Jump to content

M11 Monochrom


Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

42 minutes ago, ramarren said:

Interesting, thank you. 

As said, it's mostly irrelevant since whatever the sensor is, it's terrific. I usually don't get involved in this level of discussion at all, but since I just read about the bespoke nature of the M10-M sensor a day or two ago, it tickled my curiosity. 

G

anyways, the m11m sensor already exists  https://www.phase1vision.com/userfiles/product_files/imx455alk-k_aqk-k_flyer.pdf

Sony IMX455ALK-K Sensor
FPS (Sensors): 21.33 fps
Manufacturer: Sony
Pixel Size (Sensors): 3.76µm
Resolution (Sensors): 61.17M
Scan/Series: STARVIS
Shutter (Sensors): Rolling
Signal (Sensors): Monochrome
Sony IMX455AQK-K Sensor
FPS (Sensors): 21.33 fps
Manufacturer: Sony
Pixel Size (Sensors): 3.76µm
Resolution (Sensors): 61.17M
Scan/Series: STARVIS
Shutter (Sensors): Rolling
Signal (Sensors):

RGB

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
Posted (edited)

M11-M sensor will be BSI. It'll be interesting to see how a BSI monochrome sensor deals with highlights and if ISO sensitivity is as good as M10-M despite higher pixel count. The M10-M is as perfect a monochrome camera as there can be. It'll be intriguing to see if an M11-M can be even more perfect. 😁 

Edit - I forgot the shutter speed of 1/8000 sec. to protect highlights wide open in sunny conditions. 

Edited by Chaemono
Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I don't see any reason to re-buy an M9M but I did because I felt nostalgic.  I do see a reason to swap out of it into a Q2M - because of the lens and macro function versatility as well as B&W video capability. So tech progress sometimes delivers real world benefits.

The B&W conversion of M11 files V M10M as tested in numerous studies on line show very little differences between the two. However an M11M will approach the file quality one can get out of a B&W conversion from a Fuji GFX100 in a nice Leica M body and an ability to use the M lenses at the same time - a smaller more portable package  for those that can use the large files sizes and or higher ISO capabilities that come with the monocrom sensors.

People will buy them as fast as they can make them.

Edited by PeterGA
spelling
Link to post
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, PeterGA said:

The B&W conversion of M11 files V M10M as tested in numerous studies on line show very little differences between the two. However an M11M will approach the file quality one can get out of a B&W conversion from a Fuji GFX100 in a nice Leica M body and an ability to use the M lenses at the same time - a smaller more portable package  for those that can use the large files sizes and or higher ISO capabilities that come with the monocrom sensors.

ive got a gfx100s and a m246. the IQ on the gfx is amazing, but i still prefer to use the m246 for all my bnw works esp when taking into account the size to IQ ratio.

the gfx / higher megapixels come in handy when I stuff up the framing and I need to crop the life out of the image. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, sometimesmaybe said:

ive got a gfx100s and a m246. the IQ on the gfx is amazing, but i still prefer to use the m246 for all my bnw works esp when taking into account the size to IQ ratio.

the gfx / higher megapixels come in handy when I stuff up the framing and I need to crop the life out of the image. 

I agree a smaller body+ lens combination is always preferable - especially for hand held use - the point I was trying to make was that for moncrom shooting - you already get ( according to Leica) an up to 30% increase in resolution and much better ISO - so the M11's 60 megapixels at a 30% increase in resolution - gets you close to 80 megapixel ( effective) IQ - which is pretty close to GFX levels and much better low ISO performance if that is of any interest.

Nice portraits btw 

Cheers 

Pete

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

11 hours ago, PeterGA said:

I agree a smaller body+ lens combination is always preferable - especially for hand held use - the point I was trying to make was that for moncrom shooting - you already get ( according to Leica) an up to 30% increase in resolution and much better ISO - so the M11's 60 megapixels at a 30% increase in resolution - gets you close to 80 megapixel ( effective) IQ - which is pretty close to GFX levels and much better low ISO performance if that is of any interest.

Nice portraits btw 

Cheers 

Pete

 

To my eyes, there is already a ridiculously small difference in the fine detail that I see captured between my GFX100S + GF 63mm and “just” my M10M + 50mm APO Lanthar. So I can only imagine just how good a hypothetical 60MP version of a Monochrom could be!

The comparison between the M10M / GFX100S in terms of fine detail is based on me taking the same scene tripod mounted, and both assessing on screen but also printing crops off 60-65” images.

