Leica s Sensor Strategy ???

[glenerrolrd]

For the few Leica fan boys left .....whats up with Leica s sensor strategy ? Rumors about a new Leica M10 all point to using the same 24MP sensor as the SL and Q . While this may be great in getting higher volume purchases of sensors .....it doesn t seem a compelling (to upgrade) improvement.

Much was expressed about Leica s choice of 24MP for the SL which was a often speculated as “necessary to avoid competition with the S “. Don t get me wrong I have the M240,SL,Q and they all produce terrific image quality at 24MP but they are not better than my Nikon D810 and probably my Nikon D5 (20MP) .

The S 007 was a disappointment to most all my friends that use the S system. How could they not increase the MP ?

I do appreciate that its not all about how many pixels the sensor has ......fat pixels can produce very special results . But you only have to look at the files from the new Phase 100MP system to see the advantage . (I do realize that the physical size of the sensor also plays into the image quality ).

Leica appears to have created a “log jam” in there sensor progression ......S (37.5) ,SL,Q,M (24) .

Before its asked (Do you really need more megapixels ? ) yes if they can improve the image quality ,allow greater flexibility in cropping and support printing large . AND Leica needs a bigger better story to convince photographers to upgrade .

Maybe this is a RANT and not so much of a question .......

 

[JorisV]

You can add the T to that list...

The new TL re-uses the same 16MP sensor from the original T and yes, perhaps a 24MP APS-C sensor would have negatively impacted SL or Q sales...

You are certainly not the only one who is frustrated with this... but expressing this opinion tends to get you slammed...

 

[MGrayson]

Think of it this way. There are a bunch of factors - price, speed, lens quality, weight, ISO limits, exposure time limits, MP, AF tracking, ergonomics ... a long list. If I choose one factor and ignore all the others, it's easy to find the "best" camera. If I try for a minimax solution - find the camera whose weakest feature is highest, probably something like the D810 pops out. Put more weight on speed and AF tracking, and you get the 1DxII or Nikon equivalent.

The trick is to find a system that maximizes the factors you care about while not being so weak on some other that the system is unusable. Sony ergonomics made that system unusable for me. If I give up on AF tracking, then the Leica S wins. It's sensor, and I use the older S(006), is good enough that it doesn't disqualify the camera, while the lenses and ergonomics are so good that I love using it. A better sensor would be nice, but there's nothing out there with a better sensor that I would prefer to use (save the 007). I handled the X1D and didn't care for it. Now if my needs changed so that the S sensor became unacceptable, then, well, I'd have to find something with a better sensor.

I do get it - you'd like a single camera to have the best of everything. So would I. But that doesn't exists and probably never has. I'm not making excuses for the S sensor, it's just not the reason I use the system.

Best,

Matt

 

[Paratom]

I am quite confident that the next S will have more MP.

However for my taste I dont really need it. 36 is allready plenty.
Leica is probably "late" with increasing MP. Maybe they are slow, but maybe they are also convinced that MP are one paramter in a mix of parameters where more MP can mean other compromises: I can not explain technically but we often read that there are compromises: More MP can lead to noise, if you have more noise it means its more difficult to increase shaddows, which means it also has a influence on usable dynamic range. I have also read that noise and colorquality are 2 factors wich influence each other.

I do find the IQ I get from Leica equipment excellent and ahead of Canikon. I still have the Nikon df which I really like but I do think Leica IQ is even better. I think the T is the mirrorless with the best color, I also do like the color of the S006 and S007 a lot and believe it stands out. Also lenses like the 50APO or 75APO, the S lenses.
There are things to improve, but more MP in the S is the least important thing for my intended use. But I guess Leica has to do it because others are doing it.
Some more MP in the T would be usefull for me, if it doesnt have a bad influence on other factors.

For me its ok if a brand does take time for developping a sysem. I dont need an upgrade every year. I think its more important for Leica to improve their service in the US, or to make the T a little more weather and dustproof, or to work on the reliability of the S lenses.

 

[glenerrolrd]

Think of it this way. There are a bunch of factors - price, speed, lens quality, weight, ISO limits, exposure time limits, MP, AF tracking, ergonomics ... a long list. If I choose one factor and ignore all the others, it's easy to find the "best" camera. If I try for a minimax solution - find the camera whose weakest feature is highest, probably something like the D810 pops out. Put more weight on speed and AF tracking, and you get the 1DxII or Nikon equivalent.

The trick is to find a system that maximizes the factors you care about while not being so weak on some other that the system is unusable. Sony ergonomics made that system unusable for me. If I give up on AF tracking, then the Leica S wins. It's sensor, and I use the older S(006), is good enough that it doesn't disqualify the camera, while the lenses and ergonomics are so good that I love using it. A better sensor would be nice, but there's nothing out there with a better sensor that I would prefer to use (save the 007). I handled the X1D and didn't care for it. Now if my needs changed so that the S sensor became unacceptable, then, well, I'd have to find something with a better sensor.

I do get it - you'd like a single camera to have the best of everything. So would I. But that doesn't exists and probably never has. I'm not making excuses for the S sensor, it's just not the reason I use the system.

Best,

Matt

Not really looking for a single do it all system....but I want the Leica gear to be the best it can be . It needs to be more specialized not less. (For me).

For example ...the S could have been 60MP with the S 007 ....the lenses would handle it and it would produce better image quality for landscape,studio etc . IMHO MF is about image quality and aesthetics . A good argument can be made for the strategy with the 37.5 Mp CMOS sensor with larger pixels . I think its competitive with the 50MP Sony sensor but not the newer 100MP . The S sensor can t really get to 100MP without severely reducing pixel size ...so maybe a 60-70MP in the 2:3 format would work . Had Leica achieved this demand for the S platform would be higher .

The SL (sensor at 24MP) was a disappointment but I understand Leica s design objectives . This is a PRO camera that shoots both stills and video ..extremely well . Its not a replacement for the S . But its also not a replacement for a D5 in shooting sports .....in fact the gap in performance compared to a D5 is startling . It also does not compare favorably with a D810 or the Canon 5Ds R for image quality . For 24 MP s its terrific probably the best in its class IQ but its not 36MP+ . So its a compromise (as you mentioned ) . I am sure a good case can be made that 24MP s is the sweet spot (best compromise of video /stills) for the professional .

Actually the Q and probably now the M10 at 24Mp ....makes sense . For street ...I have plenty of image quality and with the M lenses ...I can select an option set for the subject (e.g. the 18/21/24 3.4-3.8 lenses for travel or the 24/28/35 1.4 lenses for street ) . 36MP is harder to work with ..it shows even the slightest flaw in technique ....so 24 MP could be fine . However I don’t find the Q images to have better IQ than my M240 . Hopefully if they use the same sensor they will be able to have a more robust CPU (in camera processor) . But I still wish for 36-40MP s in an M body .

So my hope is that Leica will eventually space the products out with competitive sensors aimed specifically at each segment ....if they don t why upgrade . The S 006 (at base ISO) still produces the best files I have even seen (short of my buddies XF 100MP) .

 

[glenerrolrd]

I am quite confident that the next S will have more MP.

However for my taste I dont really need it. 36 is allready plenty.
Leica is probably "late" with increasing MP. Maybe they are slow, but maybe they are also convinced that MP are one paramter in a mix of parameters where more MP can mean other compromises: I can not explain technically but we often read that there are compromises: More MP can lead to noise, if you have more noise it means its more difficult to increase shaddows, which means it also has a influence on usable dynamic range. I have also read that noise and colorquality are 2 factors wich influence each other.

I do find the IQ I get from Leica equipment excellent and ahead of Canikon. I still have the Nikon df which I really like but I do think Leica IQ is even better. I think the T is the mirrorless with the best color, I also do like the color of the S006 and S007 a lot and believe it stands out. Also lenses like the 50APO or 75APO, the S lenses.
There are things to improve, but more MP in the S is the least important thing for my intended use. But I guess Leica has to do it because others are doing it.
Some more MP in the T would be usefull for me, if it doesnt have a bad influence on other factors.

For me its ok if a brand does take time for developping a sysem. I dont need an upgrade every year. I think its more important for Leica to improve their service in the US, or to make the T a little more weather and dustproof, or to work on the reliability of the S lenses.

All good points and I am sure that Leica makes the trade offs in a thoughtful manner .

Phase XF is a game changer for sure . Look at the files ...large sensors (dimensions not MP) produce an amazing aesthetic coupled with 100MP and great new lenses ... you have IQ that is unsurpassed in my experience . System is too expense ,too heavy and slow for my tastes . Much prefer the Leica S ...but the gap in IQ is substantial ...MPs ,DR,color depth ,noise etc. Not sure I can say that about the HB 50mp solutions although they look to be equal or slightly better than the S 007 files...but the difference is small .

Agree 100% that its not all about MPs ....I still can t produce the color response we had with the DMR or even the M8 (10mps) . You get used to the evolution and as profiling gets better its still pretty great . And the S 006 CCD look is still my favorite or all my gear .

But this should not be every year model replacements . Aren t we headed for 4 years between M models . Before I put down $15K for two new bodies ..they need to produce better image quality in a major way over my M 240 s. Using the Q sensor doesn t sound good.

When the S 006 was released ..I didn t upgrade until the price dropped almost 50% . Still haven t upgraded to the S 007 . Every upgrade ,beyond the further expenditure , is a major time commitment to refine post processing . (history shows that IQ can suck for a year or more after release ). This holds me back more than cost . How exactly will my images improve by making an change ?

Ever four years or so my expectation is that Leica will match or exceed whats on the market . Probably not going to happen .

 

[MGrayson]

Not really looking for a single do it all system....but I want the Leica gear to be the best it can be . It needs to be more specialized not less. (For me).

...

So my hope is that Leica will eventually space the products out with competitive sensors aimed specifically at each segment ....if they don t why upgrade . The S 006 (at base ISO) still produces the best files I have even seen (short of my buddies XF 100MP) .

I see. I mischaracterized your complaint. I don't want it more specialized, and so I'm delighted with their chosen tradeoffs.

In my first foray into photography, I started with an Olympus XA, a Fuji SLR, and then a Yashicamat TLR. This started my own "MP" war. Next was a Pentax 67. In retrospect, I should have stopped there. I loved using it. I carried it everywhere. But I wanted to shoot landscape, and the IQ from large format was better, so I picked up a 4x5, and it was a terrible experience. I could get fantastic IQ, but it required a lot more planning, support, and infrastructure. In short, I used it less and less. But the urge for ultimate IQ was still strong. I found an old 8x10 covered in grey paint. I took it apart, had all the brass pieces stripped, cleaned it up, and used it once. I sold everything except the TLR, and didn't pick up a camera again for 15 years.

To me, the XF 100MP is large format. (I played with it at the last Photo Expo. I laughed out loud when i saw it, even though I'd seen and used recent Hasselblads. I was unprepared for the lens's size and weight.) Right now, it's the only LF digital, and if that's what you want (and for many photogs on this site it is), you go XF. But that tradeoff would kill photography for me, so I don't think about it much. I'd no more walk around the city with an XF than I would with a view camera. (I had a Cambo/Phase system, and barely used it away from workshops, so this isn't idle speculation.) The strengths of the S system come down simply to "I love using it and I love the results."

Now if Leica introduced a 60MP S? That *would* be hard to resist (unless it was over $40K ). But it wouldn't compete with the larger sensor, and if the lenses lost their magic, or the files lost their color and malleability, it would be a bad bargain.

Well, enough rambling. It all does come down to personal choice.

Best,

Matt

PS. Perhaps the problem is that you know someone with the 100MP back. I'm spared the constant comparisons.

 

[Photo Lawyer]

Phase XF is a game changer for sure . Look at the files ...large sensors (dimensions not MP) produce an amazing aesthetic coupled with 100MP and great new lenses ... you have IQ that is unsurpassed in my experience . System is too expense ,too heavy and slow for my tastes . Much prefer the Leica S ...but the gap in IQ is substantial ...MPs ,DR,color depth ,noise etc. Not sure I can say that about the HB 50mp solutions although they look to be equal or slightly better than the S 007 files...but the difference is small .

Here is an article about why Leica stayed with 37 MP: http://www.reddotforum.com/content/2014/11/why-leica-is-staying-at-37-5mp-for-the-s-typ-007/

I don't agree about the gap in IQ. The 007 has 15 stops of dynamic range (actually 15.3 from what I've read) and its ISO goes up to 12500. The lenses are the best you can buy. You even have a 100mm Summicron-S. What's not to like?

 

[Speedgraphic]

Here is an article about why Leica stayed with 37 MP: http://www.reddotforum.com/content/2014/11/why-leica-is-staying-at-37-5mp-for-the-s-typ-007/

I don't agree about the gap in IQ. The 007 has 15 stops of dynamic range (actually 15.3 from what I've read) and its ISO goes up to 12500. The lenses are the best you can buy. You even have a 100mm Summicron-S. What's not to like?

What's not to like? The reliability of the AF motors breaking down and Leica's abysmal service and support, coupled with the Leica price tag. New offerings from Fujifilm and Hasselblad are cheaper, have better sensors, are smaller, and both are premium lens makers. Leica has more lenses for now, but once Hasselblad and Fuji have their line ups on the market you'd be hard pressed to justify an old mirror camera with unreliable lenses and constantly last-gen sensor performance.

 

[fotografz]

Roger, I personally think Leica is correct in their sensor strategy ... to some degree. They seem correct for the type of camera in each category.

I do not particularly agree with how they have evolved their lead cameras (M, SL, S), in an attempt to make them more "widely" diversified. I understand why they took the Jack-Of-All-Trades approach, (to make each more attractive in a competitive marketing sense), but I think they would be better served to make improvements against each system's defined purpose.

IMO, the S camera was never meant to be a MFD challenger ... there were 60 and 80 meg FF 645 format alternatives already in existence. I had a H4D/60 when I bought into the S2, and I didn't think of the it as challenging my Hasselblad for what I used a MFD for. What the S did was provide a dual shutter camera with dual cards that made it better for some of the general work I was using the H for. I much preferred the S for specific studio and location work: portrait, fashion, some corporate and art type imagery ... even higher end weddings. Its' purpose was and still is clear to me. I no longer needed the H system or all that resolution and abilities as the flow of my work changed.

I retain the S(006) because it still offers a specific look and feel I prefer over other high resolution or CMOS alternatives. What would make me consider a new S isn't resolution (50 meg maybe, but that wouldn't be an earth shaking bump that'd move me). What would be of interest is improvements in line with the purpose of the S ... like some sort of Image Stabilization, and moveable AF point ... or something like Hasselblad's True Focus which was a major improvement in the H system even when the meg count stayed the same.

The M is a rangefinder best suited to the rangefinder style of photography (which I still think is a unique way of thinking visually) ... and all the tack-ons just serve to dilute that purpose. IMO, it would have been better to "keep it simple stupid" and refined it to be smaller and more precise. In 40 years+ of rangefinder work, I've never had a need or desire to print larger than 17 X 22 and even that is rare. Rangefinder images (at least images that made rangefinders famous) tend to be more intimate and personal and size doesn't enhance that experience. 24 meg seems more than enough even with cropping (which I do).

I do not know the SL having only handled one once. I remain unimpressed with the images posted from this camera ... but it is young and time will tell. IMO, this camera should free the M from the Swiss Army knife mentality ... and get it back to its' roots ... then strongly promote rangefinder type photography and how it creatively differs.

I also agree that energy should be placed behind improving the service and ownership experience before anything else happens ... or they'll end up suffering the consequences.

- Marc

 

[Bernard]

It also does not compare favorably with a D810 or the Canon 5Ds R for image quality .

The difference is that you can shoot the SL all day at 6400 ISO and get great results. It's also smaller and lighter than those two, especially if you use M lenses. That makes a big difference at the end of a long day when the light has gone home but you have to stick around.

Same with the S. It doesn't have the highest resolution, but it's small, light, and fast for a medium format camera and the S-007 can reach fantastic ISOs without the image breaking down. Realistically, the S's 37 MP are every bit as good as the other brands' 50 MP. Those S lenses make a big difference.

I don't think the S is competing with the 100 MP backs, either in terms of budget, or resolution, or portability. Different markets, different customers.

 

[Photo Lawyer]

What's not to like? The reliability of the AF motors breaking down and Leica's abysmal service and support, coupled with the Leica price tag. New offerings from Fujifilm and Hasselblad are cheaper, have better sensors, are smaller, and both are premium lens makers. Leica has more lenses for now, but once Hasselblad and Fuji have their line ups on the market you'd be hard pressed to justify an old mirror camera with unreliable lenses and constantly last-gen sensor performance.

AF Motors – Leica has said that it will replace the motors any time they fail. So that's a nonstarter in my book. Rarely do you see a manufacturer do anything like that these days.

Old Mirror Camera – I prefer an OVF as do others. I understand that Hasselblad's new X1D (is it even shipping yet?) has an EVF that isn't close to Leica's SL. Some of the forum posts say that its refresh rate isn't the best, isn't good, whatever. As for the Fuji, well, all I could find is that it comes with an "accessory EVF" that has "lots of resolution."

Last-Gen Sensor Performance – I guess you didn't bother to read the link in my post. That's too bad because I think it smacks down the idea that Fujifilm and Hasselblad have oh-so-much better sensors than Leica does. I couldn't even find any specs on the Fuji, except that it's supposed to have 51MP whenever it begins to ship. And 50MP v. 37MP? You should have read the article. Kudos to Leica for resisting the Sony Borg.

I really don't get all this criticism about cameras and manufacturers. Sell your stuff and buy something else. It actually is that easy.

 

[glenerrolrd]

Here is an article about why Leica stayed with 37 MP: http://www.reddotforum.com/content/2014/11/why-leica-is-staying-at-37-5mp-for-the-s-typ-007/

I don't agree about the gap in IQ. The 007 has 15 stops of dynamic range (actually 15.3 from what I've read) and its ISO goes up to 12500. The lenses are the best you can buy. You even have a 100mm Summicron-S. What's not to like?

You don t agree with the gap in IQ compared to the Phase XF 100MP ? I agree the S 007 compares favorably to the 50MP alternatives and that its enough for most all applications .....until you see a 100MP file . For now the Phase is just too large,heavy and expensive ...and it could as has been mentioned really be considered large format . But this will change overtime ..and we are speaking buying decisions that have a 4-5 year life .

Living in Florida 6 months each year .....I know David quite well and he would sell more S 007 s if they were 60MP ....otherwise the S 006 is terrific if you can live with base ISO (its bright in Florida ).

However .....why can t the SL be increased to 36MP ? Leica doesn t want to compete with the S .

 

[Paratom]

What's not to like? The reliability of the AF motors breaking down and Leica's abysmal service and support, coupled with the Leica price tag. New offerings from Fujifilm and Hasselblad are cheaper, have better sensors, are smaller, and both are premium lens makers. Leica has more lenses for now, but once Hasselblad and Fuji have their line ups on the market you'd be hard pressed to justify an old mirror camera with unreliable lenses and constantly last-gen sensor performance.

At the moment one can not buy either Fuji or Hassy X1 and nobody knows today how they work in reality.

In regards of "old mirror..." - I am still wondering why you guys still use mirrors in your bathroom instead of a TV combined with a webcam

 

[Photo Lawyer]

You don t agree with the gap in IQ compared to the Phase XF 100MP ? I agree the S 007 compares favorably to the 50MP alternatives and that its enough for most all applications .....until you see a 100MP file . For now the Phase is just too large,heavy and expensive ...and it could as has been mentioned really be considered large format . But this will change overtime ..and we are speaking buying decisions that have a 4-5 year life .

Living in Florida 6 months each year .....I know David quite well and he would sell more S 007 s if they were 60MP ....otherwise the S 006 is terrific if you can live with base ISO (its bright in Florida ).

However .....why can t the SL be increased to 36MP ? Leica doesn t want to compete with the S .

When speaking of the "gap in IQ," are you speaking of sensor quality or just the number of pixels? Sounds to me that all the gripes are about the number of pixels. If the "gap in IQ" is just another way of saying "MP" why not just buy the large, heavy, and expensive Phase and be happy about it? Leica has apparently has determined that 6 microns is the sweet spot for its professional cameras. What's wrong with that? Or, to put it another way, why gripe about Leica's low pixel count when you can buy as many as you want through Fuji, Hasselblad, or Phase?

 

[glenerrolrd]

Rather than reply to each comment(all excellent perspectives differing primarily by how each photographer sees their personal requirements ). ...let me restate .

Leica is near the point of introducing a new M ...and it is rumored from many sources that it will share the 24MP sensor with the Q and the SL . I was disappointed when Leica introduced the S 007 without any gain in MP ...seemed like a lateral move to get away from CCD and going to CMOS . I was further disappointed when Leica released the SL with the same sensor as the Q ..24MP. Both of those decisions by Leica seem to be driven by availability of a non sony sensor ,cost and the ability to support live view,video etc .

I am speaking from my own use in street ,travel ,sport and family . Probably 25K captures a year since the M240 was released . I also have and use both the Nikon D5 and D810 bodies . My daughter is a photographer and uses the canon 5DS R and 5D 3 cameras . My wife uses a d750 . So I have worked with thousands of files on each of these platforms . A good friend has the Phase XF 100MP (and he enjoys pointing out how spectacular those files are ).

By system:

Leica S ...beyond fashion,studio,event,portrait ...the S was developed as a piece of uber gear for travel and landscape . (Ice and snow locations ). This summer I hope to visit Ireland and shoot for a few weeks . A robust weather sealed kit is exactly what I want . The S has everything except the MPs . But I can make the 37.5 MPS work .....and yes I have “sensor envy “ . Hasselblad showed a prototype with a square 80MP cut down of the uber 100MP sensor . If Leica releases an upgraded sensor I will be literally first in line . Until then the S 006 will suffice and I may invest in a S 007 if the price is right .

Leica SL ...this appears to be the video platform of the future for Leica and it is a brilliant design . But the files are not as robust as the Nikon D810 (I use converted Leica R lenses and Zeiss ZF.2 ) . We could debate OVF/EVF ,size and weight,availability of AF lenses etc etc . But what bothers me the most is the files aren t any better than my M240 and the system is huge in comparison . The sensor could easily be 36MP but my understanding is that Leica did not want the SL to become a lower cost S .

Leica M ....this is my favorite system ...having been shooting Leica M RF since I was in high school (that was a long time ago ). The new M will be at least 4 years since the M240 ....I am hoping it will be worth the upgrade in both time and money .

I am in Marc s camp .....wishing Leica would built specific cameras for each market segment rather than trying to be all things to all photographers . I understand their product planning and the rationale for their sensor strategy . Phase has shown that the market is there at uber prices ...IF the product is truly outstanding .

The observation I was speaking to in my RANT ....is the apparent traffic jam in sensor improvements for whatever reasons . And yes ultimately I will VOTE like everyone else with what I buy .

Appreciate the discussion .

 

[glenerrolrd]

When speaking of the "gap in IQ," are you speaking of sensor quality or just the number of pixels? Sounds to me that all the gripes are about the number of pixels. If the "gap in IQ" is just another way of saying "MP" why not just buy the large, heavy, and expensive Phase and be happy about it? Leica has apparently has determined that 6 microns is the sweet spot for its professional cameras. What's wrong with that? Or, to put it another way, why gripe about Leica's low pixel count when you can buy as many as you want through Fuji, Hasselblad, or Phase?

Because for my applications the S platform has the best form (water proof DSLR ) and the best lenses (S/CS). I believe the S 007 is competitive with the 50MP offerings but not the newer 100MP .

 

[Photo Lawyer]

Appreciate the discussion .

Roger,

Coming across this thread, thought I'd play devil's advocate for a bit. I have both a 006 and 007. I looked at Hasselblad's X1D and, frankly, thought even more of the 007. When Leica introduced the SL, it said that its mojo was movement, i.e., the photographer's movement. Consequently, I think they've left the race of MPs, bulk, and tripods to the Phase Ones. I believe I read where Andres Kaufmann said that Leica had considered increasing MPs, and had decided against joining that race. (Can anyone say, "Canon 5DS R"?) Anyway, my S far exceeds my pay grade (and probably practically everyone else's on the forum) and it's a pity that people want to characterize it as an incorrigible. Personally, I like Leica's mojo, and am even adding an M-D later on this month (don't tell my wife, though).

 

[KeithL]

...I am in Marc s camp .....wishing Leica would built specific cameras for each market segment rather than trying to be all things to all photographers ...

I've grown tired of buying cameras/systems for specific tasks. I wanted a camera/system I could use for my tripod based architecture work - interiors and exteriors - as well as my handheld travel/street work. Because I'm often shooting in adverse conditions any camera would also have to be compact and comparatively lightweight. Above all I value simplicity.

I bought into the M240 precisely because it can be all things, at least all things to this photographer. The M240 offers me the flexibility of rangefinder or EVF which is virtually unique and is the reason why I find myself here on this Leica forum. My wish is that Leica continue building on this flexibility by offering a far more sophisticated optional EVF on the next M body together with the necessary additional processing power.

I'm not interested in building a portfolio of cameras, I am interested in building a portfolio of images.

 

[Photo Lawyer]

I am interested in building a portfolio of images.

Oof, these are nice photographs.