Leica M11 and Hasselblad X1 Rendering Similarity

[KenTanaka]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I wonder if anyone else has observed that the new M11's images render very similarly to those of Hasselblad's X1D2 50c / 907x-50c?  The colors from both often have a deep, dye-transfer print-like appearance (I call it "sherbert-like") and edges have a distinct-but-organic appearance.  I've only had my M11 a few days but this observation slapped me hard after photographing subjects I've often photographed with other cameras.  I've not noticed this rendering similarity with my earlier M10-R or M10-P cameras.   But Leica's new "Maestro" processor must have been tweaked for the new sensor.  Those 60MP M11 files sure are stand-ins for my Hasselblad X1D2 files, especially when printed!  Both system's lenses are excellent, too.

[tashley]

2 hours ago, KenTanaka said:

I wonder if anyone else has observed that the new M11's images render very similarly to those of Hasselblad's X1D2 50c / 907x-50c?  The colors from both often have a deep, dye-transfer print-like appearance (I call it "sherbert-like") and edges have a distinct-but-organic appearance.  I've only had my M11 a few days but this observation slapped me hard after photographing subjects I've often photographed with other cameras.  I've not noticed this rendering similarity with my earlier M10-R or M10-P cameras.   But Leica's new "Maestro" processor must have been tweaked for the new sensor.  Those 60MP M11 files sure are stand-ins for my Hasselblad X1D2 files, especially when printed!  Both system's lenses are excellent, too.

I agree. I recently old all my Hassy gear because now I get more pixels in a smaller package with an aspect ratio I prefer, though you do have to watch the dynamic range/exposure a bit more.

[Jon Warwick]

I don’t know about the X1D, given i don’t own it. But using my GFX100S and trying out an M11, the print crops of the same scene off a 60” wide image looked ridiculously similar to my eyes. The lenses I used were 50mm (APO Lanthar) on the M11 and GF 63mm, so broadly equivalent angle of view.

I need to do some more comparisons, it’s possible in some scenes the 100mp differential will be more noticeable, or it could be an excellent APO Lanthar on an excellent M11 sensor is punching above its megapixel weight?

Either way I do really like the filmic rendering off the M11, and the subject’s edges never look “too sharp” for my taste. And I also like the large flexibility of different looks that native M lenses provide, ie, many different types of lens options and hence renderings ….from super sharp edge-to-edge M APOs for landscapes, to sharp fall-off from Noctiluxes, to more gentle “vintage” pre-ASPH lenses for portraits etc. I see it being easier to have flex in terms of distinct renderings from native lens options in this regard compared to the GFX.

Edited February 22, 2022 by Jon Warwick

[hdmesa]

8 hours ago, KenTanaka said:

I wonder if anyone else has observed that the new M11's images render very similarly to those of Hasselblad's X1D2 50c / 907x-50c?  The colors from both often have a deep, dye-transfer print-like appearance (I call it "sherbert-like") and edges have a distinct-but-organic appearance.  I've only had my M11 a few days but this observation slapped me hard after photographing subjects I've often photographed with other cameras.  I've not noticed this rendering similarity with my earlier M10-R or M10-P cameras.   But Leica's new "Maestro" processor must have been tweaked for the new sensor.  Those 60MP M11 files sure are stand-ins for my Hasselblad X1D2 files, especially when printed!  Both system's lenses are excellent, too.

With regard to sensors, the M11 is literally a smaller version of the GFX 100S sensor with M-specific cover glass and microlenses. The X1D series uses a very old sensor, the same one in the GFX 50S and 50R.

I've always thought that the Leica and Hasselblad default color and tone curves shared a similar, refined aesthetic, though.

[tom0511]

While I find the M11 very good I dont believe it is on the same level as the Hassy or Leica S.

I directly compared to Leica S and the lenses alone make quite a difference, at least at wider open f-stops. Maybe its closer with the new 35APO (Which I dont own).

