Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Leicas and other Leica Mount Cameras > Leica M9 / ME

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

New M CMOS sensor vs M9 CCD, any thoughts??
Old 12-06-2012   #1
MVCG
Registered User
 
MVCG is offline
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 49
New M CMOS sensor vs M9 CCD, any thoughts??

I'm on a new M T240 waiting list and was thinking whether I would lose anything (photographically) by selling my M9 when buying the new M? I don't really know the theoretical difference between these sensor types (CCD vs CMOS) so thought to ask all of you informed and experienced followers if you can predict or know of any possible differences?
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-06-2012   #2
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
 
jaapv's Avatar
 
jaapv is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Hellevoetsluis,Netherlands
Posts: 7,989
The theoretical differences are quite irrelevant. The practical differences are more to the point. Right now they are known only to the beta testers and they are not breaking their NDA. So we just have to wait and see.
__________________
Jaap








jaapvphotography
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-06-2012   #3
Joosep
Registered User
 
Joosep is offline
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Tallinn, Estonia
Posts: 354
Read this.
Quote:
device production is an event that could possibly alter the product roadmaps and strategies of several companies."

Yes I am waiting for it to pop up in the tests...
__________________
click here for my babies
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-06-2012   #4
icebear
Registered User
 
icebear's Avatar
 
icebear is offline
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: just west of the big apple
Posts: 2,468
Quote:
Originally Posted by MVCG View Post
... if you can predict or know of any possible differences?
I assume no one has the crystal ball on RFF and there are no published files or prints available shot with the M (aka M10). Rumors speak of ISO 6400 with no grain at all, which would be a significant improvement over the M9. We will see.
__________________
Klaus
You have to be there !
M9, MM & a bunch of glass, Q

my gallery:http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...d=6650&showall
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-06-2012   #5
prosophos
Registered User
 
prosophos is offline
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 89
My prediction, since the M was announced:

At low ISO values the M9 will have superior IQ
(http://prosophos.com/2012/09/15/the-m9-and-ccd-sensor/)
and
(http://prosophos.com/2012/10/04/cmos...feeling-again/).

Do I know for sure? No. But I bet I'm correct, based on previous experience with CCD vs CMOS sensors.

Cheers,

Peter.
www.prosophos.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-06-2012   #6
ChrisP
Grain Lover
 
ChrisP's Avatar
 
ChrisP is offline
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Saskatoon, Sk, Canada
Posts: 342
My prediction would be to compare the output of your M9 to whatever D600 samples you can get a hold of. I'm going to guess the M's 24 mpx sensor will look remarkably similar to the one in D600.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-06-2012   #7
gustavoAvila
Registered User
 
gustavoAvila is offline
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisP View Post
My prediction would be to compare the output of your M9 to whatever D600 samples you can get a hold of. I'm going to guess the M's 24 mpx sensor will look remarkably similar to the one in D600.
I certainly hope not!

With Sony sensors in every new consumer camera (except for the larger sensor Canon's and the Nikon 1's), digital images are becoming boringly similar.

Hopefully the CMOSIS sensor brings something new and unique to the table with regard to image esthetics!
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-06-2012   #8
sleepyhead
Registered User
 
sleepyhead's Avatar
 
sleepyhead is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Posts: 1,565
Quote:
Originally Posted by gustavoAvila View Post
I certainly hope not!

With Sony sensors in every new consumer camera (except for the larger sensor Canon's and the Nikon 1's), digital images are becoming boringly similar.

Hopefully the CMOSIS sensor brings something new and unique to the table with regard to image esthetics!
I thought the aim of digital imaging technology was to capture as technically perfect image as possible, leaving the "character" of the image to postprocessing. At least that's what I would want if I didn't still shoot film, where I can change the chacrater to some extent by changing the type of film.

Sorry to get off topic - was just surprised to read this sentiment.
__________________
__________________
Film for B&W, digital for colour

Last edited by sleepyhead : 12-06-2012 at 20:24. Reason: fixed spelling errors
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-07-2012   #9
Range-rover
Registered User
 
Range-rover is offline
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,572
It's not the sensor guy's it's each of the cameras company's processor's, they tweek
the outputs here and there till they get what they want, and remember there's only
three colors on a sensor red, green and blue and you mix that all together and you
get oh my what a mess! where's my film camera!


