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)
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: