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!

CCD or CMOS - you choose

V

Vivek

Guest
So, it is Leica WB and the Asian guy who messed up the (CMOS) sales?:shocked:

I thought it was the wrong thread pitch in the shutter release button!
 

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
So, it is Leica WB and the Asian guy who messed up the (CMOS) sales?:shocked:

I thought it was the wrong thread pitch in the shutter release button!

Vivek, for me it was this thread My Lockups have stopped - Seite 8 - Leica User Forum that convinced me to wait for the follow on model of the M240. My M9 is still doing fine here in the very dry desert air. Why bother spending all that money on an M240 if I can get very similar looking images with my old M9?
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
.. What David has done to his credit is to show that with most photographs ...the results are too close to reliably differentiate . ...
That's been my feeling all along. Which is why the difference between the two cameras, for me, is more dependent upon other things, responsiveness being the first amongst them.

I'll start using my new M-P sometime this week. :)

G
 

MCTuomey

New member
Re the WB and color debate, I did the following quick, simple comparison b/w the M240 and M9:

1. same subject, aperture, s/s, lens, light, varying only the bodies (worked quickly due to risk of changing light, handheld, no concern for focus or other details)
2. imported to LR using each camera's embedded profile, added 1/2 stop exposure, adjusted color balance using the eyedropper on color checker's neutral gray square

I will at some point do this kind of test in other settings, weather and time permitting, but the result was enough assurance I could get equivalent colors to the M9 with the M240, or quite close. Prior to adjusting the color balance, AWB from the M240 produced a 200K warmer image than the M9. (The M240 file is on the left, the M9's on the right.)
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
...
The M9 had a distinct "finger-print" in the eyes of many. Why begrudge it's unique place in Leica's history of image making tools?

It all seems to be a moot point ... actually, soon to be a pointless point :rolleyes:
I feel the same is true of the Olympus E-1 vs all the later models of FourThirds and Micro-FourThirds cameras that switched to higher resolution CMOS and NMOS sensors. The E-1 has an imaging quality quite different from those later models. I hesitate to call it "CCD vs CMOS" however, because the combination of the E-1's low resolution (5 Mpixel) and heavy AA filter are a MUCH bigger influence on the results than the difference in sensor technology.

Plus the E-1 is a uniquely fine camera in the hand to use. Still have mine, will use it 'til it croaks and keep it as a shelf ornament after. It's so far my favorite of all the DSLRs I've owned, although I have to say the Panasonic L1 probably made more photos that turned into sales.

G
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
So, it is Leica WB and the Asian guy who messed up the (CMOS) sales?:shocked:

I thought it was the wrong thread pitch in the shutter release button!
Might also be a diminishing market for $7000 cameras that can be outclassed as it pertains directly to image quality by cameras that cost about half or less.

Don't get me wrong I love Leica M's... Well rangefinders would be a more accurate statement. Leica has a niche market. They corner their market but many that are on the cusp of whether a Leica is truly affordable or a luxury for them are going to cross shop with declining economies around the world. Probably not an issue for the ultra wealthy guys or girls though.
 

Paratom

Well-known member
Its interesting how much sentiments we can read in discussions about Leica, even if people just compare the color output between 2 models.
Anyways, I am quite happy with the M, in regards of handling, sensor (including color) and lenses. Flawed, outclassed, dated, luxury subject? Who cares ;)
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
Its interesting how much sentiments we can read in discussions about Leica, even if people just compare the color output between 2 models.
Anyways, I am quite happy with the M, in regards of handling, sensor (including color) and lenses. Flawed, outclassed, dated, luxury subject? Who cares ;)
Aye.

