Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 48 of 48

Thread: M lens rumors

  1. #1
    Mango
    Guest

    M lens rumors

    Quoted from:

    http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-...tml#post650133

    Quoted material:

    In the french review Chasseur d'images, p. 12 n307, the noctilux 0.95 is announced : 8000 euros. There is a picture of the dog: nice work !

    Other news :

    M summilux 21 :5000 euros

    M summilux 24 : 5000 euros

    M elmar 24 f/3.8 : 1800 euros

    Pradovit D 1200 : 9890 euros.

  2. #2
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: M lens rumors

    Just what we wanted -- faster and more expensive M lenses
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  3. #3
    Mango
    Guest

    Re: M lens rumors

    Perhaps the new fast 21 (fov 28) and 24 (fov 32) satisfy the high ISO crowd. There is now sufficient fast glass for most usage, so any comparisons with Nikon high ISO performance won't need to be made, provided these lenses deliver.

    There's also no need to create a high ISO M9. Having fast glass is a cheaper alternative (though expensive for most punters).

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Fort Collins, Colorado
    Posts
    2,077
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: M lens rumors

    Quote Originally Posted by Mango View Post
    Perhaps the new fast 21 (fov 28) and 24 (fov 32) satisfy the high ISO crowd. There is now sufficient fast glass for most usage, so any comparisons with Nikon high ISO performance won't need to be made, provided these lenses deliver.

    There's also no need to create a high ISO M9. Having fast glass is a cheaper alternative (though expensive for most punters).
    Mango

    While i think that Leica continues to do state of the art optics, particularly in the area of fast glass, Nikon builds bodies that have useful ISO's up to 6400 and will go even higher in a pinch. And considering that the new Leica lenses (if the rumors are true) will cost in the neighborhood of 5000 Euros each while the Nikon bodies are priced at $2995 for the D700 and $4500 for the D3 I could hardly call the Leica approach a "cheaper solution."

    I would love to own the 28 Lux but at this price I just could not justify it.

    Woody

  5. #5
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Hollywood, FL
    Posts
    580
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M lens rumors

    Not confirming or denying here, just commenting....

    See how rumors work? First there was that 28 lux rumor, then a 24 cron. Nobody even figured on a 21 or 24 lux. Assuming these leaks are the real deal, of course....

    Let's just wait and see what Monday (Sept. 15) brings regarding US pricing.

    David
    David Farkas
    Leica Store Miami

  6. #6
    Mango
    Guest

    Re: M lens rumors

    Quote Originally Posted by woodyspedden View Post
    "... I could hardly call the Leica approach a "cheaper solution." ..." Woody
    Woody, you're absolutely right. By cheaper I meant cheaper in the Leica world, which is like saying a cheaper Bentley. It's all relative, but it's way out of my budget!

  7. #7
    Subscriber robsteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,202
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    496

    Re: M lens rumors

    Quote Originally Posted by woodyspedden View Post

    While i think that Leica continues to do state of the art optics, particularly in the area of fast glass, Nikon builds bodies that have useful ISO's up to 6400 and will go even higher in a pinch.

    Woody
    You would probably have to shoot a Nikon 24mm at f4 or smaller to approach the quality of the Leica at f1.4. That is about three stops. Is the Leica 640 iso that much worse than the Nikon 3200?


    Robert

  8. #8
    matmcdermott
    Guest

    Re: M lens rumors

    The buzz over at LUF regarding those prices is that Chasseurs d'Images swapped a Euro sign for a dollar sign. So Noctilux will be $8000. Can't verify it beyond what's in the original thread linked at the top, but it would bring the prices into normal Leica range=pricey, but par for the course pricey and not Leica has fracking lost their corporate mind pricey.

  9. #9
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: M lens rumors

    I am waiting on news. Maybe nothing I can formally say on the forums but certainly like to see the direction here.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Fort Collins, Colorado
    Posts
    2,077
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: M lens rumors

    Quote Originally Posted by robsteve View Post
    You would probably have to shoot a Nikon 24mm at f4 or smaller to approach the quality of the Leica at f1.4. That is about three stops. Is the Leica 640 iso that much worse than the Nikon 3200?


