Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
andreas_thomsen

M9 18 mp prints A2 format

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Peter, that might be exaggerated, Im just saying that my old M8 makes perfectly satisfying prints so far. I have no doubt that 18megapix or 24megapix will make even more satisfying prints. (but I am not sure if I am able to entirely tell the difference)

 

.

 

bo,

if you bother to make the direct comparism (which takes some work) you will be able to tell the difference easily. i have done it, many times. again, as i have said before, many lomo prints have a lot of artistic value. but that has nothing to do with what is considered 'print quality' (resolution, dynamic range - shadow to highligh transition etc, microcontrast.).

peter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Peter,

 

That seem entirely reasonable to me, and as I said, I have no doubt a larger file will print better on large images. clearly micro-contrast will be positively affected by the more pixels to define details.

 

I was just saying, I did not really feel a need to be re-assured about my camera and lifestyle choices, I know it is a limited technology. I always called prints from my 4x5 "reality factor prints" because of the incredible amount of fine details available even in a huge print, I don't expect the M8 to remotely compte with that, and I surely hope that the new 20+ megapixel cameras blow the M8 away in printing. But I know a couple of guys whith BIG FF 20+ cameras and old nikon / canon glass which honestly do not resolve to the chip, only a few of their lenses actually resolve these chips, the average 5 year old tameron zoom do probably not. So if one plan to shoot 20+ megapix with a nikon and a tameron zoom, that would both be a waste and also Im not so sure if the prints would be gratifying at close inspection. Surely both a high megapix M9 (if such a thing happens) and any nikon/canon/sony/hassleblad etc with premium lenses should create some fantastic images.. As you said, if they don't we would have redefined some basic laws of physics.

 

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I for one would be very happy if the M9 is exactly the same no. of megapixels as the current M8. It is more than good enough from my point of view and I would prefer dynamic range & less noise over more pixels any day.

 

If you want to print A0 & study them with a microscope get a real camera in the $20K + range.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest malland
i forgot to add that this thread is a wonderful confirmation of the fact that many leica m users (amply represented here) belong to a slightly evolved group of lomo artists.

peter

Although sarcasm is the lowest form of humour you're probably right in the sense that, while a camera with more and better quality photo sites would produce better resolution, my preferences are driven by my liking for the "35mm aesthetic". Some years a go a friend photographed a river scene on Tri-X with an M6 and a Mamiya M7, which is a medium format camera. Looking at the prints we both preferred the 35mm shots because they had more "bite" resulting from the more accentuated grain. Now, at low ISOs the M8 produces a file that resembles scanned MF film more than 35mm film, as Sean Reid and others have often stated. With my love of the 35mm aesthetic I often destroy the "superior image quality" of the M8 to get more of 35mm look. Having gotten that look there is no problem printing the file at 100x150 cm and maintaining that look at the normal viewing distance, the latter being the length of the diagonal of the print. Sure, an 18mp camera is likely to produces more resolution, but that is not usually the look that I want. Of course if there is an M9 and if it is 18MP I can destroy it's superior image quality as easily as I do that of the M8, but I don't necessarily equate the quality of a photograph with that of if resolution.

 

—Mitch/Potomac, MD

Scratching the Surface©

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It is more than good enough from my point of view and I would prefer dynamic range & less noise over more pixels any day.

 

I second that!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I want it all: dynamic range, high ISO, MP, endless depth of field, and an in camera processor that decrease the depth of field and creates beautiful bokeh in the background once I've nailed focus on my main subjects. Sure. But if I can choose only two, I'll go with the dynamic range and ISO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Largest i print is A3+.

With that printsize my M8 prints do not look superiour to my 6mp R-D1 prints.

So i doubt the 18 MP of the M9 will make a difference at that size.

I have no intention to print any larger in the future because i simply do not like large prints very often. Even at exhibitions i prefer to look at smaller intimate prints for most subject matter, with few exceptions.

 

For the 35mm esthetics Mitch refers too.. this is a matter of taste. I do not agree.

I have seen several exhibitions where MF prints from Hasselblad or Rolleiflex where shown along with Leica M prints and i prefered the MF prints by a huge margin.

 

I also fooled around with Alien Skin and other software to add grain and simulate B&W 35mm film with my M8 for a long time. I feel liberated since i stopped doing that and accept the M8 files as they are: with a look more like scanned MF film. And completely forget about making the M8 files look like something they are not: grainy/ gritty 35mm B&W film.

Edited by j. borger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
More is better.

More of anything? There are lots of things that I could use less of. Maybe your case is different.

 

The old man from the Age of the Box Camera

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote:

Originally Posted by Printmaker

More is better.

 

More of anything? There are lots of things that I could use less of. Maybe your case is different.

 

Less is more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, got busy and couldn't keep up. Coincidentally, I was making 30x45 inch prints from 12 mp D300 files for a gallery opening yesterday. The prints look good from a normal 2 meter viewing distance. And I guess that's the key - normal viewing distance. 10 to 12 mp is sufficient for making big prints. But 18 mp will add more detail. And, yes, 18 mp will make a better A2 (16.53x23.38 inch) print. Im not sure you will be able to see the difference on an A3 (12.95x19.01 inch) print, as that size is close to ideal for printing M8 files.

 

To be perfectly clear, the IQ difference is quite small. Most will never see any difference. And when you move up to 20x30, 24x36 or 30x45, most people will never know the difference. At those sizes, M8 files have that WOW factor. Imagine how much better they could be with nearly double the resolution.

 

Tom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To make things a bit clearer: I am not printing myself, I always order laser prints and with these what I see is basically what the calculations suggest (21 MP very good but not perfect for A3, A4 is perfect). So all the stuff about me being unable to print: yes, that's true. I own a 300 DPI color laser printer with terrible photo quality.

 

The ordered prints however are just fine, and they show what's already obvious from theory: that a 5600 pixels wide sensor with an AA filter and a CFA does mostly, but not quite match the resolution of a 5000 pixels wide print. Not a surprise, or Foveon wouldn't look any better viewed at 1:1...

 

It's also no secret that the M8 delivers at least comparable quality in pratical use thanks to the missing AA filter and generally better lenses. I expect the M9's IQ to clearly leave the current C/N DSLRs behind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...