Jump to content

Not a very positive take on M11 by Overgaard - says it will not be a classic


leicavkk
 Share

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Herr Barnack said:

I was referring to processed raw files.

Perhaps you own an M240 then. Mine tends to clip reds too easily. Not a big deal but M10 and M11 files have not the same issue and have less banding and digital noise at high isos. Same for my Sonys but i won't bother you with those plastic things :D.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Herr Barnack said:

Even looking at M11 images on a laptop screen, they are head and shoulders above images produced by any other M camera in terms of image quality, and they leave the images of competitor's cameras and lenses in the dust.  I would expect printed images coming from an M11 with M glass - particularly any of the APO M lenses - to have a staggering level of image quality. 

At the end of the day, isn't image quality the priority when we buy the M11 and M lenses?

Hmmm, I'm not seeing the head and shoulders part unless pixel peeping between the M11 and M10 (24mp) files (images shot side by side). I think it depends on the scale of image we're viewing in digital or print. A3 print and under I think we would or at least I would be hard pressed to see any difference.

Image quality is important but not necessarily a priority for all. There are use cases where an M is superior as well and absolute image quality may be less so. With the cost factored in I think we should expect to have best in class image quality when wanted/needed though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Having watched the video, it seem Overgaard is implying that to be a “classic” a camera needs to have limitations. It’s funny, but my friends who are really into vinyl records, or who will only shoot film, have the same philosophy, that the only real experience must have some degree of minimalism which often/always also is challenging, inconvenient, or just plain difficult. If that’s not hipster-ism, it’s certainly in the ballpark.

The M9 is a classic? Up to 800 ISO I guess. Plenty of people take wonderful pictures to this day with their M9’s, but many of them likely wish their camera had better low light capabilities/less high ISO noise.

Is any digital camera really a “classic” at the end of the day? They really are tools of their moment, whose technical superiority is surpassed quickly by the “next best thing”. Does anybody look at a photograph and say “wow that’s great. I bet that was taken with a classic 46 megapixel camera that has in-body image stabilization and multi-coated glass”? I mean, who cares, really? This type of manufactured controversy seems to solely exist to drive engagement on social media platforms. 

When I watch interviews with truly talented or legendary photographers, they rarely seem interested in the gear, other than a requirement that it is reliable and either enables/does not impede their creative pursuits. Perhaps that’s why they are producing classic images, and not producing YouTube videos talking about which cameras will be classics or not.

Everything he is complaining about as “over complicated” for the most part is a setting you can make once on the camera and never have to bother with again. Which is how I set up my SL2 and my Q2M - now I just change shutter, aperture, & ISO. He could have framed his opinion without the negativity, but I guess that would probably get a lot less clicks.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, lct said:

Perhaps you own an M240 then. Mine tends to clip reds too easily. Not a big deal but M10 and M11 files have not the same issue and have less banding and digital noise at high isos. Same for my Sonys but i won't bother you with those plastic things :D.

Yes, I do have a 240 and I also have experienced the same shortcomings that you have.  My M10 is the M10 Monochrom; it obviously does not have these issues. 

I can't comment on the color M10 and M11, as I do not have either.  Yet.

Link to post
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, archive_all said:

Hmmm, I'm not seeing the head and shoulders part unless pixel peeping between the M11 and M10 (24mp) files (images shot side by side). I think it depends on the scale of image we're viewing in digital or print. A3 print and under I think we would or at least I would be hard pressed to see any difference.

Image quality is important but not necessarily a priority for all. There are use cases where an M is superior as well and absolute image quality may be less so. With the cost factored in I think we should expect to have best in class image quality when wanted/needed though.

I was not referring to image quality at the pixel level, but rather overall image quality. 

From what I can see, the images from the M11 look to have a level of clarity, sharpness and detail that surpasses that of many if not most of the images made with 24mp M cameras.  I am fully aware that clarity and sharpness can be increased in post processing, but I am not convinced that that's what I'm seeing.  Heavy handed processing has a tendency to reveal itself when presented. 

I seriously don't think I'm suffering from a case of M11 confirmation bias in what I see in the M11 images presented online...

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, lct said:

Perhaps you own an M240 then. Mine tends to clip reds too easily. Not a big deal but M10 and M11 files have not the same issue and have less banding and digital noise at high isos. Same for my Sonys but i won't bother you with those plastic things :D.

Clipping of the reds, which the 240 has out of the box, is easily cured by having a decent camera profile; it was only the first firmware that was really problematic in this respect. The first update which went a long way towards resolving the issue. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Herr Barnack said:

I was not referring to image quality at the pixel level, but rather overall image quality. 