For B&W I would typically always choose the image off the M10M, given my eyes detect a less digital / less processed rendering than I see off the GFX100S that has the issue of processing the light through the color filter array. I simply find the image off the M10M is so lossless and pure compared to color sensors cameras.

What I like about the M is also the flexibility of renderings …..the GF lenses are all sharp sharp, and my APO Lanthar is sharp sharp too, but I find alternative “looks” easier with the M10M if I want to get a different rendering given there are numerous lenses available with sufficient image circles to cover full frame.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Jon Warwick said:

To my eyes, there is already a ridiculously small difference in the fine detail that I see captured between my GFX100S + GF 63mm and “just” my M10M + 50mm APO Lanthar. So I can only imagine just how good a hypothetical 60MP version of a Monochrom could be!

The comparison between the M10M / GFX100S in terms of fine detail is based on me taking the same scene tripod mounted, and both assessing on screen but also printing crops off 60-65” images.

For B&W I would typically always choose the image off the M10M, given my eyes detect a less digital / less processed rendering than I see off the GFX100S that has the issue of processing the light through the color filter array. I simply find the image off the M10M is so lossless and pure compared to color sensors cameras.

What I like about the M is also the flexibility of renderings …..the GF lenses are all sharp sharp, and my APO Lanthar is sharp sharp too, but I find alternative “looks” easier with the M10M if I want to get a different rendering given there are numerous lenses available with sufficient image circles to cover full frame.  

Yes I agree with your observations.Despite the fact that I can 'see' the differences between a 50MP B&W conversion V GFX100 B&W conversion in scenes which have a lot of detail like urban landscapes. There are also other advantages to the Fuji system but the #1 disadvantage ( to me) has become size. Everything is bigger, body, lenses. I don't want big heavy stuff anymore. I don't use it - it sits on shelves and gathers dust and  higher megapixels in smaller bodies matched to smaller lenses has become more appealing and useful.

Pete

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 7/19/2022 at 5:19 PM, colint544 said:

I still use my ten-year-old M9M, and can't see a reason to change it. In many ways it can surpass film, especially in terms of resolution. The 40MP M10M looks like more camera than anyone could ever really need. You have to wonder about a 60MP M11M, and what that might offer to persuade anyone to trade up.

I agree completely. I got rid of tow M9M bodies a couple of years ago and got the M10M. I loved the mechanical aspects but not really the files. I sold it and went back to the M9M and am happy I did. The CCD is better for b&w photography than the CMOS, in my opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PeterGA said:

Yes I agree with your observations.Despite the fact that I can 'see' the differences between a 50MP B&W conversion V GFX100 B&W conversion in scenes which have a lot of detail like urban landscapes. There are also other advantages to the Fuji system but the #1 disadvantage ( to me) has become size. Everything is bigger, body, lenses. I don't want big heavy stuff anymore. I don't use it - it sits on shelves and gathers dust and  higher megapixels in smaller bodies matched to smaller lenses has become more appealing and useful.

Pete

 

couldn't agree more re the size thing. the GFX100s + GF110mm (90mm equiv) is almost 2kg. with the hood attached i'm an absolute security guard magnet when out on location! that said rather than slim down my kit, i now take both the GFX and the m246, i just love punishment 😅 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, sometimesmaybe said:

couldn't agree more re the size thing. the GFX100s + GF110mm (90mm equiv) is almost 2kg. with the hood attached i'm an absolute security guard magnet when out on location! that said rather than slim down my kit, i now take both the GFX and the m246, i just love punishment 😅 

I'm tempted to switch the GFX100 into a GFX100s and keep the 110/2 magic combo - but currently testing a nice X1D 11 with a 30/3.5 and if I decide to go with that I will be looking for the 80 / 1.7 which is universally regarded as equally amazing. All cameras these days are amazing. My Q2M is on its way since a 28 is permanently parked on my M9M - easy 'upgrade' for the file quality and versatility and the offer I've got for the M9M puts into fetishist category of silly stuff - out it goes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, fotografr said:

I agree completely. I got rid of tow M9M bodies a couple of years ago and got the M10M. I loved the mechanical aspects but not really the files. I sold it and went back to the M9M and am happy I did. The CCD is better for b&w photography than the CMOS, in my opinion.

This really intrigues me, and thank you for the reply. Are you able to say what it was that edged you back to the CCD M9M?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, colint544 said:

This really intrigues me, and thank you for the reply. Are you able to say what it was that edged you back to the CCD M9M?

