M11 Motion blur is driving me crazy(!)

[marchyman]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

6 hours ago, wijsbroek said:

Okay, thank you. Did not know that! 

Pedantic rambling probably best ignored.... 

There is also a delay when using the mechanical shutter, but it is much smaller.  It takes time for the shutter curtains to move across the frame.  That time is approximately twice the flash sync speed or 1/360s for the M11.  Why twice?  Half of the time is used to open the first curtain and the other half used to close the second curtain.  Shooting at speeds faster than the flash sync speed means the 2nd curtain starts closing before the first curtain is fully open.  There is still about 1/360s between the time the first pixels are exposed to light and the last pixels are exposed to light.  Don't know how often -- if ever in general photography? -- that 5 and a half thousands of a second difference can't be seen.

[Advertisement]

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

[pgh]

I've know a few people who know what they're doing to struggle to get consistently good results from the M11. I myself found it somewhat tougher than I would consider practical. Whatever the reason - all flaws are magnified. This isn't the first time a frustrated user has tried to get good results due to shutter shock/camera shake/whatever it is - and it can indeed be many things. In the end, I don't particularly care because when your 40 mp prints are consistently as sharp or sharper than your 60 mp prints - at the sort of large sizes that really uses the sensor's capabilities - you've got to ask some questions. I get that it's personal, but I find 40 mp to be the limit/sweet spot for shooting a 35mm sensor without any sort of IBIS. The pixel binning on the M11 doesn't seem to help the issue either. One reason I'll never pick up an M11. To all those that are nailing shots with the same consistency as ever - good on you. We know you're out there. 

Edited May 16, 2023 by pgh

[jaapv]

I would agree, although I would place the sweet spot somewhere between 20-30 MP.

[CDodkin]

54 minutes ago, jaapv said:

This is an incorrect Internet myth:

https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2019/10/more-ultra-high-resolution-mtf-experiments/

(scroll down). 

On the contrary, the higher resolving the sensor, the more lens performance is recorded. Thus any residual aberrations of an imperfect lens will show up at the extreme magnification of 100% But overall performance will improve.

Just to be clear - What is the incorrect Internet myth?

You didn't specify.

[sdk]

Voigtlander Apo Lanthar 35mm/2 is probably better than most 35mm/1.4 designs in every way, except not having f/1.4. It's even better than the Zeiss Distagon ZM 35mm/1.4 which used to be the best 35mm lens for M cameras. Perhaps the Leica 35mm/2 App Summicron ASPH is better, it's certainly smaller and far more expensive. The combo of the App Panther and the M11 is superb.

[Jeff S]

3 hours ago, CDodkin said:

Just to be clear - What is the incorrect Internet myth?

You didn't specify.

Discussed in the Appendix at the end of the linked article.

Jeff

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

55 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

Discussed in the Appendix at the end of the linked article.

Jeff

And the following discussion. 

[charlesphoto99]

9 hours ago, CDodkin said:

 

Unfortunately you cannot fully exploit the resolution potential of high-resolution (M11) sensors with the 'older' Leica lenses. The latest ($10k) Leica APO can, as can the Voigtlander APO.

This is something that people purchasing the M11 need to be aware of, and factor into their long-term lens purchasing strategy.

You might want to tell that to Leica who just re-issued what I consider a pretty lousy lens in the 35mm 1.4 pre-asph. An original one was actually my first ever Leica lens circa 1996, and I couldn't wait to get rid of the thing. Talk about soft focus at 1.4. But now you have M11 owners (and of course others) drooling all over it (if they can get it) to the tune of $4K. It resolves the sensor how it revolves the sensor, and some people love that that look. Of course, if you're going for more of a pristine medium format look, then yes, you want an APO, etc. Different lenses for different courses, nothing to do with the sensor (though I too feel the 10-R is a sweet spot - not too finicky but plenty of room if you do need to crop). 

[CDodkin]

3 hours ago, jaapv said:

And the following discussion. 

As already noted, you will not fully exploit the resolution potential of high-resolution (M11) sensors with the 'older' Leica lenses. The latest ($10k) Leica APO can, as can the Voigtlander APO. The 'discussion' referenced is merely arguing over semantics.

[CDodkin]

1 hour ago, charlesphoto99 said:

You might want to tell that to Leica who just re-issued what I consider a pretty lousy lens in the 35mm 1.4 pre-asph. An original one was actually my first ever Leica lens circa 1996, and I couldn't wait to get rid of the thing. Talk about soft focus at 1.4. But now you have M11 owners (and of course others) drooling all over it (if they can get it) to the tune of $4K. It resolves the sensor how it revolves the sensor, and some people love that that look. Of course, if you're going for more of a pristine medium format look, then yes, you want an APO, etc. Different lenses for different courses, nothing to do with the sensor (though I too feel the 10-R is a sweet spot - not too finicky but plenty of room if you do need to crop). 

The higher resolution sensor allows you to more clearly see the aberrations and limitations of older lenses, at high magnification. Whether that is important to you depends on your intended outcomes. It's interesting that the OP and I shared the same experience and reaction to the same body and lens combo.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

9 hours ago, pgh said:

I've know a few people who know what they're doing to struggle to get consistently good results from the M11. I myself found it somewhat tougher than I would consider practical. Whatever the reason - all flaws are magnified. This isn't the first time a frustrated user has tried to get good results due to shutter shock/camera shake/whatever it is - and it can indeed be many things. In the end, I don't particularly care because when your 40 mp prints are consistently as sharp or sharper than your 60 mp prints - at the sort of large sizes that really uses the sensor's capabilities - you've got to ask some questions. I get that it's personal, but I find 40 mp to be the limit/sweet spot for shooting a 35mm sensor without any sort of IBIS. The pixel binning on the M11 doesn't seem to help the issue either. One reason I'll never pick up an M11. To all those that are nailing shots with the same consistency as ever - good on you. We know you're out there. 

 

9 hours ago, jaapv said:

I would agree, although I would place the sweet spot somewhere between 20-30 MP.

The OP's image biggest problem is rolling shutter, plus the lens itself, which was never designed to be corner perfect at 1.4. There's multiple issues combining in the first photo. Not a single issue. I understand he has concerns but this is not the way.

As far as the old *M11 makes blurrier photos* chestnut, well, that depends. The *sweet spot you mention, is purely personal. It depends on your technique, natural body movement and the enlargement size. We all look at images at 100% but rarely actually output them at that size. If we judge images at full screen on a 24 inch monitor versus 100%,most of us would be saying there's no difference between and M10/M10R and the M11. We also wouldn't be saying the Summilux isn't that sharp wide open. Pixel peeping is fun but ultimately images should be judged at their output size. Because that's what counts, in the end.

From my reading it appears I'm better than many at handholding my M11 and M11M and not as good as a few. The number doesn't matter. And there isn't one number. Different lenses at different distances give different results. If I use the focal length measurement I know I'm a stop better with lenses in the 35-75 range than ultra wides and the 135 APO. I also know the difference between when I'm slow and steady versus a grab shot and after that extra espresso. I know how big an image I can print based on my personal technique and the lens I use. Why? Because I have done the tests, repeatedly. I know my gear and I know my limitations.

It 'aint the camera..... It never is. (Unless it's faulty, which a very small number of M11's have been by the comments.)

The M11 can take pin sharp images, resolved perfectly at the pixel level. Put it on a tripod with an APO lens and the timer. Shoot a static subject with the sun over your left shoulder. From here everything degrades from that ultimate IQ. The lens. The light. The weather. The photographer. Mostly the photographer. It's not whether the M11 can make sharp images. It's whether you can make sharp images with the M11. Do your own testing. Repeatedly, with every lens you own. Do those tests at the maximum you'll output an image (including cropping). Shoot within those settings. Know those settings won't be the same as mine or any one else's. The camera knows this. That's why it offers a selection for minimum shutter in auto ISO. And if you want more then get better. Practice. Often. It's an M. The one camera that demands you use use good technique and practice. The camera that rewards you most for it. And maybe one less latte before shooting....

