The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Photokina and the new M

D&A

Well-known member
This is just a hypothetical....but lets say Leica in selecting a CMOS for the new M has to make a decision of balancing high ISO performance vs. color depth, tonality etc. . They could push the usable ISO high and sacrifice color (or) keep it reasonably low (but an improvement over that seen in the M9) and concentrate on the aesthetics of the image or thirdly, maybe something in-between. That often does seem the dilemma of CMOS based sensors. If this is the case, Leica has to decide on a strategy and if we take SD interview verbatim, Leica may have felt that if they could at least come close to matching the color and the rest of the aesthetics of the M9 image in the new M while at the same time meeting the requirements of considerably superior high ISO performance, they may have met their design goals. I'm not implying that acheiving high ISO performance vs. accurate and pleasing color etc. is inversly proportional and linear, but assuming it's somewhat of a tradeoff, Leica may have found themselves in the dilemma of knowing that the majority of their base core of users (and even attracting new ones) expect better high ISO performance this time around from this new camera...and so they will strive to achieve this without too much if any sacrifice to image aesthetics.

As in the case of most things, there are always going to be some tradeoffs and no way to meet everyones criteria. Same goes for keeping a pure "M" vs. one that has the potential for higher tech advancement at the sacrifice of "add ons" that potentially bloat the physical nature of the body.

I think all one can do is be patient and wait for not only full rez DNG's to be released from the camera but additionally, be able to physically handle the camera itself, examining its new features along with the EVF and other optional accessories. Then and only then will we all know what if any compromises have been made vs. the current M9. Leica may have hit a home run with just image quality that will please almost everyone or maybe conversely excite those who placed a premium on better high ISO performance or yet again maybe please a third group who are surprised that at base ISO up to say 1600, image quaity is beyond what they expected and even surpasses the M9 and at the same time eked out about 1-1.5 stops of low light performance.

Everyone is going to have their own set of different priorities for the new M and that in itself is going to have some pacing the halls until images and camera are released. OK, now lets get out there and find who has a prototype in their hands now...LOL!

Dave (D&A)
 
Last edited:

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Bottom line there are a lot of IF's involved here. Given Leicas track record on releases I would be patient and see what they actually do and how long it takes to be acceptable in your mind. I would never trust a unproven sensor or first blush until it passes a lot of my own requirements. I like Leica but I have been burned too. I can forgive but I certainly don't forget my 2 M8s spending a minimum of 3 months in the home land in the repair shop. Not one but both of mine, luckily Leica gave me loaners.


I know a lot of folks very excited about this cam and it does look very promising. Just be careful you don't put your wallet in front of your needs and wants. Been down this road countless times and I have have been bitten too.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
could the x1/x2 be an indicator what to expect from a cmos sensor in a Leica M?
Not really. Those are Sony sensors and frankly do better in their NEX' being incredibly versatile and cheap.
 

glenerrolrd

Workshop Member
Dave and Guy

Dave ....I am not an expert but more a student of the game ..but your description is consistent with my understanding and with the results of the major DSLR mfg . I think Leica makes good choices (consistent with my view of "good color" not necessarily perfect for everyone ) . But they are also not sensor mfg and they have a complex requirement with the micro lenses . This is a lot more difficult that jamming Sony s latest APS-C into a new . I appreciate every bit of this . Personally I would be doing back flips if they had chosen the Dalsa 24MP CCD chip and added the Maestro processor...but I understand that the broader appeal of EVF,LV,video .

Guy is correct Leica has a limited track record of getting the new digital cameras right at introduction . The S2 had a major disconnect with Adobe and LR ..I believe because they had a falling out with Phase just months before introduction and changed horses . The initial files were impossible (can you remember the test files we processed) . But a firmware change and new LR camera profiles ....made the file easy and David Farkes s presets made them one button great . I was much more concerned about the S2 update where the strong aesthetic s a key attribute ... I love the solution Leica came up with and hope they keep up the "model year improvements " and time the big changes on a longer cycle .

