60mp Rangefinder - Honest Opinions

[JTLeica]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

10 hours ago, Jon Warwick said:

No probs focusing my M11 with a rangefinder. I find it very precise still and quick. I do have a Visoflex 2 that I use at times, but mainly for close ups when the subject is off centre.

For one situation you discuss (considered, slow landscapes on a tripod), if not using the rangefinder, I tend to employ the rear LCD to compose and focus, or even better make use of a magnified view via Fotos on an iPad. To me, it’s a little reminiscent of when I would put a magnifier loupe on the back of a large format cameras’s ground glass, so I quite like this routine especially with a relatively easier and more “modern” approach of digitally composing and zooming in to achieve perfect focus.

And I fully agree with hdmesa’s comment above that “Slow tripod shooting is what manual focus cameras with analog dials excel at”.  I think the M is a very good tool for landscapes for that reason, and in my personal case I’d take an M11 over a Q3 any day (I’ve often thought the image quality at the edges of the frame from a Q is ok, but nothing great compared to a tier one M lens).

Well that is very try. I compose every image I take from the rear screen on the Z7. That said it tilts. But the EVF (visoflex) would solve that.

I have a Q3 arriving today. I need to love it to keep it. And I will be checking the corner quality as that does matter to me, especially vs the equipment I have already. I suspect it will be good though vs my Z7 24-70 and 14-30.

Thanks again

[IkarusJohn]

12 hours ago, JTLeica said:

Honestly, how do you guys find focussing even remotely fast lenses on a rangefinder with 60mp files? Are you now leaning into the Visoflex?

Not sure I agree with you, @jaapv, but then does it really matter?  You did raise the issue by saying:

Quote

The only problem is that pixel peeping at 100% which is inadvisable at 60 MP, will show you your slightest error Dial back to your habitual image size and the results will be exactly the same.

I’ve never had an issue with straying into tangential issues, if it helps …

[Advertisement]

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

[jaapv]

?? I read that as a straight answer to the original question…

[JTLeica]

10 hours ago, Al Brown said:

With a calibrated RF on your camera and a properly calibrated lens my keeper rate is 90-95%, all at f/1.4 or less.
I would worry more about camera shake with M11. Use at least 3.5x focal length speed at highest resolution. Proven by a...dare I say it... ok I will... Swiss scientific test.

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!

Thanks for that, thats awesome. So between 3 and 4 times the FL for the M11 to completely remove any minor shake? Thanks!

[Al Brown]

19 minutes ago, JTLeica said:

Thanks for that, thats awesome. So between 3 and 4 times the FL for the M11 to completely remove any minor shake? Thanks!

It still depends on your holding technique and skills, but these are the guidelines.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

I have a Z7 and the lenses the OP is using, plus, of course, my M11.

The M11 can be a better landscape than the Z7 in a few ways. The sensor is better, slightly. The long exposure possibilities are better. It can be a smaller system. Battery life is vastly better as are the menus. You can use the Leica or CV APO lenses to their full effect on the M11 which produces incredible files. The VF 2 is better to use in the field than the Z7 flip screen. I vastly prefer the colour science of the M11. Actually it's what I like least about the Z7 files, which often have a magenta cast. The M11 sensor stack is MUCH thinner and just have more bite. The M11 can give better files than the Z7.

However the M11 really needs a tripod to shine at landscape work because it has no IBIS. I can handhold an M11 to 1/F easily (AND check my images at 200% magnification and have pixel sharp files) but that still doesn't compare to any IBIS camera. And there are much better cameras than the IBIS in the Z7. But that's still better than an M11. Filter use is another issue as M lens filter sizes are still all over the place and they're difficult to use with the RF. It's not the RF or lack of AF that limits the M11 for landscapes.

I see the M11 as a fine landscape camera but not a primary landscape camera. If you use an M11 and also want to shoot landscapes and you're prepared to use a tripod, it's brilliant and the files are epic. Mostly you're better off with a few primes than a bag of zooms, despite the convenience of the latter.

IMHO, if you're not getting pixel sharp files, then what's the point of the M11 at 60MP? You should be able to view them at high magnification. If you're getting blurry files either boost your shutter speed, reduce your megapickles, use a camera support or just get better at holding the camera.

Mind you if I had M11 money for a landscape camera, I'd buy an X2D. Without doubt the best landscape rig on the market right now. Followed by the SL2.

Gordon

[FlashGordonPhotography]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

21 minutes ago, JTLeica said:

Thanks for that, thats awesome. So between 3 and 4 times the FL for the M11 to completely remove any minor shake? Thanks!

Not for me. I shoot at 1/f all the time and can go to 1/2/f if I'm really careful. You need to do your own testing. Also the M rewards good technique and lots of practice, plus some lucky genetics.