It's up to each of us to learn their own limitations (and the equipment's) and stop blaming the gear.

Gordon

[Erato]

I'd like to attach some photos which were zoom to 300% cropped as a reference.

This lens was made in 1957.

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!

 

 

And a full size close-up for further reference.

M11 is good enough in most of the cases. Even it's a close-up photography down to 30cm or so.

 

[colint544]

3 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

It's not whether the M11 can make sharp images. It's whether you can make sharp images with the M11.

For me, this goes to the heart of the matter.

[colint544]

Last month, I got an M11. What I've realised is that technique is important. I'm still very much learning the best way to use this camera. I bought it, knowing that it doesn't have an image stabiliser. I imagine that, at some point, Leica will figure out a way to get an image stabiliser into their M camera, but currently this is where we are, and I accept that. I've been spoiled by the Ricoh GR3 I've had for the last three years, which does have an image stabiliser. The GR3, incidentally, is an oft-maligned camera but it has a modern APS-C 24MP sensor, coupled to a very sharp lens, in a package you can slip into your pocket. It's fast and reliable, and it makes stunning images.

Anyway, I quickly ran up against the motion blur issue with the M11. I was trying to shoot as low an ISO as possible, and I'm used to getting away with speeds of, say 1/30th or 1/60th of a second with, say, a 28mm lens. And, as has been pointed out, you have to really zoom in on an image on your monitor to see this blur. A lower resolving camera simply wouldn't resolve it. But anyway, I knew it was there, and had to adapt my technique to get around it.

Simply put, with an M11, you must choose a faster shutter speed, and/or a higher ISO than you might have in the past. That's all there is to it. It's a compromise, but the camera and sensor can take it. I was shooting some portraits on the M11 yesterday, and had to put the ISO up to 400 ISO to get a high shutter speed with the 50 Summilux ASPH mk1 at full aperture. The images are noiseless and  superbly detailed where the lens has focused. 

I'm going to attempt a short thread..

 

[colint544]

I'm fascinated with how the light, and the weather, play around these tower blocks. The scene can be dramatically different ten times in an hour. Here's a shot from January. It's shot on the Ricoh GR3, which is obviously not a Leica camera, but I'm posting it for comparison, for the greater good. 

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!

[colint544]

Here is the same scene, from April, shot on the M11 with a 28mm Summicron ASPH mk1

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!

[colint544]

Tight crops from both images

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!

[colint544]

Hmm. That's not worked brilliantly. Anyway, I know it's unfair to compare an APS-C image with one from a full-frame one at double the resolution, but when I compare images from the GR3 to images from my m9 Monochrom, there is not much difference. The M11 images are in another league to any camera I've used before. It's not just the incredible detail, there's a rich and subtle tonality available as well. It's just a case of faster shutter speeds/higher ISO than before, as far as I can tell so far.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[pgh]

7 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

The *sweet spot you mention, is purely personal.

Really, I said as much in my post. You could have saved yourself the time. 

My point was that I've known plenty persons who have run up against this practical limitation in real life. If I have to take that much care to get usable images with the M11 then the whole experience is pretty meh. This isn't much difference than back in the film days when some people have no issue shooting a pentax 67 handheld and others think of it more as a tripod camera. The thing that's new is the small form factor demanding such care - it can be a little misleading. For me and others I know, the 40~ of the R is (practical) limit. I got plenty of usable pics when I used an M11 but on balance I lost too much for it to have an appeal of it being a high res walk around camera. For those intrepid and highly skilled users of the M11 who have no such issues (as I said we know you're out there, there's no need to tell us), then I'm sure it's a great tool. 

[pgh]

3 hours ago, colint544 said:

and/or a higher ISO than you might have in the past. That's all there is to it. It's a compromise,

Sort of like upsampling a sharper, lower ISO 40 mp image to 60 might be a compromise.