From what I can see, the images from the M11 look to have a level of clarity, sharpness and detail that surpasses that of many if not most of the images made with 24mp M cameras.  I am fully aware that clarity and sharpness can be increased in post processing, but I am not convinced that that's what I'm seeing.  Heavy handed processing has a tendency to reveal itself when presented. 

I seriously don't think I'm suffering from a case of M11 confirmation bias in what I see in the M11 images presented online...

 

I had the chance to test the camera so I'm just speaking of what I can see from my limited shots with the two shot side by side. Maybe with more extensive use I'd see what you're talking about but at the same size and no post processing I just see some slight differences and mainly in color. I'm not saying the M11 doesn't have better IQ because it does but I'm personally not seeing massive differences at smaller to moderate viewing sizes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Herr Barnack said:

I was not referring to image quality at the pixel level, but rather overall image quality. 

From what I can see, the images from the M11 look to have a level of clarity, sharpness and detail that surpasses that of many if not most of the images made with 24mp M cameras.  I am fully aware that clarity and sharpness can be increased in post processing, but I am not convinced that that's what I'm seeing.  Heavy handed processing has a tendency to reveal itself when presented. 

I seriously don't think I'm suffering from a case of M11 confirmation bias in what I see in the M11 images presented online...

 

archive_all was seemingly making the point that “head and shoulders above” other M’s ‘might’ apply if you compare 60MP to 24MP brethren, but that leaves out the M10-R (40 MP) and M10-Monochrom (effectively closer to 60 MP), the latter not playing second fiddle to any M in terms of “clarity, sharpness and detail” (your above stated criteria).  In fact, the M10 Monochrom is likely still the top high ISO performer in the entire Leica portfolio (according to Red Dot Forum/Leica Miami). ‘Head and shoulders above’ implies that anyone could easily discern improvements, i.e., not even close. I certainly don’t see that  level of distinction compared to the M10-R or Monochrom.  Even some owners of these and the M11 have stated as much here in terms of IQ. Other M11 features distinguish the camera.
 

As for ‘leaving images from competitor cameras and lenses in the dust’, that too requires specific comparisons from other high MP cameras, across brands. Without actually using each extensively, and making prints, I would never leap to such bold statements, which understandably bring out the Leica haters who consider us fanboys. In fact, recent reviews from lenses like the 35 CV Ultron II show them to be objectively sharper than Leica ‘equivalents’ like the 35 Summicron ASPH, and for $800. Of course one could spend over $8k on the 35 APO, that is if one could actually find one.

Jeff

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just watched the complete video. Whew, the mechanical and electronic shutter complications say "Torpedoes Los" on the M11 for me. Leica should have leapfrogged over Sony's conventional 61MP sensor and gone with the the stacked 50MP (A1) sensor for a full artifact free electronic shutter instead. I'll be staying with my M10M and if I do get a future color M it will be either the M10R or wait.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, trickness said:

Having watched the video, it seem Overgaard is implying that to be a “classic” a camera needs to have limitations. It’s funny, but my friends who are really into vinyl records, or who will only shoot film, have the same philosophy, that the only real experience must have some degree of minimalism which often/always also is challenging, inconvenient, or just plain difficult. If that’s not hipster-ism, it’s certainly in the ballpark.

The M9 is a classic? Up to 800 ISO I guess. Plenty of people take wonderful pictures to this day with their M9’s, but many of them likely wish their camera had better low light capabilities/less high ISO noise.

Is any digital camera really a “classic” at the end of the day? They really are tools of their moment, whose technical superiority is surpassed quickly by the “next best thing”. Does anybody look at a photograph and say “wow that’s great. I bet that was taken with a classic 46 megapixel camera that has in-body image stabilization and multi-coated glass”? I mean, who cares, really? This type of manufactured controversy seems to solely exist to drive engagement on social media platforms. 

When I watch interviews with truly talented or legendary photographers, they rarely seem interested in the gear, other than a requirement that it is reliable and either enables/does not impede their creative pursuits. Perhaps that’s why they are producing classic images, and not producing YouTube videos talking about which cameras will be classics or not.

Everything he is complaining about as “over complicated” for the most part is a setting you can make once on the camera and never have to bother with again. Which is how I set up my SL2 and my Q2M - now I just change shutter, aperture, & ISO. He could have framed his opinion without the negativity, but I guess that would probably get a lot less clicks.

 

I really liked this post. And there has been a quiet but long running argument by some that a camera needs limitations and by other that you need to be prepared for anything. For the purposes of general discussion, rather than at you specifically;

1. All camera systems have limitations, eventually.

2. Limitations are good and neccessary until they aren't. Limitations have the ability, if used positively, to give focus. For example carrying a camera with a single or fixed lens, we are presented with an infinate number of possibilities for photos and seeing with a single focal length can allow us to filter out all the *noise* and see better.