The M9 worked well, I have no regrets about buying and using it. The M-P should do even better, based on my evaluation testing. :)

G
 

fotografz

Well-known member
Nobody is denying the cameras are different Marc - OR that the M9 doesn't have a distinct finger print (many cameras have distinct finger prints - uncontroversial ones might be the Olympus E1 and the Sony A900)



The reason for bringing it up is twofold

1. People are not buying the M240 because there is a huge groundswell of opinion on the internet that the colour is no good (of course, we both know that this is a matter of personal preference - which is fine if it was the general perception, but it isn't). It's one of those stories which largely originated in the incorrect WB adjustment on the original firmware - exacerbated by a series of photos taken in the far east and widely circulated where the photographer SAID he had used AWB but actually had used Daylight WB in streets in Hong Kong (I know this because I saw the raw files with intact exif information) . This still resonates around the internet and it's still putting people off

2. Because the CCD/CMOS / Colour thing does not seem to be founded in fact (again, I'm not denying the difference in the colours). Colour is a function of the Bayer filter and the demosaicing (and partly the DR) - NOT a function of the underlying structure of the sensor. . . . . . . But the reason I referred to it as a 'religion' is that it isn't really possible to investigate on any kind of empirical basis.

It's certainly NOT moot - because it's costing a number of manufacturers money (not just Leica) and it's on the basis of fundamental misconceptions - and disinformation.

Let me repeat - I'm NOT saying there is no difference between the M9 and the M240 - and I understand and respect your dislike for it . . . but what I am denying is that the reason for it is that the M9 is CCD and the M240 is CMOS!
Thank you, I truly appreciate your candid response Jono.

While I never saw the incorrect WB shots of Hong Kong, as you know I did work with the M240 (with new firmware) and found the color rendering in the broad variety of lighting scenarios I face to be inconsistent, and skin tones not to my liking. However, that is strictly the personal preference of one person.

What I can say is that I initially did attribute it to CMOS, and that may well NOT be the case. After all, I've always been a strong advocate of the contrast and color rendering from the A900 ... which used a CMOS sensor. In fact, the A900 suffered from the same drawbacks that are attributed to CCD cameras ... so perhaps there may be a clue there? Subsequent Sony cameras lost that magic IMO, but performed better in other functional areas with favored buzz words of the week..

On the other hand, too many of my favored cameras just happened to have been CCD with very similar image response, and that just added to the "belief". So much so that I have been willing to go along with the short comings of CCD to preserve the continuity of that look and feel.

So, perhaps comparisons to CCDs may do more harm than good, because it places the focus on sensors rather than other contributing factors and perpetuates the debate? As I suggested, matching images in the name of CMOS verses CCD just triggers suspicions of skilled post manipulation, and selective imagery to prove a point.

BTW, when I say a moot point, it meant that every thing will be CMOS based quite soon enough. Can't debate what doesn't exist.

If Leica is experiencing a slump, I think they need to better promte the rangefinder experience. IMO, most people that discount that unique experience simply do not get it ... and maybe more communication regarding the Rangefinder Way verse others would do more good?

That is a debate I'd gladly engage in ....

Thanks again,

- Marc
 

Tim

Active member
This might be a bit lame and uninformed, but I see them as more different than one better or right over the other.

I am a believer that it is mostly about perception, the eyes and brains of us all are different and we all have preferences mixing up attitudes even more.
Another factor is, the item you originally had becomes the norm, anything else that comes along later you feel is wrong. It can apply to anything.

With sensors its, Two steps forward, one back, repeat.
 

jonoslack

Active member
Thank you, I truly appreciate your candid response Jono.
. . And your reply Marc

While I never saw the incorrect WB shots of Hong Kong, as you know I did work with the M240 (with new firmware) and found the color rendering in the broad variety of lighting scenarios I face to be inconsistent, and skin tones not to my liking. However, that is strictly the personal preference of one person.
Quite right - and I've never, for a minute, denied the absolute right of others to prefer the M9 (of course I don't have to agree). . . I just don't think it's to do with CCD/CMOS arguments - and our mutual like of the A900 contributes to this argument.

If Leica is experiencing a slump,
I don't think they are Marc - and I think that the M240 is selling well - BUT I'm aware of a lot of people who aren't buying them because of the CCD/CMOS arguments (more on LUF than here indeed).