I believe the difference is more from lenses than from sensor. Specially corner performance at wider f-stops and vignetting do make a difference. I believe the price for smaller size of the lenses.

I also saw some comparisons with x1dII and while M11 hold up pretty good, the x1dII was still slightly ahead.

[Jeff S]

2 hours ago, tom0511 said:

I believe the difference is more from lenses than from sensor. Specially corner performance at wider f-stops and vignetting do make a difference. I believe the price for smaller size of the lenses.

 

If so, then the SL system should be even better, given that the larger SL Summicrons technically outperform even the best APO M lenses.

Jeff

Edited February 23, 2022 by Jeff S

[SrMi]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, Jeff S said:

If so, then the SL system should be even better, given that the larger SL Summicrons technically outperform even the best APO M lenses.

Jeff

I would say that the SL system sensors are great but weaker than M11's sensors. SL Summicrons should be better than APO M lenses. I do not know what the comparison in practice would look like, and I do not care much :). They are both wonderful and different systems.
M11 and X1D are similar in their long exposure capabilities, which are much better than most available on the market.

[Jeff S]

7 minutes ago, SrMi said:

I would say that the SL system sensors are great but weaker than M11's sensors. SL Summicrons should be better than APO M lenses. I do not know what the comparison in practice would look like, and I do not care much :). They are both wonderful and different systems.
M11 and X1D are similar in their long exposure capabilities, which are much better than most available on the market.

I don’t care either.  I was merely responding to the post, and theory, that the differences are more attributable to the lenses (and their size) than sensors.  Hence my comment about the larger, better performing SL lenses. 

Jeff

[chriscove]

18 hours ago, Jon Warwick said:

I don’t know about the X1D, given i don’t own it. But using my GFX100S and trying out an M11, the print crops of the same scene off a 60” wide image looked ridiculously similar to my eyes. The lenses I used were 50mm (APO Lanthar) on the M11 and GF 63mm, so broadly equivalent angle of view.

I need to do some more comparisons, it’s possible in some scenes the 100mp differential will be more noticeable, or it could be an excellent APO Lanthar on an excellent M11 sensor is punching above its megapixel weight?

Either way I do really like the filmic rendering off the M11, and the subject’s edges never look “too sharp” for my taste. And I also like the large flexibility of different looks that native M lenses provide, ie, many different types of lens options and hence renderings ….from super sharp edge-to-edge M APOs for landscapes, to sharp fall-off from Noctiluxes, to more gentle “vintage” pre-ASPH lenses for portraits etc. I see it being easier to have flex in terms of distinct renderings from native lens options in this regard compared to the GFX.

Jon,

Interesting observations. I have a GFX100S and the files are very good except I have never been happy with the colors. It takes me a while to get them to what I like (X1D or S007 colors). I traded my Hassy X1D2 for the GFX and although the megapixels and DR are better the color of the X1D2 was more pleasing to me. There is so much to like about the GFX 100s (increased MP’s, better DR, improved AF, tilting screen, auto focus stacking) but I am not happy with the colors and I get no “joy” from using it.   I have an M11 on order and will be doing direct comparisons to the GFX100S for landscape work. I have used my M10M for landscapes and love the small size, small great lenses, tilting EVF and joy of using it. I am hoping to the M11 can be my color landscape camera.

Edited February 23, 2022 by chriscove

[FlashGordonPhotography]

I have yet to do any really serious comparisons but from my basic testing the M11 is not quite where the X1D/907 is for file pliability. And while it does olng exposures the execution is still far superior on the X1D.

However there is something very pleasing about the M11 sensor. The colour science is definitely improved but I'm sure there are other things going on as well. While I see little practical difference to my M10R I like the files better. Enough I'm considering getting rid of the M10R (I was going to keep it as a backup/second.). It definitely helps that I also picked up an APO50 with my M11.