Gordon

[jaapv]

8 minutes ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

Not for me. I shoot at 1/f all the time and can go to 1/2/f if I'm really careful. You need to do your own testing. Also the M rewards good technique and lots of practice, plus some lucky genetics.

Gordon

To satisfy John: yes, this is OT 😛

 

[250swb]

1 hour ago, JTLeica said:

 

If you know much about the Z7, its certainly not a whizz bang, hyper modern camera. I dont need autofocus for landscapes either I agree. I have used the M system before for a number of years. I rely on the tilting screen a lot, but, that could be negated with the tilting EVF.

 

It's not an old digital camera either, the current Z7II doesn't improve on it to enough to switch. But things move on, you can now get a fast auto focus adapter for M lenses to the Nikon Z7, Z7II, Z8, Z9 body and of course you get image stabilisation with your M lenses as well (these adapters also work with Canon, Sony etc.). So you genuinely don't need an M body, or an SL or SL2 body and be stuck with manual focus all the time with your M lenses, just when you want to use it.

Edited August 30, 2023 by 250swb

[IkarusJohn]

I know I’ve said this before, but about 10 years ago, I took a picture from Pub Corner (on the road up to Treble Cone) up the Matukituki Valley, with a Monochrom and 75 Summilux, hand held (OVF, as there was no live view for the M9 based cameras).  I printed it (Whitewall) a metre along the long side, and hung it above my dining table.  People looked at it up close and marveled at the fine detail.

For me, sharpness and fine detail, without smeering (Summicron 28 v1) or motion blur is esstential.  I’m looking forward to mounting the XCD 38/2.5 V on my X2D, when I get it!

[JTLeica]

1 hour ago, Al Brown said:

It still depends on your holding technique and skills, but these are the guidelines.

I think I would be fine with 1/1 or even slightly less with a fully electronic shutter. I have a relatively steady hand.

[JTLeica]

1 hour ago, 250swb said:

It's not an old digital camera either, the current Z7II doesn't improve on it to enough to switch. But things move on, you can now get a fast auto focus adapter for M lenses to the Nikon Z7, Z7II, Z8, Z9 body and of course you get image stabilisation with your M lenses as well (these adapters also work with Canon, Sony etc.). So you genuinely don't need an M body, or an SL or SL2 body and be stuck with manual focus all the time with your M lenses, just when you want to use it.

So funnily enough my Leica foray all started with an A7 original, with M adapter and EVF / Focus magnification. However I know the old Sony stack was thick and didn't play well with several wide lenses and some apo / ASPH too.

How does the z7 fair with Leica lenses?

[T25UFO]

1 hour ago, JTLeica said:

Thanks for that, thats awesome. So between 3 and 4 times the FL for the M11 to completely remove any minor shake? Thanks!

When the M10 Mono was released I remember watching a Red Dot Forum episode where David (or might have been Josh) said use auto ISO and always set the shutter to 1/250 with a 50mm lens.  And that camera didn’t have a 60 mb sensor.

Of course B&W cameras can handle almost any ISO so high shutter speeds don’t matter, but I [sort of] follow that advice with the 60 mb Q3.  I don’t go slower than 1/125 even with a 28mm lens and some image stabilisation.

[JTLeica]

1 hour ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

I have a Z7 and the lenses the OP is using, plus, of course, my M11.

The M11 can be a better landscape than the Z7 in a few ways. The sensor is better, slightly. The long exposure possibilities are better. It can be a smaller system. Battery life is vastly better as are the menus. You can use the Leica or CV APO lenses to their full effect on the M11 which produces incredible files. The VF 2 is better to use in the field than the Z7 flip screen. I vastly prefer the colour science of the M11. Actually it's what I like least about the Z7 files, which often have a magenta cast. The M11 sensor stack is MUCH thinner and just have more bite. The M11 can give better files than the Z7.

However the M11 really needs a tripod to shine at landscape work because it has no IBIS. I can handhold an M11 to 1/F easily (AND check my images at 200% magnification and have pixel sharp files) but that still doesn't compare to any IBIS camera. And there are much better cameras than the IBIS in the Z7. But that's still better than an M11. Filter use is another issue as M lens filter sizes are still all over the place and they're difficult to use with the RF. It's not the RF or lack of AF that limits the M11 for landscapes.

I see the M11 as a fine landscape camera but not a primary landscape camera. If you use an M11 and also want to shoot landscapes and you're prepared to use a tripod, it's brilliant and the files are epic. Mostly you're better off with a few primes than a bag of zooms, despite the convenience of the latter.

IMHO, if you're not getting pixel sharp files, then what's the point of the M11 at 60MP? You should be able to view them at high magnification. If you're getting blurry files either boost your shutter speed, reduce your megapickles, use a camera support or just get better at holding the camera.

