6 months down the road: tough going?

[hdmesa]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

6 minutes ago, SrMi said:

Yes, the sensor technology matters sometimes more than sensor size, though BSI does not help DR at larger sensor sizes (>= m43?). BSI helps with readout speed and with the steep light angles.

Everyone keeps ordering BSI with a side of extra DR then 😆

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[FlashGordonPhotography]

28 minutes ago, hdmesa said:

In any case, the original statement about the S3 having more DR than the M11 was wrong. Even the SL2-S has higher DR than the S3. BSI > FSI even accounting for the extra sensor area.

https://photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Leica M11,Leica S3,Leica SL2-S

If someone wants more DR than the M11, you're looking at moving to something like the GFX 100S (BSI, same pixel density, but larger sensor).

Have you played with files from the S3? I directly compared it against the A7R4 and in the real world the S3 files are far more robust than that camera (which is nearly identical to M11). Charts don’t always translate to the real world. Especially ones from random user data that have been downsampled to less than a modern mobile phone.

Gordon

[SrMi]

19 minutes ago, hdmesa said:

Everyone keeps ordering BSI with a side of extra DR then 😆

Quote from Bill Claff (P2P):

In any case, I think it's a wide-spread wrong expectation that Back-Side Illumination (BSI) has a significant positive effect on the QE.
BSI has a number of benefits but raising QE in this context isn't one of them.

[hdmesa]

 

44 minutes ago, SrMi said:

Quote from Bill Claff (P2P):

In any case, I think it's a wide-spread wrong expectation that Back-Side Illumination (BSI) has a significant positive effect on the QE.
BSI has a number of benefits but raising QE in this context isn't one of them.

My meaning was that there have been other advances then in sensor design that went hand-in-hand with BSI, even if unrelated to BSI as a technology. Could these advances have translated back to an FSI sensor? We'll never know since I don't think anyone's going back to FSI.

 

56 minutes ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

Have you played with files from the S3? I directly compared it against the A7R4 and in the real world the S3 files are far more robust than that camera (which is nearly identical to M11). Charts don’t always translate to the real world. Especially ones from random user data that have been downsampled to less than a modern mobile phone.

Gordon

I agree that file pliability in post and dynamic range are two different things, though they are often related.

FWIW, the M11 noise control got much better with the most recent firmware update. The M11 files in Capture One are incredibly pliable – at base ISO there's almost zero noise ever after dumping a ton of clarity, dehaze, and contrast at them – at higher ISOs, the noise seems very well controlled now.

Here is a 1:1 screen shot of an image showing zero noise with heavy adjustments. This was at ISO 100, which is not even base ISO for the M11 (click for sharper version, inline previews here are soft – or view in PS at 100% so you don't zoom past that and think you see noise).

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!

Full image resized for forum:

Adjustments used are below. Note the extreme B&W sliders, which turned the foreground from low-contrast shadow area to something more resembling sunlight:

To illustrate how extreme these edits are, here's a JPEG exported with no adjustments to the original DNG:

Edited July 7, 2022 by hdmesa

[Jipster]

On 6/30/2022 at 2:31 PM, SrMi said:

Monochrom sensors have the disadvantage of having only one channel. If that is blown, no highlight recovery is possible. With the three channels of a color sensor, post processing software can sometimes recover the highlights using non-blown channels. That said, it is never good to blow a channel.

The three channels are filters on light. So, if there is no filter (monochrome) and highlights are blown out, it means ALL part of the spectrum is blown out, which would mean ALL three channels are blown out in a bayer-style filter on the sensor. So, if a monochrome sensor well is full, so would any of the wells+filters would.

[hdmesa]

10 minutes ago, Jipster said:

The three channels are filters on light. So, if there is no filter (monochrome) and highlights are blown out, it means ALL part of the spectrum is blown out, which would mean ALL three channels are blown out in a bayer-style filter on the sensor. So, if a monochrome sensor well is full, so would any of the wells+filters would.

The comparison is a monochrome sensor with blown highlights against a color sensor with only one or two blown channels. No one is saying the same exposure for both cameras results in blown highlights for monochrome and not blown for the color sensor. The point is you can think you blew the highlights with a color sensor, but you may not have. If you watch the histogram on the monochrome sensor, you're fine 100% of the time, but if you blow the single channel, it's blown.

[tom0511]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor 12 Stunden schrieb hdmesa:

In any case, the original statement about the S3 having more DR than the M11 was wrong. Even the SL2-S has higher DR than the S3. BSI > FSI even accounting for the extra sensor area.

https://photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Leica M11,Leica S3,Leica SL2-S

If someone wants more DR than the M11, you're looking at moving to something like the GFX 100S (BSI, same pixel density, but larger sensor).

Numbers are one thing. If you take images even with a older S007, and move the exposure slider around in post, its just great how stable colors are and whats possible.

I am totally happy with the M11 and the DR is great, but I believe these DR measurement studies are one thing, looking at and working with the images in post ist a different thing, where even the older larger sensors still shine. 

[hdmesa]

3 hours ago, tom0511 said:

Numbers are one thing. If you take images even with a older S007, and move the exposure slider around in post, its just great how stable colors are and whats possible.

I am totally happy with the M11 and the DR is great, but I believe these DR measurement studies are one thing, looking at and working with the images in post ist a different thing, where even the older larger sensors still shine. 

DR is only a measurement, and it can't measure your own perception of file mailability in post, which is something larger sensors excel at. In any case, camera sensors are really good and have been for a while now.

Stability of colors with extreme edits is something interesting across Leica models. I have zero experience with Leica medium format, but I found very stable color with the original Q, M10-R, SL2-S, and M11, but not as much with the Q2 for some reason. A lot of it has to do with how good the camera profiles are in Lightroom and/or Capture One.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

On 7/8/2022 at 11:46 PM, hdmesa said:

DR is only a measurement, and it can't measure your own perception of file mailability in post, which is something larger sensors excel at. In any case, camera sensors are really good and have been for a while now.

I agree with this except for the word “perception”. replace that with “real world”, and we’re golden.

The empiric measurements that sites like DXO and P2P do, while accurate in a lab, don’t translate to real life, too often to be taken at face value. They’re *a* measurement but not *the* measurement and other data is needed to get the whole picture. Grabbing the lightest and darkest pixels ( a simplification, I know) from a file that’s been downsampled to 8 megapixels, does not and can not, give a complete picture of what’s going on. But P2P does get used to crucify sensors, site unseen, while , as you say, most sensors are actually quite good. And the differences between modern sensors of the same size, are mostly subtle. Not always buy mostly.

There’s what is measurable and what is useable. The first is really not that important in the real world. It’s like saying a Bugatti is the fastest car when all the cars are stuck in traffic…. The P2P measurement without context is meaningless. It’s not the sites fault. They say as much. People just like to use the information out side of the parameters it was designed to be used for. Kind of like those that say M lenses are the best. Not for action sports or underwater use, they’re not.

Things that don’t get measured include the influence of non imaging pixels (PDAF site etc), microlenses and the effect of the actual lens strapped to the body. And the sensors are equalised to 8MP. AT that size an iPhone might actually have the most usable DR due to it’s computational power. Something that’s also not able to be measured accurately. Basically you’re deliberately removing the advantages of a larger sensor and then saying it has no advantages??

Gordon

[Fedro]

My 2cc - the M11 is a wonderful digital M. For me the best yet. I have the 10R but really do not use it much these days.

Not sure about what the Leica look discussion is all about, for me it is really:

1. convenience - lighter, longer lasting battery, USB etc

2. great files - not sure if they are greater or not than the 10R, some of it is subjective. Both give great results, the M11 files seem to have more latitude in post

3. back up on camera - I have had cards fail on me, not something I love to repeat

Some may not like the new metering system (I do) or the existence of an electronic shutter, but not really sure if this makes the above list of improvements a less outstanding achievement by any measure

does one need to upgrade? No unless you need the new features, but if you do, it is worth it.