Range
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-07-2012   #10
doolittle
Registered User
 
doolittle's Avatar
 
doolittle is offline
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Ireland
Age: 44
Posts: 583
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joosep View Post
Read this.



Yes I am waiting for it to pop up in the tests...
Thanks for the link - interesting!

I'm am sure there will be lots of comparison tests between the M9 and the M when it is finally released.

The fog in my crystal ball tells me that there will be subtle nuances which many will prefer in the M9 low iso files (more film like will be the quote). However the M files won't be half bad either and more than acceptable, and at higher iso there will be no contest. What should really win everybody over is the bigger buffer and faster electronics which will banish many of the quirks of the M9 (speaking as an M8 user, which is, I gather, a degree quirkier again than the M9).
__________________
--

fixerofshadows.blogspot.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-07-2012   #11
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
 
semilog's Avatar
 
semilog is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,722
Quote:
Originally Posted by gustavoAvila View Post
With Sony sensors in every new consumer camera (except for the larger sensor Canon's and the Nikon 1's), digital images are becoming boringly similar.
The reason Sony sensors have assumed a dominant position is their technical superiority. What the photographer does pre- and post- exposure determines how the image looks. The sensor, one hopes, is as neutral, efficient, and linear a transducer of the lens's projection as possible.
__________________
There are two kinds of photographers:
those who are interested in what a particular camera can't do,
and those who are interested in what it can do.

semilog.smugmug.com | flickr.com/photos/semilog/
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-07-2012   #12
Ron (Netherlands)
Registered User
 
Ron (Netherlands)'s Avatar
 
Ron (Netherlands) is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 1,918
They built in live view, that is a pity because without live view they would have used a bigger part of the sensor for the actual still photography. M8 and M9 are really very bad on high iso so if you shoot a lot in the dark, go for the cmos sensor. If you altogether want something which produces 'better' files, go for the D800 - I saw stunning files coming out of that camera (of course you'll loose the rangefinder experience)!
__________________
__________________
When day is done......

Leica: IIa synch conversion, IIIb, M6 TTL Millenium, Rolleicord V, Rolleiflex 3.5F, Rolleiflex 2.8A

My Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-07-2012   #13
v_roma
Registered User
 
v_roma is offline
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 550
Sensors may or may not be neutral (I'm not sure if there aren't inherent qualities to a sensor when it comes to color capture and other things) but the processors used by a camera/company certainly aren't neutral, as Range-rover pointed out. And that affects both RAW and JPEG files. And, even if you intend to do post-processing, it's a lot easier to start with a camera that produces whatever colors you are happy with (because they are accurate or you just find them pleasing).
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-07-2012   #14
Pioneer
Registered User
 
Pioneer's Avatar
 
Pioneer is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Age: 62
Posts: 2,280
Yes. Those of you who prefer to shoot in a low light environment will definitely want to buy the new M...

...and then one of you will feel strangely compelled to sell your lightly used Monochrom to me for a VERY low price.

Just focus on the swinging disc and repeat after me...

  Reply With Quote

Old 12-07-2012   #15
douglasf13
Registered User
 
douglasf13's Avatar
 
douglasf13 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 505
A big difference in the output between the new M and something like a Nikon will likely be the color filter that Leica uses on top of the sensor, assuming they use something similar to the M9's. Leica (and, btw, Sony cameras) tends to focus on good color over great low light performance, whereas Nikon and Canon tend to use weaker color filters to improve low light performance.

Another thing to consider is, while the M will surely perform better in lowlight than the M9, it'll likely also have better dynamic range at low ISO. We'll see. Either way, digital cameras are to the point where they're all pretty good to me, so upgrading would be like trying a new film, which, although it sounds fun, it doesn't sound all that enticing for another $7K. Unless the new M's output is outrageously preferable to me, I'll likely stick with my M9 until it dies. I rarely print over 13x19, anyways, so the M9 does a great job.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-07-2012   #16
Tom Niblick
Registered User
 
Tom Niblick is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 222
I'm mostly curious to see the dynamic range of the new M. If this sensor allows for 1-2 stops more shadow detail compared to the M9, then it could produce better B&W files than the MM. That might be why there is such a slow release planned for this new camera. $1,000 less than the MM, weatherproof, live view, video...