    Robert
    Hey Robert

    I would be talking about using the 14-24 or 24-70 zooms depending on the FL I need. Since they are fixed aperture f2.8 lenses you have tremendous latitude with the new Nikon bodies and their impressive high ISO performance.

    I love the Leica look and don't mean to disparage any new high speed lenses they bring out. I only was commenting that this is very expensive to get low light shots compared to the Nikons with their wonderful High ISO opportunities.

    I hope that everyone buys a new Leica high speed lens so that Leica remains viable. I am a lifelong fan and will continue to support their system(s). But at $ close to 6K per lens I won't be buying. I am out of money, even if my lust for the great Leica gear remains.

    Best

    Woody

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    2,338
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    52

    Re: M lens rumors

    I hope this glss comes out. Makes it easier to sell teh remaining M glass I have kept - when I do.

  12. #12
    pascal_meheut
    Guest

    Re: M lens rumors

    These are not rumors. Pictures are published and it has been confirmed by an official reseller. For pictures, see:

    http://www.summilux.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=20697

    BTW, the reseller also confirmed the price which includes the 19.6% french VAT.

  13. #13
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: M lens rumors

    Thanks Pascal , sort of what we talked about in the other thread and something David Farkas and I talked about way back in June 07 with Stefan Daniels. Glad to see some of it come to life.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  14. #14
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Terry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    6,955
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1145

    Re: M lens rumors

    I will be interested to see how the 24 elmar draws to see how it fits into the lineup.

  15. #15
    Senior Member ecliffordsmith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Antwerpen
    Posts
    467
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M lens rumors

    Hi All,

    I must admit that the lens I would possibly be in the market for is an 18mm to make a 24 field of view on the M8. Who nows, this list may not yet be complete though.

    I would be curious to see how big these lenses actually are. I suspect you would get a fair amount of viewfinder area blocked with the 24 lux.

    It is great to see these being released though. I wonder if focus shift that has dogged other Summilux models has been addressed in these new ultra fast models.

  16. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Mexico
    Posts
    525
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: M lens rumors

    Quote Originally Posted by robsteve View Post
    You would probably have to shoot a Nikon 24mm at f4 or smaller to approach the quality of the Leica at f1.4. That is about three stops. Is the Leica 640 iso that much worse than the Nikon 3200?


    Robert
    Robert, It is starting to happen to me the same thing as when they talk about trilions (of people,money) I get confused. Is .95 a half stop faster than f1? It sounds as if it is the same for practical reasons.

  17. #17
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: M lens rumors

    Gero, you use the inverse square law to calculate apertures, so f1.0 / 1.41 will give you the next smaller aperture. In this case, f0.71 is the next full aperture below f1 and f0.8 and f0.9 would be the 1/3 stops. Thus f0.95 is about 1/6th of a stop faster than f1.0. I suspect this slight gain in aperture was due to a minor re-design of the internal elements.
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  18. #18
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    420
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M lens rumors

    Damn,

    I'm still waiting for a new design 35 Lux that doesn't have focus shift issues.

  19. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Mexico
    Posts
    525
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: M lens rumors

    Jack, I was hoping it was 1/2 stop.

    Thank's

  20. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Northampton, Ma
    Posts
    532
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M lens rumors

    Quote Originally Posted by robsteve View Post
    Is the Leica 640 iso that much worse than the Nikon 3200?


    Robert
    yes!

  21. #21
    Deceased, but remembered fondly here... johnastovall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Dublin, Texas, U.S.A.
    Posts
    1,549
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    112

    Re: M lens rumors

    Actually I rather like the M8 at 640 and up. Reminds me of the M's with pushed Tri-X. One can get some very nice thing out of it with Alien Skin's Exposure.

