Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
like_no_other

**M9 - 30+ mpix**

Recommended Posts

Guest guy_mancuso
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.

 

See this is what makes me wonder is it is a 6.8 micron Kodak which reality is the same as my P30+. This is a older sensor style which with micro lenses on mine is still awesome and maybe they got a good deal on them to put them in the M9 and go FF and this maybe the real case which does not take advantage of the S2 technology which is a different sensor. But let's for example say it is the same P30+ sensor which my back is the only back that will do 1600 ISO. My fear is this sensor can't really be taken much further than that unless something came out of thin air otherwise Phase would have done it also not to mention Hassy and Sinar uses it also in one of there backs. Now the 1600 is good but not stellar with regards to noise although my ISO 800 is very good.

 

I guess we have to have a real number of Mpx to figure this out because if we went with the S2 in FF it is 24mpx FF sizing. Really hard to pinpoint what they used given the S2 is being released and only makes logical sense they used that which does have a better higher ISO range. Guess we will know one way or the other on the 9th that is if it truly is being announced which personally and no inside knowledge from Leica itself but I have some doubts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At 1.1x, you are talking about differences that fall within the margins of error anyway.

 

Leica "50mm" lenses are often close to 53mm in true focal length - and most others have some variation, also.

 

The extension factor you get focusing at 1m or .7m instead of infinity is about a 15% change (which is why the framelines are so rough at infinity - they have a built-in crop factor of 1.15x compared to the captured image at infinity).

 

Wide lenses tend to project the image slantwise "under" the edges of the film gate on film, making the final negative size larger than a frame shot with a 90 or 135 - the old 21mm Super-Angulons and 15 Hologons produced negs that sometimes impinged on the sprocket holes, they were so much larger. Which amounted to about a .95x crop factor compared to the longer lenses - from the same camera.

 

Slide mounts or negative carriers (unless filed out) impose their own crop factors of 1.05x or so.

 

I've shot Mamiya 6, Mamiya C330, Hassy, and Rollei TLR over the past decade, and every single one of them produced a slightly different quote-6x6-unquote negative size - none of which came close to 6cm x 6cm. Or even a perfect square. Varied from 53 x 55 to 54 x 54 to 55 x 56.

 

I imagine if you measured Nikon, Canon, Leica R, Leica M(21mm) and Leica M(90mm) negs/slides, you'd get a fair variation in actual image sizes as well.

 

Which raises the question "Whose full-frame? And what is it?" Exactly, precisely 24mm x 36mm? - or 23.5 x 35.5mm? - or 23mm x 35mm? - or any mixture therein?

 

I agree with those who think Leica won't bother with another "intermediate" format. When they can do "full-frame" - and I'll count 23 x 35 as full-frame - they'll do it. Until then, they'll stick with 1.33x.

 

Won't be anywhere near 30 Mpixels, either.

 

-------

 

(Edit) I just measured some old negs out of the same M body - "135" neg measured 23mm x 34.92mm, "21 S-A" neg measured 24mm x 35.7mm. From a Canon F-1: 23mm x 34.5mm. Tell me which of those is "full-frame" - and I'll tell you the "M9's" crop factor.

Edited by adan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It likely would not be too costly for Kodak to take S2 sensor technology and combine it with larger photosites for better high-iso performance. Once you can do 6 micron photosites, building a sensor with larger sites should (even in moderate numbers) be enough cheaper to merit the development cost.

 

M8 photo quality, full frame 18Mp and two stops better high iso would certainly get Leica my camera money for next year. My M8 has been simply outstanding, so any new digital M is going to get some thoughtful evaluation.

 

Speculation is fun, but I'm mostly looking forward to seeing what comes on the 9th (or whenever after)!

 

Later,

 

Clyde

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guy_mancuso

Well Andy that maybe the case i guess if we talk the S2 sensor which we figure to be 24mpx so maybe Leica did a little masking to 23X35 in which I think something like this must be the case because I would assume and bet pretty heavily on the fact they are stealing the S2 sensor technology to use in the M9 it only makes the most logical sense to me. They can save a lot of money on the purchase of the same technology being used between the two and admittedly Leica said it will take advantage of any S2 technology in future product. So maybe some little bit of masking will get it down to 18 mpx plus or minus a little here without any real effect on focal length and frame lines which i still bet are electronic. I have been betting on this one for 2 years now. LOL At some point in time i may actually win that bet. ROTFLMAO

 

Now this is all based on the assumption about the rumor being it is 18 mpx. Which in reality could be dead wrong and this conversation was worthless but fun to discuss anyway. LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guy_mancuso
It likely would not be too costly for Kodak to take S2 sensor technology and combine it with larger photosites for better high-iso performance. Once you can do 6 micron photosites, building a sensor with larger sites should (even in moderate numbers) be enough cheaper to merit the development cost.