Personally, I need a second body. There are a lot of good choices out there. M, MM, M8, M9 or Nikon D800E. Being patient for the next 6 months in order to see samples and hear the user reports will be the hard part.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-11-2012   #17
Lachie C
Registered User
 
Lachie C is offline
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron (Netherlands) View Post
They built in live view, that is a pity because without live view they would have used a bigger part of the sensor for the actual still photography. M8 and M9 are really very bad on high iso so if you shoot a lot in the dark, go for the cmos sensor. If you altogether want something which produces 'better' files, go for the D800 - I saw stunning files coming out of that camera (of course you'll loose the rangefinder experience)!
I think you'll find live-view is more or less 'free' on modern sensors. The most expensive thing about live-view for leica would be 2 extra buttons, video (liveview with compressed data output to memory card...) and make sure the battery could take it.

One would hope Leica have learnt a lot about power management in cameras...

The new M is also in a new body with a new image processor; only a fool would develop either without video capabilities in the current climate.

Quote:
Originally Posted by douglasf13 View Post
A big difference in the output between the new M and something like a Nikon will likely be the color filter that Leica uses on top of the sensor, assuming they use something similar to the M9's. Leica (and, btw, Sony cameras) tends to focus on good color over great low light performance, whereas Nikon and Canon tend to use weaker color filters to improve low light performance.

Another thing to consider is, while the M will surely perform better in lowlight than the M9, it'll likely also have better dynamic range at low ISO. We'll see. Either way, digital cameras are to the point where they're all pretty good to me, so upgrading would be like trying a new film, which, although it sounds fun, it doesn't sound all that enticing for another $7K. Unless the new M's output is outrageously preferable to me, I'll likely stick with my M9 until it dies. I rarely print over 13x19, anyways, so the M9 does a great job.
Plus all that stuff.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-11-2012   #18
flyalf
Registered User
 
flyalf is offline
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Norway, Tromsų
Posts: 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by douglasf13 View Post
...
Unless the new M's output is outrageously preferable to me, I'll likely stick with my M9 until it dies. I rarely print over 13x19, anyways, so the M9 does a great job.
Not making any guesses about the M, I would comment on the M9. I dont think we are limited to 13x19 with M9, I've made 1m prints that suits me .

Not meaning to nitpick.
__________________
Regards, Alf Sollund, Tromsų, Norway
------------------------------------
http://alfsollund.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-11-2012   #19
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: NYC
Age: 42
Posts: 16,858
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lachie C View Post
The new M is also in a new body with a new image processor; only a fool would develop either without video capabilities in the current climate.
Well, that may be a little overboard. If anyone can get away with it, it's Leica.
__________________
Fujifilm X-Pro2 / X100T / X-E2 / X70 and Nikon DF
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-11-2012   #20
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
 
jaapv's Avatar
 
jaapv is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Hellevoetsluis,Netherlands
Posts: 7,989
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Niblick View Post
I'm mostly curious to see the dynamic range of the new M. If this sensor allows for 1-2 stops more shadow detail compared to the M9, then it could produce better B&W files than the MM.
We can file this one under wishful thinking. The strength of the Monochrome comes from the removal of the Bayer filter with its attendant elimination of the (chromatic) aberrations it produces and the lack of interpolation artifacts. Neither of which is implemented in the M. That one will be a superb color camera, outperforming just about any current camera, but the Monochrome will still rule in the B&W domain.
__________________
Jaap








jaapvphotography
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-11-2012   #21
mani
Registered User
 
mani is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 672
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaapv View Post
That one will be a superb color camera, outperforming just about any current camera
As someone who loves my Leica cameras and (particularly) lenses, I still cringe with embarrassment at statements like this, about a totally unknown future quantity.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-11-2012   #22
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
 
jaapv's Avatar
 
jaapv is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Hellevoetsluis,Netherlands
Posts: 7,989
Cringe away - it won't be film

'T is just a prediction based on what I pick up in the field....
__________________
Jaap








jaapvphotography
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-11-2012   #23
maitani
Registered User
 
maitani's Avatar
 
maitani is online now
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 726
from my photokina hands on I dare to say the new M will have super clean 3200, usable up to 5000 iso (alright i have no crystal ball, but this was my impression on the pre-production display pics zoomed to the maximum)

where the M9 hits the limit at around iso 1600.

