Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
like_no_other

**M9 - 30+ mpix**

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I agree Chris, 15-18MP seems about perfect. File management and storage is hard enough at 10MP. I'd fill up hard drives fast at 30MP, not to mention that I don't need files that large.

 

All things being equal, more pixels=smaller pixels which often result in higher noise. The reason the D700 is so good at high ISO is that it has relatively low pixel count (12MP) on a full-frame sensor. I'd prefer a tad higher resolution--my agency requires 50MP files so it would be perfect if I wouldn't have to interpolate to get there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Maybe we need a head of R&D thread as well as an armchair CEO thread, or they might be merged to confine the plague:D

 

Anyway if I was responsible for Leica (sic..) I would design a FF M9 with about 10.5 megapixels (or make it less 8 Mpix). Enough is enough and I prefer less noise and higher DR over more pixels any day. If someone wants to go over the top in enlargement then they can rent (or buy) a S2 or phaseone or hassy or whatever. Pixels are boring and Leica should tell the world at large that this is the case.

 

Photography is not about maximum resolution & using a magnifying glass to check if there isn't a pixel out of whack. It is about capturing light.

 

I have a different opinion, not necessaryly a better one. But I think Leica lenses are made to produce sharp pictures and resolution. You need 30 mpix or more to utilize their power.

A 30 mpix picture looks much sharper and richer than a 8 mpix picture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't wait more. Still more than 10 days. I can't sleep well at night. Does anybody know somebody in Solms that could give as a true rumour? How can they keep the secret?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, let's get back to the original question: the number of megapixels per se is not related to the issue of Leica rangefinder lenses. If Leica and Kodak have or do develop a sensor that works full-frame with M lenses, it will be mostly irrelevant whether it is 10Mpixels or 30 Mpixels, in terms of whether it works or not.

 

At the margins, a high-Mpixel sensor would be more noise-prone, and thus any processing correction for vignetting post-exposure to brighten the corners might tend to show more obviously noisier corners at 30 Mpixels than 10 or 18 (after "pushing" them to match the center).

 

And the finer the pixel pitch, the more precision is needed to offset the "offset" microlenses that help M lenses behave with a sensor.

 

I expect a full-frame M, whenever it appears, will be in the 15-20 Mpixel range.

 

For the record, you can't just slice off the edges of a sensor to make it smaller - sensors have a "frame" of electronics burned into the same silicon that handle the transfer and flow of data off the pixels, or act as reference pixels. Cut off that frame, and you have no sensor. It takes a whole new smaller "map" of the surface, with the frame moved in, to burn a smaller sensor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guy_mancuso

The theory is but not being a engineer here is they make 8 inch sensor wafers and depending on the build you can cut at the correct points a S2 size for example and maybe get 2 from that wafer but there maybe 3 sizes left for a M9 size. If we remember correctly the sensors are bigger when put into the camera and than masked off and the edges carry the electrical contacts.The DMR was like that and from memory you can actually see that. What I am saying is it works out to 24mpx given the FF size and the pixel pitch what Leica could possible be doing is some masking and it comes to 18 mpx reason I said it truly may not be 24x36mm as we know film is. It is possible just like the S2 it has it's own size and in relationship to film it may actually be a 1:2 crop or maybe better said bigger than the current M8. Obviously this is just a theory but given the fact the S2 is a 6 micron with micro lenses and building on type of sensor is certainly more cost effective than buying two different ones from Kodak. That there is a good chance here it could be given the numbers a 24mpx sensor thrown in there and masked down to make it work.

 

One reason is their are only 2 CCD sensors out there Dalsa and Kodak and there latest build that is public knowledge is 6 micron. Currently the S2 has it, Hassy 50 has it in the Kodak. Dalsa P40+, P65+ and Hassy 60 use the Dalsa. As we see it as the public that is what is out there today. Only other option is CMOS and my bet Leica would not go down that route. So in truth and what some people may already have heard or whatever is anyone really that sure what is truly inside the guts right now. Sure we heard the given 18 mpx and FF but another thought Hassy used the word FF and it was not even close. Not that Leica did as well but it seems to me their are some potential holes in all this and my bet to save money and technology available it is that Kodak sensor as being used in the S2.

 

Obviously I could be wrong but on the same hand obviously everyone else can too. What is rumored is just that. All I am saying is don't get fixated on anything yet and it certainly could be what has been floating around but as Mark pointed out cut to that FF size that we know 35mm film is it comes in at 24mpx with that pixel pitch. So how did we lose 6 mpx if that is the case. Just something to think about

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obviously I could be wrong but on the same hand obviously everyone else can too. What is rumored is just that. All I am saying is don't get fixated on anything yet and it certainly could be what has been floating around but as Mark pointed out cut to that FF size that we know 35mm film is it comes in at 24mpx with that pixel pitch. So how did we lose 6 mpx if that is the case. Just something to think about

 

Hi Guy

Well, the 18mp seems to be very popular . . . maybe they didn't use the S2 sensor at all . . . . 18mp at FF relates to exactly the same pixel pitch as the M8, which might suggest that the new sensor is an upsized and improved version of the M8 sensor rather than a downsized S2 sensor. Just applying dear Mr Occam to the situation:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guy, if you downsize the S2 sensor to 18mp it would result in an odd cropping factor of 1.15x.

 

Leica can certainly choose to do that, which would be "one step closer but not quite there yet" as some forum members heard from Stefan Daniel.

 

On the other hand, if Kodak has migrated to the 6 micron process, chances are very slim that they'll run 6.8 micron again just because of the M9.

 

So in general I don't believe the M9 will be full frame, it'll use a sensor based on the S2 structure but either be 1.15x at 18 mp or 1.33x at 13.5 mp.