    "The market wants a Leica to be a Leica: the inheritor of tradition, the subject of lore, and indisputably a mark of status to own."
    Mike Johnston


  22. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Reykjavik, Iceland
    Posts
    2,310
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    9

    Re: M lens rumors

    I only saw the 21/1.4, I did not see the 24/1.4 -- I hope this is true -- it would be fantastic. My three favorite M focal lengths are 24, 35 and 75, so having summiluxes in all three would be great. I don't want to pay 6000+ though! That is about 4000 more than I would be interested in sacrificing. It does not seem so long ago when my MP cost 2295 new USA and the 35/1.4 ASPH was below 2000 used like new from Popflash. This looks like the "used like new" price would be 5000 USD. That's pretty intense.
    My photos are here: http://www.stuartrichardson.com and more recent work here: http://stuartrichardson.tumblr.com/ Please have a look at my book!
    My lab is here: http://www.customphotolab.is and on facebook

  23. #23
    Workshop Member glenerrolrd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Jupiter FL/Atlanta GA
    Posts
    2,279
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M lens rumors

    Maybe I am not looking at this correctly but the M8 above 320 and the D3 above 1600 (maybe 800) both start to lose the ability to resolve fine detail. The images can still quite acceptable and with the use of noise reduction wizardry can produce exceptional photographs.......but they will not be as good as those shot at lower ISOs . My experience is that the M8 can produce decent results at 640 but has less latitude for exposure errors...the pictures will look good but will not have the "looking glass" affect of more detail than you can easily see. The D3 seems to go thru the same loss of detail around 1600. So I don t believe the D3 has more than a 1 1/2 stop advantage on the M8 in this range.

    The difference is what happens above 640/1600. In my case the M8 just dies at 1250 ..I have to pretend I like that clumpy noise ..to get anything I can use. The D3 ...on the other hand keeps on going ..so both 3200 and 6400 are quite useable..not as good as the M8 at 640 but way better than the M8 at 1250.

    Of course this depends on two variables ...one ...what skills am I applying to both shot and process the images and two....what IQ do I need to feel the image is usable.

    The debate will be over(for available light champ) if Nikon or Zeiss deliver fast primes that perform wide open or Leica improves its sensor. The good news is that both systems are getting better.

  24. #24
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: M lens rumors

    Quote Originally Posted by ecliffordsmith View Post
    I wonder if focus shift that has dogged other Summilux models has been addressed in these new ultra fast models.
    BINGO!!! That is the "elephant in the room" question!

    Although I wouldn't mind a 28/1.4 ASPH for use on a M film body ... killer street shooter.

    Wish they'd bring forth a updated M7II with a 1/4000th top shutter.

  25. #25
    Subscriber robsteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,202
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    496

    Re: M lens rumors

    Quote Originally Posted by glenerrolrd View Post
    The debate will be over(for available light champ) if Nikon or Zeiss deliver fast primes that perform wide open or Leica improves its sensor. The good news is that both systems are getting better.
    I think Leica worked with what they had control over and expertise in; making fast lenses. They are limited to what the sensor supplies can supply.

    In what I have seen, the Nikons or the Zeiss have never been comparable to the fast Leica wides when shot wide open. I wouldn't hope for miracles there.

    Did you notice the sample files from the Sony Alpha 900 at iso 1600 and higher? To me they don't look as good as the Nikon and Canon file. It looks like Nikon and Canon have the market on high iso sensors.

    Robert

  26. #26
    Workshop Member glenerrolrd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Jupiter FL/Atlanta GA
    Posts
    2,279
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M lens rumors

    Quote Originally Posted by robsteve View Post
    I think Leica worked with what they had control over and expertise in; making fast lenses. They are limited to what the sensor supplies can supply.

    In what I have seen, the Nikons or the Zeiss have never been comparable to the fast Leica wides when shot wide open. I wouldn't hope for miracles there.

    Did you notice the sample files from the Sony Alpha 900 at iso 1600 and higher? To me they don't look as good as the Nikon and Canon file. It looks like Nikon and Canon have the market on high iso sensors.