The main advantege of the new M is that you can use just about any lens ever produced on it.
OM's nikkors, pentax, whatever you like..
thanks to focus peaking and the big and nice display, (also the elecronical finder) not my thing, but can be useful for longer lenses as visoflex. but if you want this it's there. it's the closest to a universal digiback we've seen yet.

the projected framelines, video, etc. are all pluses too, for whom needs it. the processing speed on the new M is amazing, quick write times, quick re-shoot times (this is a slight weakness of the M9 too, rather slow write times due to CCD sensor readout)

If you're the pure rangefinder guy and plan to use M lenses only. and the experience is important to you an M9 might still be the way to go.

I'm most curious if they manage to transfer 'some' of the CCD magic, to the new tweaked CMOS(is) technology, I'm certain it will be beat the M9 at high-iso, but I'm even more curious if it will beat the M9 at base iso.




one of the tech guys on the photokina booth told me it's the goal to retain the special look of CCD as far as possible, and don't look to different to the previous Leica bodys.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-11-2012   #24
douglasf13
Registered User
 
douglasf13's Avatar
 
douglasf13 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by flyalf View Post
Not making any guesses about the M, I would comment on the M9. I dont think we are limited to 13x19 with M9, I've made 1m prints that suits me .

Not meaning to nitpick.
Sure, you can print larger with the M9. I'm just saying that I rarely print larger than 13x19, so I'll likely stick with the M9.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-11-2012   #25
doolittle
Registered User
 
doolittle's Avatar
 
doolittle is offline
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Ireland
Age: 44
Posts: 583
Is there any indication when the first M reviews and image samples will come out? I am guessing the firmware must be approaching release version and that pre-production review copies are soon to be (or already?) out there, with non-disclosure agreements attached?
__________________
--

fixerofshadows.blogspot.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-11-2012   #26
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
 
jaapv's Avatar
 
jaapv is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Hellevoetsluis,Netherlands
Posts: 7,989
I'm sure the betatesters have been at it for a while already. Leica wants to get this one right, clearly. My guess is that the first meaningful publications will not appear before early spring.
__________________
Jaap








jaapvphotography
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-11-2012   #27
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
 
semilog's Avatar
 
semilog is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,722
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron (Netherlands) View Post
They built in live view, that is a pity because without live view they would have used a bigger part of the sensor for the actual still photography.
Nope. You misunderstand how live view works on current CMOS sensors. There is not a penalty for still images, except that live view can heat the sensor up somewhat, resulting in slightly increased noise. On the other hand, one can actually achieve exact rather than approximate focus, which is particularly important to extract the performance of really good fast lenses and subjects not at the center of the frame. Live view is, in other words, essential to extract the full optical potential of modern Leica M lenses.
__________________
There are two kinds of photographers:
those who are interested in what a particular camera can't do,
and those who are interested in what it can do.

semilog.smugmug.com | flickr.com/photos/semilog/
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-11-2012   #28
doolittle
Registered User
 
doolittle's Avatar
 
doolittle is offline
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Ireland
Age: 44
Posts: 583
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaapv View Post
I'm sure the betatesters have been at it for a while already. Leica wants to get this one right, clearly. My guess is that the first meaningful publications will not appear before early spring.
I am really hoping that the user experience of the M is the biggest improvement. More so than the sensor performance.

At lower iso at any rate the output produced by the M8 and M9 are phenomenal.

Maybe my view is coloured too much by personal experience, but I have developed a prejudice that the M8 (and by extension the M9, though I have never used one!) have a firmware that at best could be described as quirky and at worst possibly down right flakey.

I am really hoping the bigger battery, combined with better power management and speedier electronics and the bigger buffer will be a revelation.
__________________
--

fixerofshadows.blogspot.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-11-2012   #29
NazgulKing
Registered User
 
NazgulKing is offline
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 202
People are getting ridiculously high on "oh I don't need that feature", "oh this is not just for still photographers" or "why didn't they fulfill my every single whim and needs" etc. etc. Everytime they get dragged out of their comfort zone, they have to be dragged screaming and shouting. Some of these features hardly impede their normal shooting habits, but it hasn't stopped the chest thumping that is getting ridiculous.

