Maybe M9 will Have New Nikon D3 Sensor?

[barjohn]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Boy the images on the Nikon site with the new D3 are amazing. ISO 3200 looks as good as the M8 at ISO 640 and ISO 6400 beats the M8 at ISO 1250. If this sensor holds up in further scrutiny, Leica should really consider buying it from Nikon. The detail and color are outstanding and at ISO 200 it blows me away. Link to images: Nikon Press Center Lots of people viewing and downloading so it is slow right now.

[johnastovall]

We don't even know if there's going to be an M9 and there the issue of adapting the offeset micro lenses to it.

[Advertisement]

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

[dougdarter]

Hi,

 

I've had a look at them. They're good pictures, no doubt, but certainly no better than I've seen from lot's of DSLR's, my 1D mk IIn in particular. The high ISO images are smooth, but again, I've seen as good from other sensors.

 

The problem with viewing images on the net, is that you are never going to see what they look like printed up, which is the only way you'll ever tell just how good the sensor is.

 

I'm not going to get excited about these pics.

 

I reckon the M8MkII or M9 is a long way into the future, if ever. We shall have to wait and see.

[barjohn]

Adding the micro lenses to a sensor can't be that difficult, having done it once.

 

Even the Canon fanatics are saying the images are better than the Canon's at high ISO. You can download the full size JPGs from the site and print if you want. I was referring to the full size images not the small web images.

[johnastovall]

Adding the micro lenses to a sensor can't be that difficult, having done it once.

 

Even the Canon fanatics are saying the images are better than the Canon's at high ISO. You can download the full size JPGs from the site and print if you want. I was referring to the full size images not the small web images.

 

If it's what easy why did Leica go to full frame from the start?

It's not easy as this explains.

[mjh]

Adding the micro lenses to a sensor can't be that difficult, having done it once.

This is not about adding microlenses – the sensor in the D3 already got microlenses. The problem is how to cope with the rather extreme incident angles one has to deal with in a rangefinder camera. The microlenses of the D3’s sensor won’t do.

[Daniel Ortego]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I agree they are nice. However, there is always going to be a better mousetrap, be it Nikon, Canon or Leica. Heck, I’m just entering the Leica culture and I was a Canon guy with a few thousand invested. Before deciding on the M8, I looked with amazement at the D3! Not necessarily the PIC’s, but rather the sheer size and weight of that boat anchor. Too many buttons, menus and options left me thinking; I would never be able to count on catching the moment with this flagship, since a lot of my D2 friends carry a P&S while their Delta’s are buried in some suitcase, or are collecting dust back in the studio. I opted for the M8 because it’s one of the few powerhouse cameras that can be your everyday tote-along.

Regards,

[gmaurizio]

With all due respect, and being users of Leica as well as Nikon and MF equipment, the D3 is an absolutely fantastic camera!!! Of course is heavy, cumbersome and with LOTS of controls, but that is what the users of these cameras want! It is not Leica M8 or Nikon D3, it is BOTH.

Do not even dream to cover pro-sports with a Leica M8, unless you are happy with only a few lucky shots and the podium picture. We all know focal lengths above 135mm are not an option.... The D3 is not a prosumer camera, it is a pro camera for people that make a living out of those shots. Of course, prosumers can indeed buy it and enjoy it, but use 10 FPS for getting the shot of the daughter playing soccer is a tad of an overkill.

We asked Nikon for better noise performance, keep small NEF files for speedy workflow, full frame (FX now) for using their fantastic lenses like the 200mm F2.0, the 105mm F2 DC, the 28mm F1.4 and so on... and Nikon did indeed deliver.

While Leica produced a wonderful picture taking machine, compatible with the huge investment we had in Leica glass, it might learn a few lessons from Nikon. As an example, I will cite the level of service the professional organizations get from Nikon USA, not to say Nikon Japan. Turnaround time is less than 4 days or you get a replacement camera. Lens loaned (200-400mm F4 VR) on two days notice when a large sports event happens.... Do not get me started. I am still waiting (after several weeks and being part of Leica Pro Service) for a date to get our backfocusing Noctilux back.

[blakley]

Do not even dream to cover pro-sports with a Leica M8, unless you are happy with only a few lucky shots and the podium picture.

 

Exactly. To cover big-time sporting events, especially for a major international publication like Time Magazine, what you need is a Speed Graphic.

[gmaurizio]

Exactly. To cover big-time sporting events, especially for a major international publication like Time Magazine, what you need is a Speed Graphic.

 

Bob, Time magazine is editorial, not a pro-sports magazine. I do not see SI using those shots regularly. Of course they are moody, like the Leica is for editorial. How many people you see in the sidelines with Speed Graphics or Leicas?

I am not negating the merits of each camera, but for God sake let's keep a cold head regarding our equipment! It is just that, equipment... They have a purpose and design criteria. We can not be SO blind to ignore other good equipment! Or even mention that they are now gathering dust because the M8 is soooo peeerrrrrfffffeeeeeccctttt.... Give me a brake.

[sdai]

The D3 sensor is a totally different beast and specifically designed for the FX model. For lower ISO settings, expect the D300 to beat the D3.

 

I could live with a 1.5x cropped sensor inside the M9 but I know many won't be satisfied.