Mind you if I had M11 money for a landscape camera, I'd buy an X2D. Without doubt the best landscape rig on the market right now. Followed by the SL2.

Gordon

I totally agree with everything (pretty much) you say there, thanks for the reply. The smaller system is very appealing and the weight of the new M11 is next to nothing really for the built quality it offers. The older chrome M10 I had was quite a lump. Very interesting about the thin stack of the M11. Yeah filters it a bit of an issue really, I use them so often, that are nearly as important to me as the tripod and lenses.

I actually shoot too quickly, even though its much slower than I was before, I am still too fast and still forget the composition element half the time, yes the most important bit.

I dont think the SL is a perfect option for landscapes yes just due to the significant weight and size of the zooms. But, no question those APO lenses are perfection. I look at the 16-35 / 24-70 and 100-400. All seemed somewhat sub par compared to the Nikon / Sony offering in terms of quality vs weight and size. The 100-400 seems a poor lens in Leica terms which is a real shame. No doubt the SL3 will have the 60mp sensor and an all important tilting screen.

What really appeals to me about the M vs others too is that long term, you really dont loose money, having bought and sold so much equipment over the last 15 years the M didn't cost me anything, the rest did. The XQD or GFX are large and limited really to short tele lenses, I sold two GFX cameras for the Z7, so likely wouldn't go back to MF again. Stunning systems though.

Edited August 30, 2023 by JTLeica

[JTLeica]

11 minutes ago, T25UFO said:

When the M10 Mono was released I remember watching a Red Dot Forum episode where David (or might have been Josh) said use auto ISO and always set the shutter to 1/250 with a 50mm lens.  And that camera didn’t have a 60 mb sensor.

Of course B&W cameras can handle almost any ISO so high shutter speeds don’t matter, but I [sort of] follow that advice with the 60 mb Q3.  I don’t go slower than 1/125 even with a 28mm lens and some image stabilisation.

I think I would go around the 1/50 for the Q3, but that said it all changes with conditions and subject for sure.

[JTLeica]

.

Edited August 30, 2023 by JTLeica

[JTLeica]

29 minutes ago, comptroller said:

I shoot a rangefinder because I don’t care about things like absolute critical focus at f1.4 pixel peeping a 60MP file. If I did I wouldn’t shoot a rangefinder.

Super helpful, thanks. 🤔

[JTLeica]

2 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

I have a Z7 and the lenses the OP is using, plus, of course, my M11.

The M11 can be a better landscape than the Z7 in a few ways. The sensor is better, slightly. The long exposure possibilities are better. It can be a smaller system. Battery life is vastly better as are the menus. You can use the Leica or CV APO lenses to their full effect on the M11 which produces incredible files. The VF 2 is better to use in the field than the Z7 flip screen. I vastly prefer the colour science of the M11. Actually it's what I like least about the Z7 files, which often have a magenta cast. The M11 sensor stack is MUCH thinner and just have more bite. The M11 can give better files than the Z7.

However the M11 really needs a tripod to shine at landscape work because it has no IBIS. I can handhold an M11 to 1/F easily (AND check my images at 200% magnification and have pixel sharp files) but that still doesn't compare to any IBIS camera. And there are much better cameras than the IBIS in the Z7. But that's still better than an M11. Filter use is another issue as M lens filter sizes are still all over the place and they're difficult to use with the RF. It's not the RF or lack of AF that limits the M11 for landscapes.

I see the M11 as a fine landscape camera but not a primary landscape camera. If you use an M11 and also want to shoot landscapes and you're prepared to use a tripod, it's brilliant and the files are epic. Mostly you're better off with a few primes than a bag of zooms, despite the convenience of the latter.

IMHO, if you're not getting pixel sharp files, then what's the point of the M11 at 60MP? You should be able to view them at high magnification. If you're getting blurry files either boost your shutter speed, reduce your megapickles, use a camera support or just get better at holding the camera.

Mind you if I had M11 money for a landscape camera, I'd buy an X2D. Without doubt the best landscape rig on the market right now. Followed by the SL2.

Gordon

One question, how's the dynamic range compared to the Z7. That is definitely a real strength of the Nikon system.

[jaapv]

The same sensor performs differently in different cameras as the choice of Bayer Filter, microlenses, IR filter/ coating and software will be different.  A few years ago the noise performance of Nikons was considerably better than Sony cameras with the same sensor. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[charlesphoto99]

I'm sure the Q3 is a fine camera for landscapes - if one only wants to shoot them at 28mm wide. But how boring is that? And no, cropping isn't the same as one doesn't get the same look of compressed perspective was with a longer lenses. IMO the Q's are for a very different kind of use. Anyway, sounds like you've talked yourself out of an M11 as it is.