    Robert
    Rob Certainly agree on the wide open performance of the Nikon lenses but they are really improving and with a sensor advantage of a few stops ...they are getting closer . Leica at 1.4 ..Nikon at 2.8 ..Leica has an advanatge but Leica at 2.0 and Nikon at 4.0 closer. But the real advantage comes after the Leica at 1.4 with 1250 bottoms out...from there on the D3 can still perform ...so if we can get excellent..maybe not to Leica standard performance ...then the D3 can shoot in available darkness.

    But you forgot to throw in that you can shoot a M at 1/15 and the nikon will need 1/30 or 1/60 to match it. Roger

  27. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Northampton, Ma
    Posts
    532
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M lens rumors

    This is where the Zeiss 2.0 F lenses shine. Both the 35 and 50/2.0 are in Leica's neighborhood for wide open performance, coupled with very good/good iso 3200/6400 performance of the D3, hard to beat if you really need to shoot darkness. I still prefer shooting the M system though!

  28. #28
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: M lens rumors

    Quote Originally Posted by glenerrolrd View Post
    Rob Certainly agree on the wide open performance of the Nikon lenses but they are really improving and with a sensor advantage of a few stops ...they are getting closer . Leica at 1.4 ..Nikon at 2.8 ..Leica has an advanatge but Leica at 2.0 and Nikon at 4.0 closer. But the real advantage comes after the Leica at 1.4 with 1250 bottoms out...from there on the D3 can still perform ...so if we can get excellent..maybe not to Leica standard performance ...then the D3 can shoot in available darkness.

    But you forgot to throw in that you can shoot a M at 1/15 and the nikon will need 1/30 or 1/60 to match it. Roger
    1/15th, which works so well when photographing dead people and the imoblized elderly

    No doubt the M glass is top of the heap ... you'll get no argument from me in that regard. But a low light machine the M8 is not when compared to some DSLRs ... fast primes will help that M cause a little, but my Nikon D3 ISO 10,000 is as good or better as my M8s top ISO 2500.

    Isn't the notion that the Leica M21 @ 1.4 is superior to something else a bit early to be speculating on?

  29. #29
    Workshop Member glenerrolrd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Jupiter FL/Atlanta GA
    Posts
    2,279
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M lens rumors

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    1/15th, which works so well when photographing dead people and the imoblized elderly

    No doubt the M glass is top of the heap ... you'll get no argument from me in that regard. But a low light machine the M8 is not when compared to some DSLRs ... fast primes will help that M cause a little, but my Nikon D3 ISO 10,000 is as good or better as my M8s top ISO 2500.

    Isn't the notion that the Leica M21 @ 1.4 is superior to something else a bit early to be speculating on?



    Not looking for an argument. My point has been from the beginning is that it depends on what ISO range is important to you. Personally using the M8 above 640 isn t attractive to me (your experience may be different). When I compare what I can get with my D3 its around 1600 that seems to compare . Both systems can produce excellent results at these levels. Its after that the M8 seems to drop out..the rate of decline is quick . I don t like the results I get at 1250 and 2500 doesn t cut it.

    The D3 decline is much more gradual with the results at 6400 still acceptable but clearly degraded from 1600. So your perspective /experience that the D3 at 10,000 is as good or better than the M8 at 2500 is consistent with what I have been able to do.

    I agree with Rob s point that the the quality of the optics at wide apertures should be considered. I am completely happy with my 35 asph at 1.4 but not with my 24-70/2.8 at 2.8. This of course is apples and oranges but not an uncommon situation. The big hole in the Leica argument has been the lack of fast wide angles ..without which the differences aren t as great . To get a 28mmFOV I use the 21asph/2.8 ....if ,and of course its a wish and a hope, the 21/1.4 produces results similar to the 35/1.4 then this creates a lens speed advantage for the M8.

    As to what shutter speed can be hand held this is a discussion with in itself . I believe I can hand hold an M8 at a lower shutter speed than a D3 and get similar results.