Should be fun to dig into the new files and see whats possible .
 

glenerrolrd

Workshop Member
Not really. Those are Sony sensors and frankly do better in their NEX' being incredibly versatile and cheap.
But the color profile is decided upon by the camera mfg and you have the sony sensor with a leica lens. The files I have seen have been pretty good for the X1. When the M8 came out I know they had quite a debate over generating a neutral low contrast file verse a stronger color version. They went with neutral.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Dave and Guy

Dave ....I am not an expert but more a student of the game ..but your description is consistent with my understanding and with the results of the major DSLR mfg . I think Leica makes good choices (consistent with my view of "good color" not necessarily perfect for everyone ) . But they are also not sensor mfg and they have a complex requirement with the micro lenses . This is a lot more difficult that jamming Sony s latest APS-C into a new . I appreciate every bit of this . Personally I would be doing back flips if they had chosen the Dalsa 24MP CCD chip and added the Maestro processor...but I understand that the broader appeal of EVF,LV,video .

Guy is correct Leica has a limited track record of getting the new digital cameras right at introduction . The S2 had a major disconnect with Adobe and LR ..I believe because they had a falling out with Phase just months before introduction and changed horses . The initial files were impossible (can you remember the test files we processed) . But a firmware change and new LR camera profiles ....made the file easy and David Farkes s presets made them one button great . I was much more concerned about the S2 update where the strong aesthetic s a key attribute ... I love the solution Leica came up with and hope they keep up the "model year improvements " and time the big changes on a longer cycle .

Should be fun to dig into the new files and see whats possible .
I think the real message here with Leica and i know a lot of folks will agree and the key word is Patience when it comes to Leica. Buying out of the gate is a risk with them, every cam has had a growing period to get all things down perfect. Now a lot of folks have the patience to wait things out and I give them a lot of credit. I did with the M8 and I got lucky and had loaners to get me through it all. Will never see that issue again as they have gotten better and better with each new cam but they do take time be it themselves or Adobe to get things correct and looking good. Im not saying this will be bad on release far from it but I am saying be patient. Leica seems sometimes to go at a rate slower than some are willing to accept too. Be it now its a new unproven never been on the market sensor my Red flag goes up. I have been shooting digital since the very very beginning of it and a lot has changed but also a lot of growing pains as well. I know we have some very serious Leica fans here and i love you folks but from me just dont fall into any marketing trap or false hopes . This sensor needs to be proven is all I am saying. :thumbs:

And none of this is to offend anyone, I just been around the block a few times and thought its worth bringing that up.
 

algrove

Well-known member
I do not know about ISO 6400, but I did take some ISO1600 shots with the Monovid 800 and I did not see grain in the images. I know that is not a technical statement, but that's what I remember. I do know with my M9 at 1600 I would see some artifacts.
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
I think the real message here with Leica and i know a lot of folks will agree and the key word is Patience when it comes to Leica. Buying out of the gate is a risk with them, every cam has had a growing period to get all things down perfect. Now a lot of folks have the patience to wait things out and I give them a lot of credit. I did with the M8 and I got lucky and had loaners to get me through it all. Will never see that issue again as they have gotten better and better with each new cam but they do take time be it themselves or Adobe to get things correct and looking good. Im not saying this will be bad on release far from it but I am saying be patient. Leica seems sometimes to go at a rate slower than some are willing to accept too. Be it now its a new unproven never been on the market sensor my Red flag goes up. I have been shooting digital since the very very beginning of it and a lot has changed but also a lot of growing pains as well. I know we have some very serious Leica fans here and i love you folks but from me just dont fall into any marketing trap or false hopes . This sensor needs to be proven is all I am saying. :thumbs:

And none of this is to offend anyone, I just been around the block a few times and thought its worth bringing that up.
I fully agree on this and I should mention once more that I was pretty much burned with the M8 and lot of issues this camera had. Actually was so bad that I totally skipped the M9 and sold the M8.