I too have a GFX 100S. But I still have my X1D, X1DII and 907x. They're more fun to shoot, although the GFX is vastly more capable and I much prefer the colours. Currently I'm bouncing between the M11 and 907x as my daily carry (the 907x with 45P is ridiculously small and quite beautiful).

The system that's not getting as much use is my SL2. Those wonderful APO Summicrons deserve more use. I'm also not shooting for work or travelling much where the flexibility and speed of the SL2 shine. I do wonder if Leica should fast track the SL3 with the M11 sensor, including the vario resolutions. Now that'd be something.

Gordon

[Jon Warwick]

2 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

I have yet to do any really serious comparisons but from my basic testing the M11 is not quite where the X1D/907 is for file pliability. And while it does olng exposures the execution is still far superior on the X1D.

However there is something very pleasing about the M11 sensor. The colour science is definitely improved but I'm sure there are other things going on as well. While I see little practical difference to my M10R I like the files better. Enough I'm considering getting rid of the M10R (I was going to keep it as a backup/second.). It definitely helps that I also picked up an APO50 with my M11.

I too have a GFX 100S. But I still have my X1D, X1DII and 907x. They're more fun to shoot, although the GFX is vastly more capable and I much prefer the colours. Currently I'm bouncing between the M11 and 907x as my daily carry (the 907x with 45P is ridiculously small and quite beautiful).

The system that's not getting as much use is my SL2. Those wonderful APO Summicrons deserve more use. I'm also not shooting for work or travelling much where the flexibility and speed of the SL2 shine. I do wonder if Leica should fast track the SL3 with the M11 sensor, including the vario resolutions. Now that'd be something.

Gordon

Yes, I’d really like to see the SL3 with the M11 sensor (both for the rendering & resolution).

I sold the SL2 for the GFX100S, because I never particularly liked the rendering from the SL2 sensor, unfortunately …a shame, in some ways, because the SL Summicrons are incredible in terms of their resolution and lack of field curvature. A flat field is one thing I miss about the SL Summicron, and M 50 APO for that matter.

Edited February 23, 2022 by Jon Warwick

[setuporg]

The MF look with X1D/907x and Leica S is dramatically different in terms of subject separation at rather closed apertures compared to the FF.  The overall look of an S image differs rather dramatically from any FF one, and an X1D/907x with the 80/1.9 looks rather distinct from anything FF I've tried, including M10-R.  I wonder whether M11 will be that much different from other FF contenders...

[Jon Warwick]

4 hours ago, setuporg said:

The MF look with X1D/907x and Leica S is dramatically different in terms of subject separation at rather closed apertures compared to the FF.  The overall look of an S image differs rather dramatically from any FF one, and an X1D/907x with the 80/1.9 looks rather distinct from anything FF I've tried, including M10-R.  I wonder whether M11 will be that much different from other FF contenders...

I think the tonality, dynamic range, and smoothness of the rendering off FF sensors has improved substantially, and closed a gap with MF.  Some of that is subjective, I know, but it’s my personal observation, at least as I compare my GFX with an M11 that I’ve tried. The quality off the new “real” ISO 64 on the M11 takes that further IMHO.

Clearly equivalent focal lengths on FF and MF will remain different, ie, GFX / X1D + 63mm equates to FF + 50mm in terms of how much of a scene is captured. Clearly that won’t change, and MF can produce a compelling look as a result of larger sensor and longer focal length. On the flip side there are benefits too, at times, of using the FF for increased depth of field for things like landscapes, without resorting to focus stacking. I might have missed your point, but regarding your comment re X1D + 80mm 1.9, I guess one could equally argue that an M11 + Noctilux (especially the 75mm) is unlike a lot of the other FF “look” out there too?

 

 

Edited February 24, 2022 by Jon Warwick

[setuporg]

12 hours ago, Jon Warwick said:

using the FF for increased depth of field for things like landscapes, without resorting to focus stacking

In my experience, the MF look is easy subject separation at many apertures and across many lenses, as well as the high dynamic range -- which lends to the unique Leica S look when combined with the S lenses.  That's just different from FF, even if you can get similar colors and even DR.