 

This of course is only my educated guess, I love FF too but I don't think it'll happen this time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been wondering the same thing too. It's almost as if Dr.Kaufmann/Leica have taken a page out of the Steve Job/Apple book of marketing; this forum is beginning to resemble one of the numerous Apple forums (which I also frequent

). Bodes well for Leica if you ask me.

 

Here's another vote for rather seeing an 18mp machine than anything approaching 30mp. I can't imagine Leica would not improve on the M8's ISO performance.

 

I'm still having a hard time to catch up with the forum.

 

In January this year, Dr. Kaufmann said that full frame is a marketing trick and nobody should fall for it, in this June a good number of forum members heard straight from Stefan Daniel that they've made a step forward but not quite there yet.

 

On 9/9/9, we can already buy it???

 

This is an odd one which I'll believe only when I see it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Leica has never been famous for its marketing, but they would really be stepping on their collective dick if this isn't full frame -- the expectations are too high. If it's not FF, they should have started "not full frame" counter-rumors back in June. If they come up with a 13mp 1.33x, why would anyone trade up from an M8? And I think a lot of their business will be trade-ups. The M9, to warrant the number change, has to be a fairly definite step-up from an M8...

 

I'm still somewhat skeptical of anything being available soon, but I expect the announcement on 9/9 will have to do with a FF camera...and perhaps something else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well if it does come to pass and the Holy Grail (M9) is NOT FF...I would be rent...oh and gob smacked. I would not be parting with my pennies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If they come up with a 13mp 1.33x, why would anyone trade up from an M8?

 

For proper IR filtration, and perhaps better high ISO performance? There were countless forum threads suggesting improvement in many other areas such as focusing/frameline accuracy too.

 

Theoretically anything is possible including full frame. My point was, from what we've heard from Leica (in such a short period of time), the rumored M9 spec. and suggested price tag ... things don't add up.

 

Actually, if you take a second look at Mark's latest anatomy, 1.13x or 1.15x makes a lot of sense in my opinion and it matches the rumored 18 or 18.7MP pixel count exactly.

 

It's not full frame but close enough to be considered as full frame IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For proper IR filtration, and perhaps better high ISO performance? There were countless forum threads suggesting improvement in many other areas such as focusing/frameline accuracy too.

 

Theoretically anything is possible including full frame. My point was, from what we've heard from Leica (in such a short period of time), the rumored M9 spec. and suggested price tag ... things don't add up.

 

Actually, if you take a second look at Mark's latest anatomy, 1.13x or 1.15x makes a lot of sense in my opinion and it matches the rumored 18 or 18.7MP pixel count exactly.

 

It's not full frame but close enough to be considered as full frame IMO.

 

I would doubt that Leica would want to introduce another crop factor, other than FF. It wouldn't be very appealing for those of us who've got used to 28mm lenses having 38mm FoV, 75mm being like a 100mm etc. if the same lenses suddenly changed to be 32mm/85mm etc, It would introduce new lens lineup confusion. If it's not going to be FF, I'd rather that they stuck with the 1.33x factor so that the M8/M9 would be consistent.

 

I would also agree though that there are plenty of improvements that would be valuable and worth an upgrade even if the new alleged camera was not FF. Improved Noise/ISO/DR and IR would do it for me personally.

Edited by gwelland

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would doubt that Leica would want to introduce another crop factor, other than FF. It wouldn't be very appealing for those of us who've got used to 28mm lenses having 38mm FoV, 75mm being like a 100mm etc. if the same lenses suddenly changed to be 32mm/85mm etc, It would introduce new lens lineup confusion. If it's not going to be FF, I'd rather that they stuck with the 1.33x factor so that the M8/M9 would be consistent.

 

Well, it's all about the fun of speculation but, the beauty of all M cameras is that all you'd care about is the frameline, in this sense you don't need to worry much about the conversion of effective focal lengths especially when (if) it is close up to 1.1x.

 

Some folks speculate that the M9 could sport a 6.8 micron FF sensor which also adds up to 18.7mp, it is certainly possible too but if it turns out to be that case, I suspect that must be the M9 Steven K Lee announced prematurely at the last PMA not long before he got sacked. Leica must have a FF prototype since then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Maybe we need a head of R&D thread as well as an armchair CEO thread, or they might be merged to confine the plague:D

 

Anyway if I was responsible for Leica (sic..) I would design a FF M9 with about 10.5 megapixels (or make it less 8 Mpix). Enough is enough and I prefer less noise and higher DR over more pixels any day. If someone wants to go over the top in enlargement then they can rent (or buy) a S2 or phaseone or hassy or whatever. Pixels are boring and Leica should tell the world at large that this is the case.

 

Photography is not about maximum resolution & using a magnifying glass to check if there isn't a pixel out of whack. It is about capturing light.

 

For most part I would agree with the 10 mp sentiments. Except I have need for a higher mp count and reducing the problem of moire(both chromatic and luminance types). I rather not pp moire if possible.

 

And it is also generally accepted that more pixels help reduce the effect of noise in the final print. Not dynamic range though. I have not had the time to test that out on the 5DmkII or the D3X.

Edited by lxlim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they gave a 1.1X crop factor, would it be noticeable?

 

Thanks, Simon, for bringing up this possibility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If they gave a 1.1X crop factor, would it be noticeable?

 

I think that will (partly) depend on the magnification factor of the viewfinder, you can take a look at the 0.72x viewfinder below, what's the difference between a 50mm and 75mm frameline? will you notice it between 50mm and 55mm?

 

Look at the 0.58x finder again. can you see any difference between 50mm and 55mm at all?

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...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue., Read more about our Privacy Policy