I think they need to better promte the rangefinder experience. IMO, most people that discount that unique experience simply do not get it ... and maybe more communication regarding the Rangefinder Way verse others would do more good?
That is a debate I'd gladly engage in ....

Thanks again,

- Marc
I couldn't agree more -
 

jonoslack

Active member
So, it is Leica WB and the Asian guy who messed up the (CMOS) sales?:shocked:
Maybe you didn't see it Vivek - it went on for months (mostly on Chinese forums and LUF, not here) - I ended up as a messenger (transferring files to Leica) and got duly shot! But I think it still resonates.

There are so many things that get 'stuck' in the public perception on the web - I'm sure you can think of lots of them - two that spring instantly to mind are the wonderfulness of the 'king of bokeh' which now sells for more secondhand than a recent 35 'cron Asph. . . or the lovely 75 Summicron, which is apparently 'clinical'.

I thought it was the wrong thread pitch in the shutter release button!
:)

I'd forgotten about that!
 

Paratom

Well-known member
This might be a bit lame and uninformed, but I see them as more different than one better or right over the other.

I am a believer that it is mostly about perception, the eyes and brains of us all are different and we all have preferences mixing up attitudes even more.
Another factor is, the item you originally had becomes the norm, anything else that comes along later you feel is wrong. It can apply to anything.

With sensors its, Two steps forward, one back, repeat.
This could very well be the case for me. I have used M6 about 30 years ago. Even at that time I tried Leica R but for some reason, even though the R had more functions and lens selection etc I allways connected better to the M. I have also allways liked simple and reduced cameras, so no wonder I find the A7 series and most mirrorless overloaded and dont "connect" so well to them.
Still I use the A7II and get good results with it (Yes, for some occasion I do want Tele or I do want the flexibility of a zoom or the speed of AF).
Many s
Sensors have become so good that user interface and lenses have become maybe more important when deciding for a system.
 

Paratom

Well-known member
Maybe you didn't see it Vivek - it went on for months (mostly on Chinese forums and LUF, not here) - I ended up as a messenger (transferring files to Leica) and got duly shot! But I think it still resonates.

There are so many things that get 'stuck' in the public perception on the web - I'm sure you can think of lots of them - two that spring instantly to mind are the wonderfulness of the 'king of bokeh' which now sells for more secondhand than a recent 35 'cron Asph. . . or the lovely 75 Summicron, which is apparently 'clinical'.

:)

I'd forgotten about that!
As you all know I also like to join the discussions on the internet but I think we must not forget: The internet forums are just a small percentage of people who actually own and use those cameras. I am sure there are many just out shooting with it. So it is allways the best to not overrate such internet discussions, specially as long as you do not know the people you are talking to, and make own experiences and build up an own opinion. In case of Leica a good example was the M8, which quite some people in the internet saw as a flawed camera, but for me it worked quite well and was my main camera for some years.
In case of Leica one problem might be the premium prices, where people might expect perfect products from the first moment, which does not always happen.
The fact that Leica allows us to use still the same lenses we have used for 10s of years is probably another thing which makes the desgin of sensor, coverglass etc. more difficult and expensive. The good thing is that-in my experience- Leica has become more open and ver reliable, that they adress problems and find solutions. OK, in the case of the cover glass problem of the M9 a little pressure from the internet was necessary first ;)
 

fotografz

Well-known member
This might be a bit lame and uninformed, but I see them as more different than one better or right over the other.

I am a believer that it is mostly about perception, the eyes and brains of us all are different and we all have preferences mixing up attitudes even more.
Another factor is, the item you originally had becomes the norm, anything else that comes along later you feel is wrong. It can apply to anything.

With sensors its, Two steps forward, one back, repeat.
This may be the crux of the problem ... at least for me.

"Continuity" is a discussion I've had with a number of photographers. It may not be a matter of being wrong, instead it is "different" when different is not what one wants.