But finally I trust that they learned a lot in the last 3 years and the physics of the new sensor seem to be a pretty great advancement and I do not doubt (I actually never doubted) that CMOS if done right is at least as good if not better than CCD. Maybe I am in the minority with that opinion here, but I come from the technology side and I know what can be done with both technologies. And Leica has a pretty great design on their CMOS sensor.

SO I fully trust that the M will be the cam for great RF like shooting finally. I have gone through so many mirrorless approaches with m43 and others and I was finally not overwhelmed and still am not - even with the pretty great EM-5 from Olympus.

Also you can call this kind of getting me tired trying some other solutions, which finally turn out not to deliver all that was promised. But Leica finally always had a perfect (almost perfect) IQ. This is why I decided to stop my unsuccessful search of a better mirrorless / RF system and get lined up for the new M. It rings all the bells WRT functionality and features for me and finally I am sure that Leica will be able to deliver, even if this is not the first version coming out.

Simply interesting what we can expect here from Leica, I stay more than tuned :D
 

jonoslack

Active member
Dave, Roger, Guy, Peter.
Lots of good points here.
One thing that hasn't been mentioned is the difference in Leica's position these days, not only do they have much more digital experience and resources - they do, now, have time to get things right. When the M9 was released this wasn't really the case. I would think that the M8, M9 and S2 needed to be out of the door as fast as possible. Priorities change, and I imagine that the priority with the M is to get it as ready as possible before it ships.
 

woodyspedden

New member
Dave, Roger, Guy, Peter.
Lots of good points here.
One thing that hasn't been mentioned is the difference in Leica's position these days, not only do they have much more digital experience and resources - they do, now, have time to get things right. When the M9 was released this wasn't really the case. I would think that the M8, M9 and S2 needed to be out of the door as fast as possible. Priorities change, and I imagine that the priority with the M is to get it as ready as possible before it ships.
Jono et al

i agree that the new S is what the original S2 should have been. This is why the specs seem so evolutionary.

However I have had two great years shooting the S2 with its wonderful lenses. For me this camera system is all about landscapes and (not for me) fashion. While having higher ISO is nice, it is not a feature I find necessary for my work. So I plan to wait for a more revolutionary path for the S system before I buy a new body.

On the other hand, the MM and the new M, having superb high ISO capabilities, are perfect for my street work.

So all in all, I am happy with the path Leica has taken. Only time will tell how successful this strategy will be

Woody
 

barjohn

New member
Well, as someone that has worked in technology all of my life, I know that if a company waits until the engineers think it is "perfect" (i.e. good enough) it would never get out the door. It usually, takes a marketing or sales person to say this is good enough let's stop and start shipping and then address major issues as they arise.

As a program/project manager I don't have a problem with this approach becasue try as we might including all kinds of automated testing, the complexity of today's software means that we will miss somthing that users will find. The key to me when I evaluate a company is how quickly they address these issues, if at all. It is in this realm that I fault Leica. They have been slow to acknowledge and address issues often leaving customers hanging for months without working equipment (unless you are among the select few that get loaners). A simple example would be the problem they had and may still have to some degree with using various SD cards, a problem I never experienced with any other vendor. It took until long into M9 production for them to admit they had a problem and even longer to develop a solution.

Their experience with a CMOS sensor is very limited. It may be even more limited than we know in that Sony may have provided a pretty complete development tool set where all they had to do was tweak certain algorithms to meet their image "look" requirements. CMOSIS may not have such an extensive library of support tools. Further the Maestro processor was designed to work with a CCD sensor. Read outs and processing from CCD is very different thatn read-outs and processing from CMOS. How well has the interface been redesigned to go from an analog output to a digital one?

Dalsa has a good write up explaining the differences and the problems with each. The key in CMOS is experience to overcome its shortcomings. I can't tell how much CMOSIS has but one of the points Dalsa makes in their paper is that having your own foundry is key to successful high performance CMOS. I got the impression that CMOSIS is dependent on an outside French foundry for production. It will be interesting to watch.
 
Top