    None of this in anyway takes away from the far superior sensor performance of the D3. But is it 2-3 stops better than the M8 ? My experience up to a point ..say 640-1250 on the M8 and 1600-3200 on the D3......the sensor performance of the D3 is matched by the speed of the Leica glass and my ability to hold slower shutter speed. After that its not a contest .

    In the context of a thread on the new Leica offerings, I am excited about the possibilities that fast wideangles might bring to my street photography.

  30. #30
    Subscriber robsteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,202
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    496

    Re: M lens rumors

    Here is one from the San Juan workshop. Ray playing with a Mamiya mounted with my SF-20. this was the Noctilux at f1 or 1.2 and 1/8th and 1250iso. Both Ray and Bob had D3 with them that night and the D3 couldn't produce images as good as the M8 and Noctilux.



    I later put the sf20 on a remote cord and placed it up on a shelf pointing backwards on low power. It added just enough light to shoot at 640, but retain some ambient light.

    This is 1/15th and 640iso. She was moving, look at the ghosting on the hands. I found if I focused (ligned the rangefinder) on her waistband, her face was also in focus.



    Here is 1/30th.


  31. #31
    Workshop Member glenerrolrd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Jupiter FL/Atlanta GA
    Posts
    2,279
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M lens rumors

    Rob I think you made my second point...results vary by photographer . What provides an outstanding result for one photographer may not work for another. In the hands of a skilled and experienced photographer the M8 noctilux can deliver pretty amazing results. Someone thats new to rangefinders or uses them infrequently or has difficulty focusing in low light would be hard pressed to match your results. But you should not care as we know your work and can "handicap" your results. Thats an analogy to golf where players of different abilities adjust there scores to account for skill differences. If Rob can do this at 1.0,1/8,1250....I might need another stop or two to match his results.

    New wide angles that provide a 2 stop improvement .... repositions the M8 and extends its range for low light situations.

  32. #32
    Subscriber robsteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,202
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    496

    Re: M lens rumors

    Quote Originally Posted by glenerrolrd View Post

    New wide angles that provide a 2 stop improvement .... repositions the M8 and extends its range for low light situations.
    Exactly what Leica was trying to do. I bet more people can handhold a 21mm at 1/20th of a second than a 50mm at that same speed.

    Robert

  33. #33
    Workshop Member glenerrolrd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Jupiter FL/Atlanta GA
    Posts
    2,279
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M lens rumors

    Quote Originally Posted by robsteve View Post
    Exactly what Leica was trying to do. I bet more people can handhold a 21mm at 1/20th of a second than a 50mm at that same speed.

    Robert
    The competition is pretty strong though from the new d700. The DHL man just delivered a zeiss 28/2 for my D3 . It is sharp wide open and at least to my eye I can hold it at 1/30 . So maybe under more careful inspection it will be 1/60. I don t view this as an either or just some nice extensions to both systems. But the D3 is still a beast for street shooting even with the 28/2. I want that D3 sensor in my Leica!

  34. #34
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: M lens rumors

    Roger that Zeiss 28mm is a sweetie you will like that a lot . has a nice draw to it
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  35. #35
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: M lens rumors

    Quote Originally Posted by glenerrolrd View Post
    Not looking for an argument. My point has been from the beginning is that it depends on what ISO range is important to you. Personally using the M8 above 640 isn t attractive to me (your experience may be different). When I compare what I can get with my D3 its around 1600 that seems to compare . Both systems can produce excellent results at these levels. Its after that the M8 seems to drop out..the rate of decline is quick . I don t like the results I get at 1250 and 2500 doesn t cut it.

    The D3 decline is much more gradual with the results at 6400 still acceptable but clearly degraded from 1600. So your perspective /experience that the D3 at 10,000 is as good or better than the M8 at 2500 is consistent with what I have been able to do.

    I agree with Rob s point that the the quality of the optics at wide apertures should be considered. I am completely happy with my 35 asph at 1.4 but not with my 24-70/2.8 at 2.8. This of course is apples and oranges but not an uncommon situation. The big hole in the Leica argument has been the lack of fast wide angles ..without which the differences aren t as great . To get a 28mmFOV I use the 21asph/2.8 ....if ,and of course its a wish and a hope, the 21/1.4 produces results similar to the 35/1.4 then this creates a lens speed advantage for the M8.

    As to what shutter speed can be hand held this is a discussion with in itself. I believe I can hand hold an M8 at a lower shutter speed than a D3 and get similar results.

    None of this in anyway takes away from the far superior sensor performance of the D3. But is it 2-3 stops better than the M8 ? My experience up to a point ..say 640-1250 on the M8 and 1600-3200 on the D3......the sensor performance of the D3 is matched by the speed of the Leica glass and my ability to hold slower shutter speed. After that its not a contest.

    In the context of a thread on the new Leica offerings, I am excited about the possibilities that fast wideangles might bring to my street photography.
    I think you may have missed the point I was trying to make ... I totally agree that one can hand hold a M8 at a lower shutter speed than a D700 (which I would debate is easier to do with a D3 than it was with past DSLRs, so that gap isn't as wide as it once was IMHO) ... however, when you get down into the 1/15th or 1/20th area it's the subject motion that becomes the issue, not camera movement. Unfortunately, most of my subject matter tends to be alive : -)

    For what I have to produce, ISO 640 seems to be the optimal IQ for the M8 ... where the D3/D700 produces comparable file quality (for me) @ ISO 2000 ... and easily produces good results @ ISO 5000. When comparing wide offerings for the sake of this discussion, I wouldn't use my 24-70 as the bench mark in the Nikon line-up ... but instead the 14-24/2.8 which is an astounding performer (as documented on this forum many times.)

    I do relish that faster wide primes are now available for the M8, but would much prefer it if Leica would get the M8 ISO up a stop or two ... if ISO 1250 was like 640 is now I'd be one super happy camper.

  36. #36
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: M lens rumors

    Marc interesting you put ISO 2000 on the D700. When I had the D300 i noticed the reality was ISO 2000 was truly the limit with good quality and holding noise down, after that i was not comfortable at all with color on the D300. Yes you can jump higher into the ISO but it was not great. I see the D700 and d3 maybe better at this top end. But i just could not get happy past ISO 2000 with the D300. Of course what I find acceptable maybe different than what others think also.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  37. #37
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: M lens rumors

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    Marc interesting you put ISO 2000 on the D700. When I had the D300 i noticed the reality was ISO 2000 was truly the limit with good quality and holding noise down, after that i was not comfortable at all with color on the D300. Yes you can jump higher into the ISO but it was not great. I see the D700 and d3 maybe better at this top end. But i just could not get happy past ISO 2000 with the D300. Of course what I find acceptable maybe different than what others think also.
    Totally agree. The D3 and D700 offer better high ISO color than the D300. I no longer have the D300.

    For me, when shooting weddings, getting the shot in the first place trumps other considerations ... so I'd also say that what's acceptable may also be be mitigated by application.

    Shooting a corporate gig may demand a slightly different level of acceptance than a candid wedding shot at a reception. Neither can be crap ... but the Corporate useage may be more demanding than pulling a 8X10 for a wedding album.

    Point in question: in light that would have had a cat stumbling around, D3 with 24-70/2.8 & fill: 1/40th @ 70mm ... of a quickly moving subject requiring stopping down (I did f/9 in this case), getting the shot trumped all other considerations ... and I knew I was doing these shots in B&W anyway ...

    ISO 10,000 !

    Horses for courses.
    Last edited by fotografz; 6th November 2008 at 15:33.