 

M8 photo quality, full frame 18Mp and two stops better high iso would certainly get Leica my camera money for next year. My M8 has been simply outstanding, so any new digital M is going to get some thoughtful evaluation.

 

Speculation is fun, but I'm mostly looking forward to seeing what comes on the 9th (or whenever after)!

 

Later,

 

Clyde

 

Clyde not being the engineer here you could be exactly right take the technology and increase it to 6.8 microns and still save a bunch of money on the costs.

 

We need a engineer here to let us know if this makes any sense as well to be able to do that. I simply don't know that one but a interesting thought for sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guy_mancuso

BTW i agree with Andy what is Full Frame in digital it could mean anything. Just take the s2 technical it is full frame. It's not 35mm FF and it's not 645 FF but it is it's own FF camera.

 

We actually and i know this is changing way to many brain waves from our past but any size sensor is what it is and considered FF for that camera. I have been shooting a 1.3 crop since the DMR than M8 and now a P30+ and to me after 4 or so years it is FF in my thoughts. I know a hard one to grasp and actually think that way but digital is not film either. I know for many that maybe a bunk comment but if you sit and think about it what really is FF now that this is a new medium.

 

I know, I know you all want a FF M9 sensor and i am not here to argue that point but the medium has changed

Edited by guy_mancuso

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guy, I agree on the whole with your last affirmation, but the problem is that we have already the fullframe M film cameras and 1,33x M8 digital. formats.

Framing a 24Mp 24x36 sensor to 18Mp. means a crop factor of 1.15x. Another one. That would give us a sensor of 21x31.5 mm. - quite less than the 23x34mm. of a typical slide mount.

For sure 1.15x it's an improvement over 1.33x, but a bit frustrating, and an added hassle factor for the user of film M and digital M cameras, regarding the focal length equivalents for each format and the need of different ext. viewfinders for WA lenses, depending on the camera.

( FOV of a 21mm. on a M8 = 24mm on a M9 = 28mm, on a M7..).

Really I hope the M9 will be 1.00x or 1.05x at most, even if that means waiting some extra months for the release.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi All

all the rumours say it's full frame (as far as I can see)

all the rumours say it's 18mp (as far as I can see)

That makes a 6.8 pixel pitch . . . which is the same as the M8

 

stir in a little of Mr Willam of Occam's razor and . . . .

boing - the sensor is similar to the M8, and not based on a cut down S2 sensor.

 

But maybe I'm missing something here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guy_mancuso

Your supposed to be packing bud. LOL

 

My only real issue with that using a larger version of the same sensor is noise which I brought up earlier. Given the older 6.8 sensor like I have I can only get to 1600 and rumor has it this M9 is supposed to be good at high ISO. Okay that is rumor and frankly I have not been paying much attention to any M9 stuff until maybe 2 weeks ago , my thrust has been the S2. Obviously not being the engineer here and working with CCD sensors for maybe 5 years now we have seen low ISO numbers with them. Obviously Kodak could have come out with a better 6.8 sensor for the M9 and add in the processor and electronics maybe I am looking at losing a steak dinner bet. I think it is the S2 sensor and that is my bet on it.

 

But seriously I have no inside knowledge like I have had before so in the same guessing boat as any one else. And honestly this is has been a very rare moment I have even talked about the M9. I just hope it meets the rumors on it and if it is even announced. Personally for me having a MF camera and a M system would truly be my way of camera's. I would love to have the go anywhere camera that I don't have with MF but still be able to knock out great images with it and be a backup that can also shoot certain jobs. Just hard to afford both

 

 

Well I will just wait to the 9th and see what happens. Steak dinner money put aside in a drawer. LOL

Edited by guy_mancuso

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Personally for me having a MF camera and a M system would truly be my way of camera's. I would love to have the go anywhere camera that I don't have with MF but still be able to knock out great images with it and be a backup that can also shoot certain jobs. Just hard to afford both

 

 

Well I will just wait to the 9th and see what happens. Steak dinner money put aside in a drawer. LOL

 

Guy, you've hit the nail on the head for me there ... my gut tells me that the S2 is going to be steak and sizzle. Add in an M9 with the previously discussed updates and I'm salivating. I'd put both systems to great use, but, sadly, the cost of acquisition will force me down only one of the roads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guy_mancuso

Exactly and i just don't have enough banks and different ski masks to pull that off. LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When it comes to sensor technology I could imagine a number of factors where pixel size is one, obviously very important for high ISO performance. Then I can imagine innovations on the Bayer pattern and improved colour filters with better spectral properties and higher transmission. Further, we can improve the micro lenses with better focus, wider capture angles, higher transmission and lower leakage across pixels. Finally there is the sensor silicon which can improve the micro structure and material for higher quantum efficiency and lower noise.

