Megapixels, resolution and the M9 sensor

[nugat]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Let's be optimistic and believe that M9 comes.

How would it best balance Mpix count, sensor size (36x24?) and high ISO?

Let's start with Mpix count vs effective resolution.

Based on DPreview tests we find the following effective resolutions of cameras with their best glass (primes) in LPH-lines per picture height. In brackets print resolution

for 10inch x 15 inch picture.

 

In the 10-12Mpix range:

Canon 5d 2000 lph (dpi 200)

Nikon d3/700 2200 lph (dpi 220)

Olympus E3 1800 lph (dpi 180)

Panasonic G1 2300 lph (dpi 230)

Leica M8 2400 lph (dpi 240)

20+ Mpix FF:

Canon 5Dm2 2700 lph (dpi 270)

Canon 1Dm3 2700 lph (dpi 270)

Sony Alfa 900 2700 lph (dpi 270)

Nikon D3x 2600 lph (dpi 260)

 

If we choose to print a 10 inch x15 inch picture, which is effectively A3 size with "art" framing, the picture height resolutions in dpi will be the above figures divided by 10.

180-200 dpi of 5D and E3 slightly below standard. 220-240 dpi of D3/700, G1 and M8 at acceptable standard. All 20+ Mpix cameras at 260-270 dpi.

 

The talk of 20+ Mpix cameras being able to print way bigger pictures than 10-12 mpix cams doesn't take into account the fact that the megapixels do not translate proportionally to increased detail even with the best prime lenses. They show only 10% more detail than Leica M8, the rest of resolution is below Nyquist=blur. That given perfect conditions: accurate focus, no shake.

What's interesting that the size of the frame in the 10-12 MPix range does not correspond to resolution: G1 and m8 sensors are 25% and 56% of 36x24mm respectively, yet offer better resolution than FF 5D and D3/700.

 

The designers of the M9 sensor would best settle on a moderate increase in pixel count and frame size and work hard on high ISO.

14-15 Mpix and 1.2 crop should be the target enabling to exceed the resolution performance of the best current 20+ Mpix cameras.

ISO should become usable at 3200. A in-body image stabilization system would be nice.

With such parameters holding the current price of M8 could be possible. A target of full frame and 20+ Mpix with the attached price of 10k (euro or dollar) could spell the end of the line.

[Advertisement]

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

[j. borger]

I do not see any point in a 1.2 crop sensor .....would realy be a deal killer for me.

[robertwright]

the 1dsMkII hit a sweet spot with FF and 16mp. Take away the AA filter and it should compete easily with the current 20+mp FF sensors.

 

going from 1.3x to 1.2x doesn't seem like it is worth it-operating with two bodies would be more difficult-confusing. I'd rather keep the current crop factor and get more mp and better High ISO.

 

The current sensor upsamples easily to 16mp. give me a real 16mp and no AA filter and 20mp would be a snap.

[nugat]

on a second thought...

1.2 crop (30x20mm) is handy to recalculate f-length by adding 2x10%. So 21mm is 21+4, 35 is 35+7 etc. Now that we have leica 18mm prime and CV 12 mm and 15mm nobody should really complain about the lack of wide angles,even with 1.2 crop.

However 2:3 is hardly the best ratio for display/print uses. Only postcards (4x6 inch or 10x15 cm) use it. Leica introduced it in the 1930s as a simple doubleframing of the cinematic film. Instead of vertical run, the photographic camera started using the film horizontally.

2:3 other than on postcards, wastes s lot of available display area through the neccesary cropping. 3:2=1.5, 16:9=1.77, A4 is 1.414, A3+ is 1.46, 10x8=1.25, 4:3=1.33 etc.

In fact the Panasonic solution of true off-sensor crop options of 4:3, 3:2 and 16:9 offers the best possible resolution savings of all. In short cameras like LX3 and GH1 have a slightly bigger sensor that enables the most economical crops resolutionwise (see attached).

Maybe M9 should also employ such a sensor that with 16:11 native ratio would offer best of all worlds: real wide horizontal angle of view (AOF) close to that of 3:2 35mm film. After all its the horizontal AOV that counts most for real wide angles.

The sensor woud be still a bit smaller than 36x24 and perhaps easier to hold picture quality in the corners with M lenses. Just fantasizing...

PS.

The diagrams are by Bjorn Utpott

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!

[nugat]

I do not see any point in a 1.2 crop sensor .....would realy be a deal killer for me.

 

 

What do you mean? You'd kill for 20%?

Also please read my below proposal for a panasonic-like "flexible" ratio sensor.

[nugat]

I noticed a mistake in my OP with regard to Olympus E-3 and Panasonic G1. Because of their 4:3 sensors they would be able to print (with the given dpi) pictures ca 10x13 inches, and NOT 10x15 inches.

[swamiji]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I don't see a point at 1.2 crop factor either. I would like the M9 to give me the same experience that my M7 gives. For me it's FF (3:2) or I stay with my M8. I have no use for the other ratio's, nor for my M to take movies either... Leave that to Panasonic.