3. Limitations are bad if we need something outside what's available. A pro sports photogrpher is going to struggle to compete if his only camera is an M11.

4. Most photographers have too much gear and they are hamstrung by it. Too much choice and a bag that hurts your shoulder are not good for creativity. One of the best things about the M is that heading out the door with a small simple camera and one lens can be liberating and insparational.

5. The camera is generally the least important piece in the imaging puzzle. It has always been: Subject-Light-Exposure-Lens-Camera.

The M11 is my favourite M, so far. However, it is still just a camera. I like using it. So therefore it is more likely to get good images over a camera I don't like because it'll be an M over my shoulder. But I have images I love from cameras I despised. The M11 makes incredible files. Better than any M before it. But whether it makes better photos remains to be seen.

I will say this though. Sometimes you get a camera that seems to have some *special sauce*. Something above and beyond what the specs sheet would imply. Where the total is more than the sum of its parts. There are definitely cameras who make files that have *something*. The M8 in b&w. The original Canon 5D. The Hasselblad X1D. I think the M11 has this. Instatntly I liked the M11 files more than any digital M before it. I've done a few quick and dirty tests with my M10R, M10 and M240 compared to the M11. Same lens, subject, exposure. Every time I like the M11 files. I don't know exactly why yet but I'm not the only one. It really shows in prints. It doesn't change when I use the vario-resolutions or with different lenses. I was going to keep my M10R as a second body/backup. Now I'm seriously looking at another M11 instead.

Gordon

Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny, or maybe plain sad, how certain people are so pushing their visions on discussions. And by doing so, repeatedly, their words get lost. Pity, cause sometimes they do say something useful.

i know this remark is off topic, but I can’t help noticing it over and over.

Link to post
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

I really liked this post. And there has been a quiet but long running argument by some that a camera needs limitations and by other that you need to be prepared for anything. For the purposes of general discussion, rather than at you specifically;

1. All camera systems have limitations, eventually.

2. Limitations are good and neccessary until they aren't. Limitations have the ability, if used positively, to give focus. For example carrying a camera with a single or fixed lens, we are presented with an infinate number of possibilities for photos and seeing with a single focal length can allow us to filter out all the *noise* and see better.

3. Limitations are bad if we need something outside what's available. A pro sports photogrpher is going to struggle to compete if his only camera is an M11.

4. Most photographers have too much gear and they are hamstrung by it. Too much choice and a bag that hurts your shoulder are not good for creativity. One of the best things about the M is that heading out the door with a small simple camera and one lens can be liberating and insparational.

5. The camera is generally the least important piece in the imaging puzzle. It has always been: Subject-Light-Exposure-Lens-Camera.

The M11 is my favourite M, so far. However, it is still just a camera. I like using it. So therefore it is more likely to get good images over a camera I don't like because it'll be an M over my shoulder. But I have images I love from cameras I despised. The M11 makes incredible files. Better than any M before it. But whether it makes better photos remains to be seen.

I will say this though. Sometimes you get a camera that seems to have some *special sauce*. Something above and beyond what the specs sheet would imply. Where the total is more than the sum of its parts. There are definitely cameras who make files that have *something*. The M8 in b&w. The original Canon 5D. The Hasselblad X1D. I think the M11 has this. Instatntly I liked the M11 files more than any digital M before it. I've done a few quick and dirty tests with my M10R, M10 and M240 compared to the M11. Same lens, subject, exposure. Every time I like the M11 files. I don't know exactly why yet but I'm not the only one. It really shows in prints. It doesn't change when I use the vario-resolutions or with different lenses. I was going to keep my M10R as a second body/backup. Now I'm seriously looking at another M11 instead.

Gordon

Special sauce!  Like it.  It’s interesting how people form attachments to equipment, and how that equipment can inspire.  I’m a great believer in making the most of what you have.  Everything has a limitation - sometimes that limitation results in inspiration.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We have the technology to create a camera that is sufficiently automated as to require almost no involvement from the user at all except to point and sift through the results. There are people who want state of art results from automated cameras. Other people love the act of using an M3.
 

These two approaches are different and require different equipment. The M11 to me is neither fish nor fowl because it tries to please both camps. It doesn’t offer the best technology for those who want it (for starters there’s the viewfinder, there’s no AF), and it doesn't offer the other camp all that they need (for starters the mechanical shutter is completely unacceptable).
 

I feel that the M line of cameras should aim to please those looking to enjoy the act of photography by prioritizing the user experience over the technology and IQ. Leica have other product lines for optimizing technical performance.

Edited by Mr.Prime
Link to post
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

All camera systems have limitations, eventually.