AT the core of it all, the question of the "look" will ultimately depend on what kind of data is extracted out of the sensor and how it is processed. CCD and CMOS tech these days perform very similarly. To wit: http://www.teledynedalsa.com/corp/ma...D_vs_CMOS.aspx

As for live view, it's just real time read out of the sensor. Nothing to it. Even CCD sensors can be used to do that. Just slap a heat sink if it gets too hot that's all.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-11-2012   #30
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
 
jaapv's Avatar
 
jaapv is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Hellevoetsluis,Netherlands
Posts: 7,989
Not much slapping space for heat sinks in M bodies I would say
Anyway, you are forgetting one thing: the M (8,9,M,MM) is not about image quality as long as it is good to excellent. The whole point of the camera is about ergonomics, RF experience, intangible Leica feel etc. Otherwise we would all be using some DSLR brick.
So it is quite normal for users to get nervous when Leica starts changing -to them (us)- essentials and to ask whether Live View and Video do not impinge the gestalt of the camera.
Of course the rationale is clear - the camera needs to become more mainstream to remain viable, but Leica carefully kept building the pure digital M in the form of the ME, very aware as they are of these sensibilities.
__________________
Jaap








jaapvphotography
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-11-2012   #31
douglasf13
Registered User
 
douglasf13's Avatar
 
douglasf13 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaapv View Post
Not much slapping space for heat sinks in M bodies I would say
Anyway, you are forgetting one thing: the M (8,9,M,MM) is not about image quality as long as it is good to excellent. The whole point of the camera is about ergonomics, RF experience, intangible Leica feel etc. Otherwise we would all be using some DSLR brick.
So it is quite normal for users to get nervous when Leica starts changing -to them (us)- essentials and to ask whether Live View and Video do not impinge the gestalt of the camera.
Of course the rationale is clear - the camera needs to become more mainstream to remain viable, but Leica carefully kept building the pure digital M in the form of the ME, very aware as they are of these sensibilities.
Agreed, Jaap. Not to compare Sony to Leica, but a similar thing happened to Sony with their A900 DSLR. IMO, that's still one of the best DSLRs around, in terms of user experience. It had the best viewfinder of any DSLR to date, the controls were fantastic, and the IQ, while not quite as clean as today's cameras, was very good. When that camera arrived, the biggest complaint was that it didn't have live view or video, which never bothered me one bit. Fast forward four years, and we have a new Sony A99 which has completely reversed course by being based off of live view, and it doesn't even have an OVF at all.

I'm not saying that Leica will remove the rangefinder altogether, but I personally started using the M9 to go back to a simpler form of rangefinder shooting, so all of the bells and whistles of the new M don't really interest me, outside of maybe the quieter shutter and weather sealing.

Either way, as long as Leica doesn't get rid of the classic features of the M series, like the rangefinder, I'm ok with more features that I personally won't use. However, if the success of these new features sends Leica in a new direction, that would be a disappointment.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-11-2012   #32
colonel
Registered User
 
colonel is offline
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by semilog View Post
Live view is, in other words, essential to extract the full optical potential of modern Leica M lenses.
I don't agree. I get pin sharp at f1.4 everytime with the M9/MM

My 2 cents is that for off centre subjects, live view is ok on a tripod, but impractical for hand held
Focus and re-compose works fine as long as the subject is not close.

The only way for fast accurate off-centre focus at very close distances is using contrast detect AF.

Off centre can also be achieved comfortably using cropping with 18mp, especially as the M9 is usualy pixel level sharp.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jaapv View Post
the M (8,9,M,MM) is not about image quality as long as it is good to excellent.
oh it is. thats the whole rationale behind Leica lenses' unequaled excellence optically
its the sensor + lens combination, and the M9 sensor can deliver at 160 and 320
Of course the workflow and ergonomics are also key to the Leica experience. more difficult to master then a DSLR, but once mastered better pictures result.
Love it or hate it!
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-11-2012   #33
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
 
semilog's Avatar
 
semilog is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,722
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaapv View Post
The whole point of the camera is about ergonomics, RF experience, intangible Leica feel etc.
I do not think that that word, "intangible," means what you think it means.
__________________
There are two kinds of photographers:
those who are interested in what a particular camera can't do,
and those who are interested in what it can do.

semilog.smugmug.com | flickr.com/photos/semilog/
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-11-2012   #34
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
 
jaapv's Avatar
 
jaapv is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Hellevoetsluis,Netherlands
Posts: 7,989
I think I do ;http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/intangible
__________________
Jaap








jaapvphotography
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-11-2012   #35
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
 
semilog's Avatar
 
semilog is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,722
Quote:
Originally Posted by colonel View Post
I don't agree. I get pin sharp at f1.4 everytime with the M9/MM
MTF falls off precipitously with even slight focus error, and focus-recompose (necessary of any subject not at the center of the frame) is inherently inaccurate. Field curvature adds to the difficulties.