 

SVS

[jaapv]

All this theorizing does not take into account that lenses simply cannot resolve 24 Mp on a 135 sensor. It is called "the cell-phone syndrome". The sweet spot for an 135 24x36 camera with the very best lenses, and we all know that only Leica can supply those ,is about 15-18 Mp. If the future M9 can deliver that, without AA filter, it will blow all other cameras in its sensor class out of the water without even trying.

[Bob Ross]

All this theorizing does not take into account that lenses simply cannot resolve 24 Mp on a 135 sensor. It is called "the cell-phone syndrome". The sweet spot for an 135 24x36 camera with the very best lenses, and we all know that only Leica can supply those ,is about 15-18 Mp. If the future M9 can deliver that, without AA filter, it will blow all other cameras in its sensor class out of the water without even trying.

Hi Jaap,

The 4/3rds format is roughly 1/4th of a 135 frame. Scaling a 10MP (4.7µm pixels) 4/3rds sensor to 135 would yield about 40MP. Scaling the ZD lenses up to a larger image circle is another matter, but as it is they resolve nicely within the crop. Lenses that can cop with 24MP or 40MP probably can be made, but they wont fly off of the shelves for what they will cost....

Bob

[swamiji]

I think this discussion is the wrong way around. We should be talking about what chip is best for the lens. I don't care for MP or GP, I want the best picture my Leica lens can deliver, and there designed for 135 format. I find that the depth of the existing chip to pretty good. For My money a chip along the current line, with FF would suit me fine.

 

However there is one feature I would like... to be able to emulate various film types, in camera. There are some images that beg for Kodacrome.... or X-Pan....

 

SVS

[jaapv]

I think this discussion is the wrong way around. We should be talking about what chip is best for the lens. I don't care for MP or GP, I want the best picture my Leica lens can deliver, and there designed for 135 format. I find that the depth of the existing chip to pretty good. For My money a chip along the current line, with FF would suit me fine.

 

However there is one feature I would like... to be able to emulate various film types, in camera. There are some images that beg for Kodacrome.... or X-Pan....

 

SVS

So use Kodachrome, or X-pan. Although, since today, Kodachrome is a bit of a problem:mad:

But I really mean it. If you like film, use film, don't try to kitsch it in digital.

[swamiji]

I do both, each has there place... but until Kodachrome reincarnates, my only hope is Digital.

[mmk60]

I think this discussion is the wrong way around. We should be talking about what chip is best for the lens. I don't care for MP or GP, I want the best picture my Leica lens can deliver, and there designed for 135 format. I find that the depth of the existing chip to pretty good. For My money a chip along the current line, with FF would suit me fine.

 

However there is one feature I would like... to be able to emulate various film types, in camera. There are some images that beg for Kodacrome.... or X-Pan....

 

SVS

 

I just want RAW files from my digital camera;)

[noah_addis]

I'd love a 16MP 24x36 sensor in a future M digital. I'd say any more is overkill and if they can get a 16MP sensor to perform as well as the M8 sensor in terms of sharpness, it would certainly compete with higher MP cameras.

 

As for film emulation, that's really better left to computer software after the fact. I prefer to shoot RAW and process to my needs later. An added benefit is that if my needs change, I can re-process the raw files.

 

I sincerely hope that Leica wouldn't even consider a different aspect ratio for a future M digital sensor. I couldn't care less what paper sizes exist, but I shoot with 35mm since I like the proportions of the frame. Changing to some other shape format would be a huge mistake.

[scaryink]

I understand that Leica is working on an invisibility cloak that will be an option with the new M9 or M9.2.

 

This will make you and the camera even more stealthy. I hope the new M9.2 will also have 9.2 Gigapixels, be made with 100% renewable resources and you will be able to sell the excess battery charge back to your local power grid.

[noah_addis]

While we're on the topic of batteries (sort of), I hope any future M digital will use the same batteries as the M8.

 

If you're working with two different cameras carrying two sets of batteries and chargers is a drag.

[Fotomiguel]

I would like:

- to be able to work without LCD ( at least Iso dial).

- about 15 or 16 MP would be enough. What a files! I've already happy with the M8 files.

- Better high iso files (even when is not my priority)

- The M9 has to be a bit smaller camera. Similar to the M7.

- I'm not sure about the AA filter. With or without? I think without. Files will be nicer and I'll keep my lenses with the IR filter, to use as well the M8 as a second body.

- The shutter has to be incredible. As quiet and smooth as the best of the M cameras.

- I wish FF sensor, but if not I'll be happy anyway.

No more wishes for me. I think with all these improvements any M lover would be dreaming the best dream.

The preis could be 6000 Euros. I wish It was less, but I think It will be more.

I've already spared more than half so if the next year the world economic situation doesn't brake me more, I'll be ready to buy the new M9.

I'll keep on dreaming!

Kind Regard

Miguel

[jaapv]

You can have an IR filter without an AA filter. Different things. But on the whole I echo your sentiment.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[plasticman]

However there is one feature I would like... to be able to emulate various film types, in camera. There are some images that beg for Kodacrome.... or X-Pan....

 

Sorry swamiji - but this is the funniest M9 request I heard yet. Holy cr@p it's only a hair's breadth away from in-camera 'van Gogh' effect...

[rosuna]

The quality of the files is not only about resolution. Bit depth should be 14 bits, whith no tonal compression scheme. 16-18MP / 14 bits DNG files would be fine.