I'd like the better functionality of the M240, but not at the expense of an interruption in the continuity I've managed to accomplish with a digital M9 and with my S system.

- Marc
 

aDam007

New member
This may be the crux of the problem ... at least for me.

"Continuity" is a discussion I've had with a number of photographers. It may not be a matter of being wrong, instead it is "different" when different is not what one wants.

I'd like the better functionality of the M240, but not at the expense of an interruption in the continuity I've managed to accomplish with a digital M9 and with my S system.

- Marc
This statement most accurately reflects my thoughts.

I find that I love the idea of updated features (better iso, faster AF where applicable, etc). But it's always at a cost of having to relearn to process files. Having to learn the quirks of the sensor can be frustrating to say the least.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
Maybe you didn't see it Vivek - it went on for months (mostly on Chinese forums and LUF, not here) - I ended up as a messenger (transferring files to Leica) and got duly shot! But I think it still resonates.

There are so many things that get 'stuck' in the public perception on the web - I'm sure you can think of lots of them - two that spring instantly to mind are the wonderfulness of the 'king of bokeh' which now sells for more secondhand than a recent 35 'cron Asph. . . or the lovely 75 Summicron, which is apparently 'clinical'.



:)

I'd forgotten about that!
A couple of years ago, I looked up the "reviews" and comments about the AA 75/2 (particularly from an ancient Leica M reviewer from the UK- I guess he has retired now) and I understand what you mean about that. But these are the folks (who get influenced by such reviews) that Leica are eager to cater to.

[I think Leica needs a different strategy. May be get back to the roots? Their magazine has become a joke, for example.

If a retailer is the only last hope for them to set opinions right, it is sad.]


Sorry, if I opened my mouth a bit much.
 

jonoslack

Active member
A couple of years ago, I looked up the "reviews" and comments about the AA 75/2 (particularly from an ancient Leica M reviewer from the UK- I guess he has retired now) and I understand what you mean about that. But these are the folks (who get influenced by such reviews) that Leica are eager to cater to.

[I think Leica needs a different strategy. May be get back to the roots? Their magazine has become a joke, for example.

If a retailer is the only last hope for them to set opinions right, it is sad.]


Sorry, if I opened my mouth a bit much.
Not at al Vivek. These are useful discussions . In this case David is a retailer, but he's also a good photographer and an honest bloke. He will do an honest job with the statistics, and I'm 90% certain that this wasn't sponsored. The results won't (can't) be definitive, but I'm sure he won't suggest they are.

I do think it'll be interesting though, and your vote would add a little (and it's interesting second guessing). You aren't prostituting yourself to a marketing exercise by doing it. Why not?

The magazine seems just to have become a standard product rag : I gave up ages ago. Sad.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
I will opine here (fwiw) that all modern Leica lenses would do just majestically on the M240. All those old stuff (Mandler, Cosina, etc) are better off on an M8 or film or the MM.

(I also hope that the price of the 50 AA drops so that I can get one. :D)
 

scott kirkpatrick

Well-known member
I shoot fast and process fairly lightly. I'm not surprised when I can't always tell which sensor or lens was used to produce an image from a scene that I didn't see myself (case 2 of David's exercises). And I don't draw very far reaching conclusions from any of this.

However, I think internet opinion has to take second place to the fairly rotten state of the world's economies in affecting the rate of M[240] family sales. In the meantime, America (3.5% growth in GDP -- yay!) and maybe the UK (where morale has improved since the flogging has ended) will take up the slack, while growth in the Far East stutters, and fewer Italians purchase new Leicas to go in their lovely leather Italian cases. One result of the recent observation of increasing wealth inequity is that the old stereotype of the doctor or dentist with HIS Leica has given way to the financial industry boomer with HIS or HER Leikravitz. (Sorry, I'm just before their time and don't know why I should care about Lenny -- but I might sign up for a Joplin Mercedes-Benz.)

Kudos to Jono for trying to keep some sense in lens comparisons, but I think the market impact will be a wash.

scott
 
Top