You may be happy with your results. That is not the same thing as saying that you are extracting the full potential of M system optics.

Leica's engineers know this, and that is precisely why they have designed the new M in the way that they have.
__________________
There are two kinds of photographers:
those who are interested in what a particular camera can't do,
and those who are interested in what it can do.

semilog.smugmug.com | flickr.com/photos/semilog/
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-11-2012   #36
hellomikmik
Registered User
 
hellomikmik's Avatar
 
hellomikmik is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Suomi
Posts: 220
Quote:
Originally Posted by MVCG View Post
... I don't really know the theoretical difference between these sensor types (CCD vs CMOS) so thought to ask all of you informed and experienced followers if you can predict or know of any possible differences?
The main theoretical difference is that Leica's new FF sensors supplier is "brand new". That means: or 1) they are going to make something exceptional or 2) it's going to be a little fiasco. I wish them good luck and hope for them the sensor and camera will work as announced, charged for and expected.

Not on the subject:
I think the camera announced on 9/9/09 can start to be called Leica M9 "classic" (means it's not M9-P, MM or ME or this Hermes thing). Isn't it romantic?... It probably represents something with its rather special Kodak (RIP) CCD. After lot of sympathy for M3 and M6, I see only one successor for them - No 9 ("MM" is also nice but that's personal, not mathematical).
__________________
flexibility is life
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-11-2012   #37
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
 
semilog's Avatar
 
semilog is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,722
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaapv View Post
Look at the word's etymology. Something tangible is, literally, something that may be touched.

Latin: tangere -- to touch.

A camera's ergonomics and feel are -- by definition -- the tangible aspects of the device.
__________________
There are two kinds of photographers:
those who are interested in what a particular camera can't do,
and those who are interested in what it can do.

semilog.smugmug.com | flickr.com/photos/semilog/
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-11-2012   #38
hellomikmik
Registered User
 
hellomikmik's Avatar
 
hellomikmik is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Suomi
Posts: 220
Quote:
Originally Posted by semilog View Post
I do not think that that word, "intangible," means what you think it means.
for example price is something that is "intangible"
__________________
flexibility is life
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-11-2012   #39
colonel
Registered User
 
colonel is offline
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by semilog View Post
MTF falls off precipitously with even slight focus error,
Leica's engineers know this, and that is precisely why they have designed the new system in this way.
At 2 metres with a 50mm lens at f1.4 the DOF is 13cm.
We can all make far less error then this and I don't think the MTA would be effected.
For 35mm it's more then double

Live view was introduced to keep up with the joneses, allow video, allow longer telephoto lenses and allow a different focus technique that many people like using a tripod.
I don't think it had anything to do with the quality of detail.
R lens compatability was just a bonus. I am sure that Leica will be bringing out long focal length M lenses at some point.

IMHO obviously this could be speculated endlessly, but I am pretty sure that detail was not an objective of live view.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-11-2012   #40
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
 
semilog's Avatar
 
semilog is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,722
Quote:
Originally Posted by colonel View Post
IMHO obviously this could be speculated endlessly, but I am pretty sure that detail was not an objective of live view.
Erwin Puts, and Lloyd Chambers (e.g., here) among others, would disagree with you.

The plane of critical focus is far, far shallower than indicated by a DoF scale, and field curvature is present even in many of the best lenses from Leica and other marques.

This is in fact easy to see. Put, say, a 35/1.4 ASPH on any good mirrorless body (NEX-5, GRD, XE-1, OM-D, etc.) and use magnified live view to focus. You will see, in real time, that considerably finer adjustments than suggested by the DoF scale make a big difference.

For further information see e.g. John Williams, Image Clarity, ISBN 0240800338.

I find it bizarre that Leica shooters would spend huge amounts of money on optics and then reject a feature that allows the performance potential of those optics -- the reason for spending big bucks in the first place -- to more readily be harnessed.
__________________
There are two kinds of photographers:
those who are interested in what a particular camera can't do,
and those who are interested in what it can do.

semilog.smugmug.com | flickr.com/photos/semilog/
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:16.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.