Yes, happy to. I thought the M10M images were too smooth and creamy. I came from a background in b&w film and I still love the contrast and depth inherent in Tri-X, which was always my favorite film. I think the CCD sensor in the M9M comes closest to that look. If I really needed all the megapixels of the M10M, I could have made it work for me, but I just don't. I'm never printing bigger than 20"x30" and the files from the M9M hold up extremely well at that size. 

The landscape shot I posted (see below) which I then colorized is a very good example of why I love the M9M files. It's had very minor tweaks in post. 

Cheers,

Brent

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!

Edited by fotografr
Link to post
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, fotografr said:

Yes, happy to. I thought the M10M images were too smooth and creamy. I came from a background in b&w film and I still love the contrast and depth inherent in Tri-X, which was always my favorite film. I think the CCD sensor in the M9M comes closest to that look. If I really needed all the megapixels of the M10M, I could have made it work for me, but I just don't. I'm never printing bigger than 20"x30" and the files from the M9M hold up extremely well at that size. 

The landscape shot I posted (see below) which I then colorized is a very good example of why I love the M9M files. It's had very minor tweaks in post. 

Cheers,

Brent

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!

It's a beautiful image, and I take your point. I think you have captured every tone, from zero to ten on the zone scale there. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 8/16/2022 at 10:38 PM, PeterGA said:

There are also other advantages to the Fuji system but the #1 disadvantage ( to me) has become size. Everything is bigger, body, lenses. I don't want big heavy stuff anymore. I don't use it - it sits on shelves and gathers dust and  higher megapixels in smaller bodies matched to smaller lenses has become more appealing and useful.

 

It’s an interesting point and I have seen myself almost subconsciously responding in a similar fashion - I used to have the SL2 and SL 50 APO, and now the GFX100S, and I’ve noticed (for, say, a quick day-trip by train to visit family) that I’m often deciding not to bring those cameras along because, well, I can’t be bothered to always carry a bigger bag.  Whereas my previous M240 in its compact Leica neoprene case used to accompany me pretty much the whole time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jon Warwick said:

It’s an interesting point and I have seen myself almost subconsciously responding in a similar fashion - I used to have the SL2 and SL 50 APO, and now the GFX100S, and I’ve noticed (for, say, a quick day-trip by train to visit family) that I’m often deciding not to bring those cameras along because, well, I can’t be bothered to always carry a bigger bag.  Whereas my previous M240 in its compact Leica neoprene case used to accompany me pretty much the whole time.

I suspect that many feel the same way about the size of cameras and lenses - I am happy to be able to access 50-60 megapixels in much smaller bodies with smaller lenses and not sacrifice IQ.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I am really happy with my M10M and have been able to take photos otherwise difficult or impossible with film without flash due to the seemingly unlimited iso. I had the M9M briefly and after 4 months in Solms getting the sensor replaced I sold it immediately afterwards out of frustration and kept shooting film until now. I only shoot street and I shoot very quickly so any tool that helps me get the shot is a good tool. I did manage to buy a used M9M while I had the M10M but there were problems like none of my SD cards would work with it. They were the same SD cards I was using with an M8.2 so rather than risking another lemon I returned it. I found that the look of the M10M varies with the character of the lenses. I have an V1 28mm Elmarit that gave me a gritty film like image while the 24mm Summilux a smooth image and my Lightroom skills can be of course improved. I would be interested in the M11M if there are obvious differences in rendering else I would rather have a second M10M or an Q2M.

Edited by rtai
Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, rtai said:

I am really happy with my M10M and have been able to take photos otherwise difficult or impossible with film without flash due to the seemingly unlimited iso. I had the M9M briefly and after 4 months in Solms getting the sensor replaced I sold it immediately afterwards out of frustration and kept shooting film until now.

That's exactly what caused me to sell my M9M a few years ago after I had the sensor replaced. I'm very happy I was able to find another one recently in mint condition with just over 2K clicks. I do agree with you and others about the great high ISO performance of the M10M. I rarely need to go higher than ISO 5000, which is already a big improvement over what I did with film. The M10M also does have other qualities that I miss, like the thinner, lighter body, ultra quiet shutter, large high res LCD, increased dynamic range, the list goes on. But image for image, I'm still sold on my M9M as the best camera for me. I'll definitely look very closely at a M11M if one is brought out.

Edited by fotografr
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...