And attempting to overcome these limitations can lead to compromises which are less than ideal Far better to work within a design's limitations rather than try to overcome them with cumbersome adaptions which are flawed. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Mr.Prime said:

We have the technology to create a camera that is sufficiently automated as to require almost no involvement from the user at all except to point and sift through the results. There are people who want state of art results from automated cameras. Other people love the act of using an M3.
 

These two approaches are different and require different equipment. The M11 to me is neither fish nor fowl because it tries to please both camps. It doesn’t offer the best technology for those who want it (for starters there’s the viewfinder, there’s no AF), and it doesn't offer the other camp all that they need (for starters the mechanical shutter is completely unacceptable).
 

I feel that the M line of cameras should aim to please those looking to enjoy the act of photography by prioritizing the user experience over the technology and IQ. Leica have other product lines for optimizing technical performance.

What's wrong with the mechanical shutter? It sounds slightly different to the M10R/P/M but it's operation is essentially identical. Compared to the M10P/R/M the difference is 1/100th of a second (measured shutter lag) which makes it faster than the M240, M9 and M8. It's also much quieter than the M10, M240, M9 and M8. I have no figures on the film M's but it's likely faster than an M3...

The M11 has some issues that need addressing. Mostly firmware related and inconsistant user experiences. The shutter isn't one of them.

Gordon

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, trickness said:

Having watched the video, it seem Overgaard is implying that to be a “classic” a camera needs to have limitations.

 

I think that you're right....that does seem to be what he is implying.  Just goes to show that we all have different criteria for "classic".  For me, it has more to do with being a "first" in my personal experience.  The first digital camera that I had that gave me worthwhile prints is the Canon Powershot G1.  That camera still makes me feel all warm and gooey inside in spite of the fact that it is over 20 years old.  I made plenty of decent 8x10 prints from that whopping 3mp camera.  I consider that a classic.  Then my RD1 was my first digital rangefinder.  I consider that a classic.  Again, surely a limited camera but loved and still love it.  Then there is my M6TTL, my first Leica.  Classic.  Then there is the hand-me-down Minolta SRT-102, my first interchangeable lens camera.  Classic.  Finally my M262 is my first full frame M mount.  Super duper classic.  Everything you need and nothing you don't.  A better camera I don't need.  So long as it holds up, no other M will fit the classic category for me because it wasn't my first (and I really love that M262.)  I use the M10R and M10M almost exclusively now, but they won't be classics for me.  That's just me of course, but I'd bet that the definition of "classic" is personal enough that things like electronic shutters or on-sensor metering aren't likely to be what characterizes it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I enjoy this conversation on limitations too.  How about putting it this way.  Certain limitations are limitations in available capability, mostly due to technology or physics.  ISO sensitivity is a good example.  Few would complain if ISO 1 million were achievable.  Similarly dynamic range.  Other limitations are a choice.  Manual focus is a choice.  It doesn’t really matter why one would choose it or how it compares to autofocus; it’s simply a choice.  A few aspects fall in between, where a chosen limitation causes a technical limitation.  IBIS is an example.  Many would welcome it, but few would want a larger camera body.

Looking into shutter technology and light metering specifically, the M11 has pushed the technical capabilities without affecting chosen limitations - or at least that is how I experience the use of the camera.  It may not meter off the shutter curtain, but similar center weighted metering is available even while it uses the sensor to achieve it.  I personally welcome the technically more evolved multi field and am happy the technical envelope has been pushed.  With the addition of electronic shutter possibilities, any aperture can be used at any time.  I choose to manually pick the aperture, while I’m happy the technical limitations of using my chosen aperture have been diminished.  I find my M-A a joy and very charming, but do not see the 1/1000 shutter speed and fixed film ISO as exciting choices, but rather technical limitations.

I would welcome further technical advances in electronic shutter capabilities and IBIS. Please keep the wonderful optical rangefinder, body size, and manual setting of aperture, focus, and sometimes shutterspeed.

Which ‘limitations’ are your choices?

Edited by harmen
Link to post
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, harmen said:

 

"I would welcome further technical advances in electronic shutter capabilities and IBIS. Please keep the wonderful optical rangefinder, body size, and manual setting of aperture, focus, and sometimes shutterspeed."

Which ‘limitations’ are your choices?

I agree with all of that although I'm indifferent to IBIS especially if useable high ISO was very good or even as it is. I would add keeping the physical iso dial otherwise I think you nailed it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Olaf_ZG said:

Funny, or maybe plain sad, how certain people are so pushing their visions on discussions. And by doing so, repeatedly, their words get lost. Pity, cause sometimes they do say something useful.

i know this remark is off topic, but I can’t help noticing it over and over.

To whom are you refering? Hard for those people to modify their behaviour if they don't know who they are.

Gordon

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.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...