[hdmesa]

1 hour ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

I agree with this except for the word “perception”. replace that with “real world”, and we’re golden.

The empiric measurements that sites like DXO and P2P do, while accurate in a lab, don’t translate to real life, too often to be taken at face value. They’re *a* measurement but not *the* measurement and other data is needed to get the whole picture. Grabbing the lightest and darkest pixels ( a simplification, I know) from a file that’s been downsampled to 8 megapixels, does not and can not, give a complete picture of what’s going on. But P2P does get used to crucify sensors, site unseen, while , as you say, most sensors are actually quite good. And the differences between modern sensors of the same size, are mostly subtle. Not always buy mostly.

There’s what is measurable and what is useable. The first is really not that important in the real world. It’s like saying a Bugatti is the fastest car when all the cars are stuck in traffic…. The P2P measurement without context is meaningless. It’s not the sites fault. They say as much. People just like to use the information out side of the parameters it was designed to be used for. Kind of like those that say M lenses are the best. Not for action sports or underwater use, they’re not.

Things that don’t get measured include the influence of non imaging pixels (PDAF site etc), microlenses and the effect of the actual lens strapped to the body. And the sensors are equalised to 8MP. AT that size an iPhone might actually have the most usable DR due to it’s computational power. Something that’s also not able to be measured accurately. Basically you’re deliberately removing the advantages of a larger sensor and then saying it has no advantages??

Gordon

 

Enjoyed that read. Thanks for taking time to write it.

I used the word “perception” only because we all have differing, well, perceptions about things like acceptable shadow noise, etc. Additionally we all have differing “needs” for how far we want to push our files in post and in what ways.

My story (digitally) starts with the original Canon 5D. I loved that camera’s color and file IQ at 1:1 viewing. But the files could only be pushed so far before they would “break” (digital artifacts and/or noise would overpower the result visually). Often I could achieve my artistic goal before that happened, but often not. Next up was the 5DsR, which improved on the original 5D in many ways, but the RAWs were still quite “rigid” with regard to the edits I wanted to make. And so on until the latest generation of sensors. Finally, my artistic vision no longer exceeds the file pliability limits of the RAWs. On the Leica platform, the M10-R was very close to (my idea of) perfect, but the M11 is the touchstone for me. Same story with the GFX for me. The 50S/R was very close, but the 100S fully exceeded my needs. (SL2-S also exceeds my needs except for cropping ability.)

It’s a good place to be in these days as a photographer.

[davidmknoble]

On 7/7/2022 at 7:40 PM, hdmesa said:

The comparison is a monochrome sensor with blown highlights against a color sensor with only one or two blown channels. No one is saying the same exposure for both cameras results in blown highlights for monochrome and not blown for the color sensor. The point is you can think you blew the highlights with a color sensor, but you may not have. If you watch the histogram on the monochrome sensor, you're fine 100% of the time, but if you blow the single channel, it's blown.

Remember that in a color sensor the ‘save’ is that there are 3 color channels and as long as only two are blown, there is some detail, and blue tends to blow first.  That said, it is still only one channel, which means the recovery is effectively in black and white.  Just like film, it is always better to save the highlights and boost the shadows with a little noise (negatives = shadows are highlights).

[FlashGordonPhotography]

22 hours ago, hdmesa said:

 

It’s a good place to be in these days as a photographer.

Best sentence in this thread…..

Gordon

[Jeff S]

3 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

Best sentence in this thread…..

 

Technically, yours is “best sentence in this thread.”

Jeff

[Herr Barnack]

Here is a new release from Hugh Brownstone at Three Blind Elephants (sorry, Hugh - couldn't resist) about his first three months with the M11. 

Even before I watched his latest assessment of the M11, I had been leaning toward waiting for the M11-P.  After giving this more thought, I am even more inclined to wait for the M11-P.  It seems there are still some things that need to be fine tuned in the M11 which is not unheard of with any first generation electronic device, cameras included.

