Now the 6,350€ question : M11-S 24MP BSI in 2023 ? [Merged]

[SrMi]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

10 hours ago, nicci78 said:

After reading lots of review about M11. Binning seems totally useless. 
60MP is overkill. 
We will need a 24MP BSI variant of M11 in the near future. 
A cheaper M11-S in 18 months will be awesome. 

That would be a waste of time. I'd prefer Leica would invest in development of M11M, CL2, Q3, and SL3.

The 60MP sensor is Leica's best digital sensor so far.

[nicci78]

Making a 6,350€ M11-S is not a waste of time. It will be awesome for everybody (except M11 owners 😉) 

[Photoworks]

1 hour ago, nicci78 said:

M11 body is awesome. 
But it’s 60MP sensor ? No thanks 

 

Leica kinda ruined the Q2 with 47MP. A Q2-S with SL2-S sensor would have been awesome. 

that is funny. if you look over the SL forum many are asking for the SL3 with M11 sensor. Just because the new M11 sensor is so good and better than SL2s

Plus you already have and 36MP and 18MP in M11, 24MP sounds funny again.

I think you just want a M11 at a better price.. well in 18 months there will be some in the used market and then it may be closer to your budget.

[nicci78]

I don’t want high MP counts camera again. 
It is useless actually. 
 

M11 sensor is not better than SL2-S. it is different. Downscaling can be very effective. But ultimately what’s the point to throw away 42MP to reach 18MP, just to beat 24MP SL2-S ? 

[LocalHero1953]

3 hours ago, Photoworks said:

that is funny. if you look over the SL forum many are asking for the SL3 with M11 sensor. Just because the new M11 sensor is so good and better than SL2s

Plus you already have and 36MP and 18MP in M11, 24MP sounds funny again.

I think you just want a M11 at a better price.. well in 18 months there will be some in the used market and then it may be closer to your budget.

Some people have suggested a SL3 would have the sensor from the M11; in practice it's more likely to have a later iteration.

As far as I can tell from published data, and from what those able to make the comparison have written, the only way in which the M11 sensor is significantly "better" than that of the SL2S sensor is in pixels. Is your experience different? (I'm past judging photographs by the number of pixels in them).

[SrMi]

1 hour ago, LocalHero1953 said:

Some people have suggested a SL3 would have the sensor from the M11; in practice it's more likely to have a later iteration.

As far as I can tell from published data, and from what those able to make the comparison have written, the only way in which the M11 sensor is significantly "better" than that of the SL2S sensor is in pixels. Is your experience different? (I'm past judging photographs by the number of pixels in them).

While I am happy with SL2, in theory, M11 should produce an even better IQ (1 stop less noise: link). On the other hand, SL2-S has a similar IQ (per measurement) as M11. So it would be nice if SL2's DR improves to the level of M11, Canon, Nikon, and Sony cameras.

The sensor in M11 is the latest available sensor. There is no other sensor mentioned even in rumors. The rumored Sony a7V is supposed to have the same 61MP sensor.

[Jeff S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

7 hours ago, insomnia said:

Also they went ahead and did a sensor development purely for the M10-R which will feature the least production number of all (from what we can imagine right now).

The sensors for the M10-R and M10 Monochrom were derived from the S3 sensor architecture (wafer), which spread costs and created economies of scale.  The same for the S007 sensor and the M240 platform.

Jeff

[roma]

I would also love an m11 with the SL2-S sensor.

But….I know Leica will do whatever it needs to make money. If m11 sales tank within a couple of years, they will make an m11-s. If m11 keeps selling well, they will not do anything except for putting out more “collectible” m11 variants.

[oka]

It doesn’t make sense to make M11 with the same sensor with SL2-s.

If Leica releases M11-s, it won’t be in near future and that time the sensor would be far too “old”. It would be better to the “current” sensors available.

I’m happy to see that Leica finally releases bodies with current sensors, not something which are outdated from day one.

M11 sensors high iso performance is not far away from the SL2-s while retaining much higher pixel count. M10-R and M10 is just not comparable in real world use.

I do believe variable sized raw files are future, not releasing “same” camera with different sensors.

[nicci78]

But every tests shows that variable raw size does not improve the image at all. 
It is the same as downsizing the image in Lightroom. 
Absolutely nothing new under the sun. 
It is just pure marketing talk with no real world benefits. 

Edited April 5, 2022 by nicci78

[nicci78]

By the way DXOMark will release soon its M11 sensor review. 

[SrMi]

29 minutes ago, nicci78 said:

But every tests shows that variable raw size does not improve the image at all. 
It is the same as downsizing the image in Lightroom. 
Absolutely nothing new under the sun. 
It is just pure marketing talk with no real world benefits. 

AFAIK, Leica is the first to provide smaller resolutions in raw without image quality reduction. 
Some users, like you, want to have smaller file sizes and resolutions (e.g., 24MP instead of 60MP). 
It is not the same as shooting 60MP raw, resizing in Lightroom, and exporting as TIFFs before deleting the raws.

[raizans]

As a plebian, I would be very happy if Leica made a lower MP version of the M11 that cost only $6500.

[Tailwagger]

24 minutes ago, raizans said:

As a plebian, I would be very happy if Leica made a lower MP version of the M11 that cost only $6500.