[blakley]

Bob, Time magazine is editorial, not a pro-sports magazine. I do not see SI using those shots regularly. Of course they are moody, like the Leica is for editorial. How many people you see in the sidelines with Speed Graphics or Leicas?

I am not negating the merits of each camera, but for God sake let's keep a cold head regarding our equipment! It is just that, equipment... They have a purpose and design criteria. We can not be SO blind to ignore other good equipment! Or even mention that they are now gathering dust because the M8 is soooo peeerrrrrfffffeeeeeccctttt.... Give me a brake.

 

Right. Let's all keep a cool head and go out and get full-frame Canons with white lenses, so all our sports pictures will look the same. Great commercial AND artistic strategy! Thank God Canon thought of it for us.

[Guest guy_mancuso]

Exactly. To cover big-time sporting events, especially for a major international publication like Time Magazine, what you need is a Speed Graphic.

 

hey don't laugh i used to shoot one doing aerials

[Makaveli45]

I was going to write this post in a new post titled, "Why I Didn't Buy the M8", but I figured everyone would call me a Troll. So I figured instead, I'll let it get buried inside another thread instead.

 

I was on the fence about getting an M8 for quite some time. Money wasn't my most important issue holding me back from getting the camera. It was the Leica image quality at high ISO. I wanted a camera that I could use for mostly flashles pictures -something small that I could carry to a lot of places. I was leaning towards getting the camera when the D3 was announced.

 

After seeing what the D3 will be able to do in a church, or a basement, or a streetcorner at night withtout a flash, I didn't see any place for the M8 in my arsenal. It's always cool to say, "Its all about the photographer and his vision, not the camera" But when the technology makes major strides that isn't necessarily true. A D3 will help me take better flashless shots in a variety of situations that the M8 (or my D2x) will not let me shoot in. It's that simple. And for me, that made me not want to get the M8.

 

If Leica were able to put a chip in the M8 that would give it the low light ability of the 5D or D3, I'd buy it.

[JeffreyTotaro]

This is not about adding microlenses – the sensor in the D3 already got microlenses. The problem is how to cope with the rather extreme incident angles one has to deal with in a rangefinder camera. The microlenses of the D3’s sensor won’t do.

 

One thing I've wondered about is this. I use a Phase One P45+ back with several lenses on a Cambo Wide DS. My widest lens is the Schneider 24xl. This lens is remarkably close to the sensor, closer than any Leica lens on the M8, and it covers a 645-size chip and with view camera movements. Why can't Leica make a full-frame chip with microlenses for it's cameras? Love the M8, just can't see why it can't be done.

[dseelig]

I shoot profootball there is one guy in Oakland who shoots with a speed graphic.

[zlatkob]

The high ISO images are smooth, but again, I've seen as good from other sensors.

 

Really? Which other sensors are as good at high ISO?

[luigi bertolotti]

Boy the images on the Nikon site with the new D3 are amazing. ISO 3200 looks as good as the M8 at ISO 640 and ISO 6400 beats the M8 at ISO 1250. If this sensor holds up in further scrutiny, Leica should really consider buying it from Nikon. The detail and color are outstanding and at ISO 200 it blows me away. Link to images: Nikon Press Center Lots of people viewing and downloading so it is slow right now.

 

Apart all the tech considerations already made ... I don't foresee Leica Co. to buy a sensor from Nikon... and maybe even Nikon not so willing to sell them; sensors, together with lenses, are becoming the main tech factor of photo gear: Kodak is a certain kind of supplier... a tech company which manages the sensor business to sell its technology to manufacturers (and between them, camera manufacturesrs, like Leica, who surely cannot afford now and tomorrow to develop his own technology).

Nikon develops sensor technology in house (I think) to use it into its big camera business... if they want sell to others their sensor tech, they surely search for other markets : phones, medical devices, industrial vision systems.. there are many.

Would you think of Ferrari to sell engines to Aston Martin or Porsche to sell engines to Maserati ?

[mjh]

One thing I've wondered about is this. I use a Phase One P45+ back with several lenses on a Cambo Wide DS. My widest lens is the Schneider 24xl. This lens is remarkably close to the sensor, closer than any Leica lens on the M8, and it covers a 645-size chip and with view camera movements. Why can't Leica make a full-frame chip with microlenses for it's cameras?

I don’t know about this particular lens (the vignetting depends not only on the distance between lens and sensor, but also on the size of the exit pupil), but as far as the P45+ is concerned, it doesn’t have microlenses. That’s why the sensor’s native sensitivity is ISO 50, 5/3 EV lower than the M8’s ISO 160. Coping with extreme incident angles is much simpler without microlenses; you will still get vignetting, but only as much as you have to expect from the cosine law.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[billh]

I shoot profootball there is one guy in Oakland who shoots with a speed graphic.

 

That's funny! He must be even older than the average Leica M user! My dad had one, and I used it a few times. I have friends who still use the Linhof version, but they are going landscapes.

 

The interesting thing is the incredible versatility we are seeing in high quality cameras today. Nikon may well be onto something with the 12MP D3 with very low noise. It does not seem like they can keep cramming more MP into these cameras, so improvements have to come in other areas.

 

Remember when the release of a new film camera was an infrequent event?