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!

M 240 AA filter or not

V

Vivek

Guest
There always is, has been.

The filter used in cutting IR in the M8 (however insufficiently), for example, is also an AA filter.

It is not a blur filter.

If the M9 has no blur filter and if you still do not see moire in most cases then anti aliasing applied somewhere. Whether it is hardware or software is a different matter.

The whole point of Leica using a very thin filter (minimal glass) on the M8 sensor was to the minimize the aberrations (spherical and others) induced by flat glass. When it is in the front of a lens (any filter) this is negligible but when it is close to the imaging plane (sensor) the effects are substantial.

The question is, how thick a filter Leica will use in the new M and what sort of an effect we will see.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
Yes, it is a compromise in image clarity. Fuji's new sensor further minimizes that.

If you look at Ricoh' A12 M module and see what can be achieved, the new M (with the CMOS sensor) would be excellent. If that is your concern (new sensor), I would not be worried. :)
 
V

Vivek

Guest
I hear a murmur that Leica have postponed (by an year) the production of the AA 50 due to QC problems.

Can anyone confirm that?
 

jonoslack

Active member
Hi There
Without going in to a discussion about the definition of an AA filter. The situation with the M(240) is the same as that of the M9, and, as such, it's possible that there will be moire and coloured specular highlights just like you do on the M9, together with the same kind of detail you get with the M9.

As for the 50 'cron APO Asph. I don't think it'll be a year, but anyway, postponed by a year might as well be from the original date (May 2011). I've heard many stories, and several different ones.
 

douglasf13

New member
There always is, has been.

The filter used in cutting IR in the M8 (however insufficiently), for example, is also an AA filter.

It is not a blur filter.

If the M9 has no blur filter and if you still do not see moire in most cases then anti aliasing applied somewhere. Whether it is hardware or software is a different matter.

The whole point of Leica using a very thin filter (minimal glass) on the M8 sensor was to the minimize the aberrations (spherical and others) induced by flat glass. When it is in the front of a lens (any filter) this is negligible but when it is close to the imaging plane (sensor) the effects are substantial.

The question is, how thick a filter Leica will use in the new M and what sort of an effect we will see.
An AA filter is essentially a beam splitter, and it is the same thing as what is usually referred to as a blur filter. The M9 doesn't have an AA filter, especially not attached to its inexpensive IR filter (Kyocera BS7,) and the camera exhibits moire rather frequently. Assuming the M 240 also doesn't have an AA filter, it should exhibit less moire than the M9, because of the smaller pixels.
 
Last edited:

algrove

Well-known member
I am no expert on this. But I found it interesting on the Nikon site when discussing the differences between the D800e and the D800, they specifically show someone in fabric that brings out the moire in the results of the D800e.

Now most will acknowledge that the D800e has very small pixels, but it still shows moire. Many pros have not bought the D800e, but have instead bought the D800 mainly due to the moire possibilities they might get from D800e images.

I wonder if the new Sony RX1 has moire effects in its images?
 

edwardkaraa

New member
It has been confirmed in one of the interviews at photokina that the typ 240 does not have a AA filter. As Douglas said, the higher pixel density means less moire than the M9, but in order to remove moire substantially, you need a 160 mp sensor, so it's not going to be a dramatic difference from the M9. Anyhow, moire is just an artifact like any other. It has never bothered me in the past, and I doubt it is a deal breaker for many judging by the popularity of the M8 and M9 among Leica users.
 

woodyspedden

New member
Hi There
Without going in to a discussion about the definition of an AA filter. The situation with the M(240) is the same as that of the M9, and, as such, it's possible that there will be moire and coloured specular highlights just like you do on the M9, together with the same kind of detail you get with the M9.

As for the 50 'cron APO Asph. I don't think it'll be a year, but anyway, postponed by a year might as well be from the original date (May 2011). I've heard many stories, and several different ones.
I got definite confirmation from my dealer that the 50 cron asph is delayed.

He did not speculate as to how long

Woody
 

ced

Member
Any rigid arrangement like the Bayer pattern will give you moire at some point no matter how fine your pixels it is just a question of frequency collision. If you change the distance to/from the subject you could obtain/reduce moire. It is the nature of the beast till we can get a random arrangement/size of the pixel site on the sensor. My 2 cents worth...
 

Taylor Sherman

New member
An AA filter is essentially a beam splitter, and it is the same thing as what is usually referred to as a blur filter. The M9 doesn't have an AA filter, especially not attached to its inexpensive IR filter (Kyocera BS7,) and the camera exhibits moire rather frequently. Assuming the M 240 also doesn't have an AA filter, it should exhibit less moire than the M9, because of the smaller pixels.
Also. . .you can't do AA in software. You can *try*, but you can't really do it. The best you can do is guess - "uh, this is real detail! and that over there, that's false detail due to aliasing. . .sure, that's the ticket!". But there isn't even a good way to guess about it. False detail due to aliasing can take on almost any form. . . that's the whole point of aliasing. Frequencies higher than the Nyquist rate masquerade as lower frequencies, and they can show up as anything from baseband to the Nyquist, there's no way to tell them apart from the "real" frequencies in that range.
 

douglasf13

New member
Also. . .you can't do AA in software. You can *try*, but you can't really do it. The best you can do is guess - "uh, this is real detail! and that over there, that's false detail due to aliasing. . .sure, that's the ticket!". But there isn't even a good way to guess about it. False detail due to aliasing can take on almost any form. . . that's the whole point of aliasing. Frequencies higher than the Nyquist rate masquerade as lower frequencies, and they can show up as anything from baseband to the Nyquist, there's no way to tell them apart from the "real" frequencies in that range.
The interesting thing is that so many shooters seem to prefer the look of AA-less files, despite all of the false detail.
 
Top