I love my M11, (and Q2 Mono) but....

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 minute ago, jdlaing said:

No source that I will publicly expose. Leica, right up to today, has never used a mass produced off the shelf sensor. It won’t work with the flange to sensor distance on M lenses. That’s why there are micro lenses on the sensor. The image engine is pure Leica specifications. 

You give me the feeling to challenge the obvious here, sorry to put in bluntly. Now if you have any evidence i will be glad to change my mind obviously. 

[Advertisement]

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

[jakontil]

8 minutes ago, Vinncent said:

This is a solid argument based in business. I totally get that Leica doesn’t operate in a vacuum. But for that they have their mirrorless SL system. 

I never thought the Leica M rangefinder had to compete to “lead the market” because the Leica M is in its own island. It has no competition. Being market leading and competitive was never the Ethos of the Leica M. 
 

If the Leica M is entering into a race that it wasn’t invited to, then this surely marks the end of the Leica M rangefinder and it’ll just evolve to be a full frame Fuji XPro. With tracking and animal AF and all the rest of it. Because once you enter this race then it’s a never ending chase for specs to beat the other guy. 

In reality the M11 could’ve continued to use the 40MP color sensor. Faster processor. Maybe CMOSIS could’ve done it BSI. And then add some other more interesting and useful things than 60MP, like for example, instead of the lever giving you frame line previews, it could magnify the OVF like the XPro2 used to do. That would be awesome to be able to magnify the OVF.

make the ISO dial just rotate like the SS dial without having to pull it up. 

A programmable rear wheel to whatever you want and the same with a front function button. 

shutter speed mechanical on the dial to go to 1/8000 instead of the 1/4000. That would’ve been huge and much more useful than the ES thing they have now where anything moving ends up looking like a bending noodle  

Better LCD? Sure. 

So many things they could’ve done that made a real difference in every day use. The new sensor IMO was totally unnecessary. They can leave that to their SL system. 
 

You are talking as if you want xpro 3 more than a leica M11 😀

[PeterGA]

57 minutes ago, Vinncent said:

But these are all mass produced conveyor belt Made in China cameras. They’re not premium “hand made in Germany” exclusive extremely expensive $9,000 brass rangefinders. 

If they’re just going to go with sourcing parts from what all others use, then where is the exclusivity? It’s like Rolex using Seiko movements. It’s crazy. 

Why not keep AMS/CMOSIS as an exclusive manufacturer for them? 

Like I said before, they’re probably saving cost now sourcing parts from generic manufacturers everyone else uses. Hence OLOD issues. 

If Rolex wanted to actually make watches that keep accurate time - they should use Seiko movements.

[SrMi]

1 hour ago, Vinncent said:

But these are all mass produced conveyor belt Made in China cameras. They’re not premium “hand made in Germany” exclusive extremely expensive $9,000 brass rangefinders. 

If they’re just going to go with sourcing parts from what all others use, then where is the exclusivity? It’s like Rolex using Seiko movements. It’s crazy. 

Why not keep AMS/CMOSIS as an exclusive manufacturer for them? 

Like I said before, they’re probably saving cost now sourcing parts from generic manufacturers everyone else uses. Hence OLOD issues. 

Phase One (hand-made in Denmark) and Hasselblad (hand-made in Sweden) use Sony sensors.
The camera manufacturer selects the sensor that works best for them, not based on the sensor exclusivity. The same goes for all other electronics.

[SrMi]

47 minutes ago, PeterGA said:

If Rolex wanted to actually make watches that keep accurate time - they should use Seiko movements.

AFAIK, Seiko automatic watch accuracy is +/-5 seconds, while a Rolex is -2/+2 seconds a day.

[Mr.Prime]

1 hour ago, Vinncent said:

If the Leica M is entering into a race that it wasn’t invited to, then this surely marks the end of the Leica M rangefinder and it’ll just evolve to be a full frame Fuji XPro. With tracking and animal AF and all the rest of it. Because once you enter this race then it’s a never ending chase for specs to beat the other guy. 
 

I have a lot of sympathy for this statement. The Leica M is a flagship product and without it the future of M-lenses would be in peril. The M products for me is Leica and defines the brand so the M has to live on. What I take away from your comment is that Leica needs to have a clear vision for the M camera line, what it stands for, why it is special and not just because there's a rangefinder under the top plate. 

 

I've never used or handled a digital M so I can't related any personal impressions or experience. It's not due to a lack of interest on my part, but due to the high selling price and niche market there aren't any dealers in my town where I can encounter one. None of my friends or work colleagues have one either. I use film M's instead and certainly enjoy their use and as a result I've invested in expensive M-glass. To go digital means retaining use of my M-glass, but a Leica digital M is not my only option. How does Leica attract customers to the M line ?

Edited July 21, 2022 by Mr.Prime

[jdlaing]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

2 hours ago, lct said:

You give me the feeling to challenge the obvious here, sorry to put in bluntly. Now if you have any evidence i will be glad to change my mind obviously. 

Be very clear that I do not or cannot provide evidence. End of story. If you don’t believe what I tell you it’s no skin off me. 

[andybarton]

Gentlemen...

 

Please do not get into a spat over this.

[SrMi]

2 hours ago, jdlaing said:

No source that I will publicly expose. Leica, right up to today, has never used a mass produced off the shelf sensor. It won’t work with the flange to sensor distance on M lenses. That’s why there are micro lenses on the sensor. The image engine is pure Leica specifications. 

While some manufacturers share the sensor silicon (e.g., Sony's 60MP), all of them have their own toppings (CFA, microlenses). 

[Jeff S]

1 hour ago, SrMi said:

Phase One (hand-made in Denmark) and Hasselblad (hand-made in Sweden) use Sony sensors.
The camera manufacturer selects the sensor that works best for them, not based on the sensor exclusivity. The same goes for all other electronics.

And a lot of important decisions and configurations happen after that choice, for supporting hardware (including cover glass, color array, etc) and software/electronics. The same Sony sensor can be used by several companies, yet with very different implementations and results.

And beyond that, the user has equally or more important choices regarding workflow and output. The OP’s comparison tells me nothing about how these cameras would compare in MY own shooting and print workflow and print output.

Makes for entertaining forum debates, though.

Jeff

[Jeff S]

Just now, Vinncent said:

But that’s the point of this entire discussion. There aren’t any differences between the Sony and the Leica M11. They’re basically the same image. 

This is basically saying that you can edit a raw file to look like whatever you want? 🤷🏻‍♂️ 

Well, you can take 1 photo with 1 camera. Give the same file to 2 different people. Ask them to edit it and end up with 2 very different results. This isn’t what the OP is talking about. 

Read above regarding implementation differences, despite same sensor. I don’t care about OP’s results; I  conduct my own tests by shooting and making prints.  Just because the OP has an opinion doesn’t mean I have to agree… you’re the poster child regarding this type of forum debate.

Jeff

[andybarton]

Last time I looked, Sony don’t make rangefinders. Maybe when they do, the $9,000 might be more relevant. 

[SrMi]

10 minutes ago, Vinncent said:

But that’s the point of this entire discussion. There aren’t any differences between the Sony and the Leica M11. They’re basically the same image. 

No. The CFA, microlenses, firmware and profiles are different. They may only share the sensor’s silicon.

[andybarton]

11 minutes ago, Vinncent said:

But you open up that hood and inside it’s still a Renault.

It has an engine developed by Daimler AND Renault. 

It does not make it a Renault. 

[SrMi]

23 minutes ago, Vinncent said:

But it’s not an opinion. It’s just an objective fact. 
 

Here is a link of raw files. Leica m11 and sony A7RIV

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/4o0sct6fqohew5z/AAAp5vPkyU1s2-6lWCB6GYAka/RAWs?dl=0&subfolder_nav_tracking=1

reset both files in LR to undo any edits. They look identical basically. That’s all there is to it. 

No need to attack people personally. 

I already knew that you were also known as KeyofG (banned a while ago). You keep trying to sabotage this forum by instigating pointless arguments 😠.

[lct]

There is no such thing as objective facts in photography. To make relevant comparisons one has to use the same lens to begin with. Problem is Sony cameras have not an M mount. Then one has to use an adapter to fit M lenses but even then, the Sony sensor stack is thicker so, objectively as well as subjectively, images are different. Only way i found to reduce such difference is a modification of the sensor stack by Kolari Vision but even then, colors must be tweaked out of the Sony due to the sensor modification. Not a big deal to be honest but it is not for jpeg shooters so suggesting that images are identical is just another joke. I have no experience with the A7r4 though, only Kolari mod A7s and A7r2. 

 

[elmars]

vor 55 Minuten schrieb Vinncent:

There aren’t any differences between the Sony and the Leica M11.

There are differences, of course: It is basically the same (Sony-) sensor, but the Leica sensors (all, even the SL ones) have a special micro lens design due to the M lenses, Leica sensors have their own color filters and Leica sensors have since the M10-R a special (own development) cover glass (IR and UV glass fixed together). 

[Jeff S]

32 minutes ago, Vinncent said:

But it’s not an opinion. It’s just an objective fact. 
 

Here is a link of raw files. Leica m11 and sony A7RIV

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/4o0sct6fqohew5z/AAAp5vPkyU1s2-6lWCB6GYAka/RAWs?dl=0&subfolder_nav_tracking=1

reset both files in LR to undo any edits. They look identical basically. That’s all there is to it. 

No need to attack people personally. 

His facts..his subject matter, his shooting conditions, his lenses, his evaluation (screen) process, etc. I trust that’s what he found. Just not relevant to me. I buy camera systems, not sensor part numbers. And I make prints. And make my own assessments based on too many variables to bother addressing here.  I know that when I tested Hasselblad, Fuji and Pentax cameras, each apparently sharing the same ‘base’ sensor, the results were quite different, as were dozens of other important factors.  

Jeff

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Erato]

1 hour ago, Vinncent said:

😅 Yea sure. That’s why where I live it’s the same price as a Toyota, even though import taxes on foreign cars is 500%. 

Sorry but, the writing is on the wall for the Leica M. That’s all there is to it just to bring this discussion back to where it matters. 

The OP brings up an excellent point. The M11 just makes you wonder why you’re bothering at all with a really expensive rangefinder? Get the same result and a lot more features with a Sony A7RIV. The results will be the same and you’ll be able to get your photo a lot easier. 
 

Personally I think Leica is going mirrorless and the M11 is just the beginning of the end for the Leica M rangefinder. 

Base on the context of your interesting logic, why don't you use a smart phone dedicate for your photos but a Pentax or a Leica M?

Edited July 21, 2022 by Erato

[M11 for me]

Who is Vinncent?