[tom0511]

Am 23.2.2022 um 15:52 schrieb Jeff S:

If so, then the SL system should be even better, given that the larger SL Summicrons technically outperform even the best APO M lenses.

Jeff

I did not say the difference is only/just from lenses, but that I believe lenses are probably one big part of the difference. Vignetting and corner performance are one factor here. 
While I really like the M11 IQ, I can also NOT see IQ to be better than SL2.

 I Even believe that WB presets of M11 ( I can only talk about LR conversion) and profiles still can be improved. for my part, if I import a file from S007 I need les post work vs a file imported from SL2 vs a file imported from M11. This includes color.

With a top notch M lens like the 50 apo iq quality gets quite closer to the S 70mm.
But the ‚problem’ is, that all S focal lengths are top notch, but not all M focal lengths are.

24mm S vs wate at 18 mm - worlds apart all over the frame even at f8 (21 sem is better than wate but its not as wide)

35 S vs 28/1.4 M - corners of M lens softer and darker

45S - I dont own the M 35 APO, but I assume lens quality to be close ( for double price of the S lens)

The S lenses are very consistent, for all focal lengths and also for wide open to closed down.

Additionally I believe the S and X1D ( I cant talk about Fuji) still show advantages in regards of color, midtones and transitions.

BUT I also agree, that the M11 gets one step closer, and specially for its size ( and the lenses size) delivers great IQ.

My opinion.

 

 

 

[IkarusJohn]

I sold my X1D II and my SL lenses as I came to the conclusion that my cameras and my lenses were not the limiting factors in my photography. I’d gone down an image quality rabbit hole, to the point where I had too many fine lenses and too many cameras.  If I wish to improve my images (and I do), then the biggest limiting factor is behind the camera.

[John Smith]

18 hours ago, setuporg said:

The MF look with X1D/907x and Leica S is dramatically different in terms of subject separation at rather closed apertures compared to the FF.  The overall look of an S image differs rather dramatically from any FF one, and an X1D/907x with the 80/1.9 looks rather distinct from anything FF I've tried, including M10-R.  I wonder whether M11 will be that much different from other FF contenders...

I didn't see that to be the case all the time when I had my 007. I compared the 007 and 70mm side by side with the SL and 50LUX and it was hard to see any difference. In fact, I usually opted for the SL's photos over the 007's with that little comparison. If you are talking subject separation, it is hard to beat the 75Noct and 90Lux. That being said, the S70mm, which is supposed to be based on the 50Lux-M sometimes shows that oh-my-gosh separation.

[satijntje]

When I saw my first images taken with my M11, it indeed reminded me of 907x images, so fully agree.

what to do now? Sell the Blad? No…..

[setuporg]

48 minutes ago, John Smith said:

I didn't see that to be the case all the time when I had my 007. I compared the 007 and 70mm side by side with the SL and 50LUX and it was hard to see any difference. In fact, I usually opted for the SL's photos over the 007's with that little comparison. If you are talking subject separation, it is hard to beat the 75Noct and 90Lux. That being said, the S70mm, which is supposed to be based on the 50Lux-M sometimes shows that oh-my-gosh separation.

So it's in the eye of the beholder -- the S forum has a consensus that the MF look is distinct and unattainable with FF dimensions.  The large lenses gather light differently.  The 75noct and 90lux might approach that, I haven't tried.  But then you can have 5 S lenses for each of those.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[tom0511]

vor 2 Stunden schrieb IkarusJohn:

I sold my X1D II and my SL lenses as I came to the conclusion that my cameras and my lenses were not the limiting factors in my photography. I’d gone down an image quality rabbit hole, to the point where I had too many fine lenses and too many cameras.  If I wish to improve my images (and I do), then the biggest limiting factor is behind the camera.

So what do you use now, your cellphone?