Not that most wouldn't be, but the cost differential between a 24 Mpx and 60 Mpx is measured in a couple of hundred, not thousands of $$$.  You might get an initial $1k discount off the M11, if they were feeling generous, which AFAICT they rarely, if ever, do.  Can't remember exactly, but the last of the MPs were sold at what, $8300?  No, if theres a 11-S, it's far, far more likely it will debut at or near the current $9K and the price of the M11 will jump to tickle the $10K mark.  

[oka]

6 hours ago, SrMi said:

AFAIK, Leica is the first to provide smaller resolutions in raw without image quality reduction. 

While my own and other tests has concluded that it’s not true.

Medium RAW files has less highlight headroom and it’s bit soft but I do believe it’s just growing pains.

I do hope its just firmware issue but nevertheless I do believe variable sized raw files makes SL2/SL2-s kind of releases history when this feature gets ironed out.

BUT SL line is in different market segment than M line where Leica needs to be competitive on pricing.

SL2-s was “quick fix” on my view. Lower the price point and catering hybrid world. Also fix the high iso performance which in SL2 was quite bad.

Currently I have heard that SL2 sales are dismissal and s variant selling many times over the original SL2.

Now if you look few years back it’s amazing how fast SL2 has become “obsolite”. M11 just kills it in high res files and on high iso where it’s more than one stop better.

If you need (high res)EVF, L mount or video there is SL2-s which has become also great pick for entry to Leica world.

Ultimately I’m really impressed what Leica has accomplished in recent years while being such small player on the business.

Edited April 6, 2022 by oka

[intermediatic]

The FP-L and the Fuji GFX 100S knifed my SL2 long before my M11 did, but yes. I don’t get all the folks whining that the Q2 was awful because it has more resolution or that the M11 is terrible because it has more resolution. None of the arguments they have put forth make the least bit of sense to me. As for dynamic range, I was just looking at some M240 images the other day and it was shocking how little headroom they had and how much noise they had in the darks. Things have changed.

[Photoworks]

11 hours ago, intermediatic said:

The FP-L and the Fuji GFX 100S knifed my SL2 long before my M11 did, but yes. I don’t get all the folks whining that the Q2 was awful because it has more resolution or that the M11 is terrible because it has more resolution. None of the arguments they have put forth make the least bit of sense to me. As for dynamic range, I was just looking at some M240 images the other day and it was shocking how little headroom they had and how much noise they had in the darks. Things have changed.

Do you think it is a problem of price?

say the M11 would be $3000 and the M10r $8000 would does people still complain? or they would still rave about the m9 over the M11?

 

[hdmesa]

On 3/29/2022 at 10:26 PM, IkarusJohn said:

...viewing up the Matukituki Valley into the Southern Alps from Pub Corner.  The print was 1 metre across the long side... Sadly, the print came off the backing and stuck to the inside of the glass, and I've lost the DNG...

Sounds like a good excuse to go on a quest to recreate it.

 

On 3/30/2022 at 3:37 PM, Jared said:

With the very minor exception of read noise (and it is a minor exception in the case of the IMX 455 sensor), there is no benefit in image quality to having a lower resolution sensor. You can get the same improvements in signal-to-noise by binning or down-sampling as you would from having a lower resolution sensor to begin with. Really. Truly. The only difference is in read noise, and the sensor in the M11 is right around 1.5 electrons (depending on gain/ISO) which is already quite low. In fact, if your normalize for area per pixel and take into account that read noise adds in quadrature, a 60 megapixel M11 image down-sampled to 24 megapixels should have almost the same read noise as an SL2S image at the same ISO (using ISO1600 as a benchmark, though you could choose other values). The quantum efficiency on the IMX 455 is approaching 90% at peak which is better than the chip in the SL2S. So, the M11 down sampled should actually very slightly outperform an SL2S at most ISO's under similar lighting. 

In other words, there really is no need for an SL2S chipped version of the M11. There is no benefit. You can just shoot the M11 at 18mp or 36 (depending on how you intend to use the image) and get either slightly better or very similar low light performance. 

...

^ A little bit louder for the people in the back who are not paying attention. The only reason to have another version of the M11 would be to have a fast stacked sensor like the sensor in the A1, Z9, R3, etc., and it would likely be more expensive. It would be a great idea for an M11 variant toward the end of the M11's run, maybe call it the M11-B.

[jonoslack]

13 hours ago, hdmesa said:

^ A little bit louder for the people in the back who are not paying attention. The only reason to have another version of the M11 would be to have a fast stacked sensor like the sensor in the A1, Z9, R3, etc., and it would likely be more expensive. It would be a great idea for an M11 variant toward the end of the M11's run, maybe call it the M11-B.

I quite agree - no other reason, although whether there really is a big demand for such a camera I'm not sure . . . . and maybe it would be more likely to be in a full update (M12)

Leica already tried to make 'bargain' lenses, and nobody bought them (the M summarits). I would imagine they would think twice before doing that again (especially with cameras). 

Best

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Kwesi]

9 hours ago, jonoslack said:

Leica already tried to make 'bargain' lenses, and nobody bought them (the M summarits).

In all fairness Jono, Leica neutered the M summarits with sub par accessories, half hearted max apertures and onerous MFD’s.  Had they simply created a full complement of normally specced elmarits they would still be in the catalogue.