As for waiting for the M11-P, availability is a concern, given the agonizing waits some have experienced in acquiring an M11.  There are worse things in life and availability of a $9000 USD camera pretty well shoulders its way to the top of the first world problems list. 

From the day of its debut, the M11's sensor and its capabilities seemed to be the camera's greatest strength.  Hugh addresses that point and validates it.  From all that I have seen, the image quality coming from the M11 is mind boggling. 

The M11 has enormous potential and image making capability IMHO and I am fervently hoping the gents in Wetzlar can get the kinks ironed out of this magnificent image making machine (to include availability), hopefully before the M11-P drops.

For those who find the M11's falling short of perfection right out of the gate unacceptable, please keep this in mind:  Unlike the Chevrolet Volt, the M11 has yet to burst into flames and burn down the homes of hapless owners while it is charging.

 

 

Edited July 19, 2022 by Herr Barnack

[SrMi]

2 hours ago, Herr Barnack said:

Here is a new release from Hugh Brownstone at Three Blind Elephants (sorry, Hugh - couldn't resist) about his first three months with the M11. 

Even before I watched his latest assessment of the M11, I had been leaning toward waiting for the M11-P.  After giving this more thought, I am even more inclined to wait for the M11-P.  It seems there are still some things that need to be fine tuned in the M11 which is not unheard of with any first generation electronic device, cameras included.

As for waiting for the M11-P, availability is a concern, given the agonizing waits some have experienced in acquiring an M11.  There are worse things in life and availability of a $9000 USD camera pretty well shoulders its way to the top of the first world problems list. 

From the day of its debut, the M11's sensor and its capabilities seemed to be the camera's greatest strength.  Hugh addresses that point and validates it.  From all that I have seen, the image quality coming from the M11 is mind boggling. 

The M11 has enormous potential and image making capability IMHO and I am fervently hoping the gents in Wetzlar can get the kinks ironed out of this magnificent image making machine (to include availability), hopefully before the M11-P drops.

For those who find the M11's falling short of perfection right out of the gate unacceptable, please keep this in mind:  Unlike the Chevrolet Volt, the M11 has yet to burst into flames and burn down the homes of hapless owners while it is charging.

 

 

M11-P is vaporware. You could as well wait for M12 😀. In the meantime, most M11 owners are having a great time with their camera.

M11 is by far not a perfect camera, but, IMO, it is the best digital M camera at the moment. 

[Herr Barnack]

9 minutes ago, SrMi said:

M11-P is vaporware. You could as well wait for M12 😀. In the meantime, most M11 owners are having a great time with their camera.

M11 is by far not a perfect camera, but, IMO, it is the best digital M camera at the moment. 

 

Actually, you do make some valid points.  My decision is obviously not carved in stone - I keep going back and forth.

Quote

...In the meantime, most M11 owners are having a great time with their camera...

Very true.

 

[hdmesa]

2 hours ago, Herr Barnack said:

…My decision is obviously not carved in stone - I keep going back and forth.

Image quality on the M10-R is so close to the M11 as to make the M11 sensor improvements a non-factor, IMO.

It’s actually all the other improvements of M11 that brought me back to the M platform. I had sold my M10M and R, having been frustrated with the lackluster battery life, the easily-fooled rangefinder meter, low-quality EVF, lag/blackout in live view, and the inability to shoot at times faster than 1/4000 sec. M11 addresses every one of those. Firmware will keep getting better, and I have only a few issues that I’d like to see fixed. I was perfectly happy with the IQ from the M10-R, though.

Edited July 20, 2022 by hdmesa

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[jakontil]

@hdmesa is quite right regarding the IQ between M10R and M11 that i could comfortably using both sparingly and share my presets between them

i couldnt part with M10 r being a black paint and a baseplate, but the battery life in M11 as well as the usb c really itched me so bad

i think that’s probably the reason why i got the M11 at the first place, even after reading through reviews here and there, i should sit comfortably with my M10r

[charlesphoto99]

Who is this person? Never heard of him...

8/9/240/10-R-P/11 all take fantastic photos, lets not forget that.