from the S3) effectively have more photon gathering ability than the M10 sensor, despite the same overall size, by moving supporting electronics (to the back side of the sensor, I think). There were other improvements such as dual gain architecture, refined pixel shape, etc.
 

Jeff

Edited by Jeff S
Link to post
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Pixeleater said:

 Many have commented that the M10-R has superior highlight recovery compared to the M10-P. 

Curious on this one, is it a real improvement, or is it due to the way the meter reading is biased towards the highlights (so requiring more shadow recovery) ….ie, f8 on a standard M10 became, for example, f11 on the M10-R when using their in-camera readings?

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Jon Warwick said:

Curious on this one, is it a real improvement, or is it due to the way the meter reading is biased towards the highlights (so requiring more shadow recovery) ….ie, f8 on a standard M10 became, for example, f11 on the M10-R when using their in-camera readings?

Covered extensively by Jono, in both his initial review and follow up thread here.

Jeff

Link to post
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Artin said:

One thing I have noticed on the M10R. the metering does have a very different pattern then the 240. I am constantly correcting exposure during shooting with the M10R, where with the 240 it was just set it and forget it.

I am having the opposite experience. Whereas on M240 it was a very frequent over- or underexposure in many semi-difficult situations (like against the window or a contrasty scene), with my M10-R the images are hardly ever needing the compensation.

@Jon Warwick it is not the meter biasing for highlights. It is just simply a better DR and more information in the highlight areas on M10-R period.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Al Brown said:

I am having the opposite experience. Whereas on M240 it was a very frequent over- or underexposure in many semi-difficult situations (like against the window or a contrasty scene), with my M10-R the images are hardly ever needing the compensation.

@Jon Warwick it is not the meter biasing for highlights. It is just simply a better DR and more information in the highlight areas on M10-R period.

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.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...