 

I believe that apart from pixel size any manufacturer would struggle to magically improve high ISO performance more than slightly, i.e. dreaming of several stops better for a given pixel size is very optimistic.

 

Also, why would Leica+Kodak put EVERYTHING they now have from R&D into the M9 and exhaust their ability to deliver further improvements in the near future?

 

So, I think, at least this is what I would do if I was Leica to sell more over time:

 

- M9 with new FF sensor with same pixel size as M8 but slightly improved to give ISO1250 close to the same performance as the M8 at ISO640. Electronics from S2 and rangefinder from M7.

 

- M10 with primary upgrade from M9 being significantly redesigned rangefinder, perhaps electronic framelines, diopter adjustment, possibly next generation Maestro, possibly very slightly improved sensor.

 

- M11 with primary upgrade a new sensor with smaller pixels but still the same high ISO performance as before. Again next generation Maestro and small improvements on body details. Much improved battery capacity.

 

- M12 generally small improvements everywhere but now two versions with M12.1 and 8mu pixels (13.5 Mpix) for extreme low light plus speed and M12.2 with 4mu pixels (54Mpix) for high resolution to make good use of lens capability (cf Nikon D3X and D3).

 

Of course, in parallel deliver a steady stream of new and exciting optics to go with the cameras.

 

Great fun to speculate

 

Regards

Per

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

 

and in 10,10,10 @10 we would get the M10 with 24mp's based on the S2 sensor?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think you'll lose the bet. The M9 with an 18MP full frame sensor (and available in September) is pretty much public knowledge now. I'd be astonished if any of this tuns out to be wrong.

 

I do not believe in an 18MP FF sensor. No sensor vendor nor camera vendor does produce such a thing.

 

Who came actually up with 18MP FF? Are there any real references to Leica or their people or are there just rumors?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
When it comes to sensor technology I could imagine a number of factors where pixel size is one, obviously very important for high ISO performance. Then I can imagine innovations on the Bayer pattern and improved colour filters with better spectral properties and higher transmission. Further, we can improve the micro lenses with better focus, wider capture angles, higher transmission and lower leakage across pixels. Finally there is the sensor silicon which can improve the micro structure and material for higher quantum efficiency and lower noise.

 

I believe that apart from pixel size any manufacturer would struggle to magically improve high ISO performance more than slightly, i.e. dreaming of several stops better for a given pixel size is very optimistic.

 

Also, why would Leica+Kodak put EVERYTHING they now have from R&D into the M9 and exhaust their ability to deliver further improvements in the near future?

 

So, I think, at least this is what I would do if I was Leica to sell more over time:

 

- M9 with new FF sensor with same pixel size as M8 but slightly improved to give ISO1250 close to the same performance as the M8 at ISO640. Electronics from S2 and rangefinder from M7.

 

- M10 with primary upgrade from M9 being significantly redesigned rangefinder, perhaps electronic framelines, diopter adjustment, possibly next generation Maestro, possibly very slightly improved sensor.

 

- M11 with primary upgrade a new sensor with smaller pixels but still the same high ISO performance as before. Again next generation Maestro and small improvements on body details. Much improved battery capacity.

 

- M12 generally small improvements everywhere but now two versions with M12.1 and 8mu pixels (13.5 Mpix) for extreme low light plus speed and M12.2 with 4mu pixels (54Mpix) for high resolution to make good use of lens capability (cf Nikon D3X and D3).

 

Of course, in parallel deliver a steady stream of new and exciting optics to go with the cameras.

 

Great fun to speculate

 

Regards

Per

 

And then you wake up

 

No way we will see these things coming up in the next decade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and in 10,10,10 @10 we would get the M10 with 24mp's based on the S2 sensor?

 

Photokina 2010 runs from 21/09/2010 through 26/09/2010, so that's quite possible they'll start delivering the M10 (if there's such as thing) on 10/10/2010.

 

Gentlemen, FF 18.7mp is exactly what Leica could have done more than a year ago and as announced by Steven K Lee at the last PMA in February 2008, are they still hanging on it? possibly but I very much doubt so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I do not believe in an 18MP FF sensor. No sensor vendor nor camera vendor does produce such a thing.

 

Who came actually up with 18MP FF? Are there any real references to Leica or their people or are there just rumors?

 

18.7MP FF for euro 5500 was first seen on a French dealer's web site and posted here not very long ago, Peter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The same pixel size combined with newer technology could mean big improvements in the IQ department, which to me is far more important than a higher (30MP+) resolution. I hope for ISO 100-3200, with 1600 being clean-ish and 800 being perfect. I don't think this is unreasonable, given how good the M8 already was.

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...