  38. #38
    Workshop Member glenerrolrd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Jupiter FL/Atlanta GA
    Posts
    2,279
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M lens rumors

    Marc I understood exactly what your points were. Your point as I understood it was , you can t hand hold 1/15 and even if you could the subject itself may have visible motion. I have tried to restate my POV as" you can hand hold an M8 at a slower shutter speed than a D3" . For me its about a stop ..and thats the only relevant point I was trying to make about the shutter speed.

    You are also of course correct that the 24-70/2.8 isn t the optimum lens you can get for a Nikon..especially when you are shooting wide open. It is ,however, probably the most common solution for the 28MM FOV. I stated exactly that in my initial post. This is why I purchased a 28/2 distagon and my initial images show its significantly better.

    Really two observations that I have from using both systems . The D3 has a 2 stop advantage over the M8 until the M8 hits 640. This is nice to have but a faster lens(thats better wide open) and an ability to hand hold the M8 at slower shutter speeds really make this a draw for me.

    Its only after the M8 is pushed to 1250 that the D3 pulls away because the M8 just quits . This equates to about 3200 on the D3 after which I don t want to use it. So if you want to shoot in places where the M8 has to use 1250 ..keep working on the D3/D700 kit.

    If you experience is different(or you need to shoot different subjects/venues etc) then you might make different choices than I have. But for me gaining 2 stops in that critical 21mm(28mm FOV) is a real
    benefit.

    Roger Dunham

  39. #39
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    43
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M lens rumors

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    in light that would have had a cat stumbling around...
    I use night vision goggles to watch my cats frolic in pitch darkness, and they never stumble!


  40. #40
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: M lens rumors

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    where the D3/D700 produces comparable file quality (for me) @ ISO 2000 ... and easily produces good results @ ISO 5000.
    Marc:

    I find it interesting that the Nikon produces superior results at an intermediate ISOs... My Canon and Leica definitely produce their best results at full ISO multiples of base ISO, and the intermediate steps are usually significantly worse -- noisier -- than the next full ISO up. IOW on my Canon's, 800 was significantly better than 500 or 640. Heck, even my M8 640 pushed one and two is better than using it at the native 1250 and 2500...

    Cheers,
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  41. #41
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    819
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M lens rumors

    By pushed, do you mean over-exposing by 2 stops and pulling back in post, or by under-exposing and pushing up the exposure in post? I suspect the latter, but curious.

  42. #42
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: M lens rumors

    Hi John:

    You are correct, it's the latter. A "push" is under-exposing and adding exposure back during processing. By contrast, over-exposing then under-developing is traditionally referred to as a "pull" ...
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  43. #43
    Subscriber Member Chuck Jones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Studio City, CA
    Posts
    700
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    18

    Re: M lens rumors

    Pull - a very dirty word in digital circles. <Smile>.

  44. #44
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    819
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M lens rumors

    Hi Jack - Push or pull, it's all relative to which end you're on I'm interested to see how the first M8.2 feel about pushing/pulling with the updated 16-bit DNG file. And I'd really like to see that option available via firmware update for the original M8. Seems like that's possible since Leica's FAQ document states they did not see an appreciable difference. That implies the M8 can generate a 16-bit DNG.

  45. #45
    pascal_meheut
    Guest

    Re: M lens rumors

    It is possible because the pre-production M8 had 16 bits DNG. Leica Fotographie used one to compare with the 8 bits DNG. And found little if no difference indeed.

  46. #46
    35mmSummicron
    Guest

    Re: M lens rumors

    While I'm sure its possible via FW update to introduce true 16bit DNG files, I don't think this M8.2 press release leak is implying it will have this feature.

    The M8 has ALWAYS stated in their marketing material that it shoots 16bit DNG's. That's why there was so much uproar when people discovered its actually 8bit via lookup tables. even now, if you go on leica's website and download the technical data PDF for the M8.0, it will say 16bit DNG.

    http://us.leica-camera.com/photography/m_system/m8/

    The other challenge I believe is that **IF** Leica releases true 16bit DNG's, then ALL current raw processors on the market that read M8 files will need to be updated. (similar to when Canon came up with the sRAW format)

    my two cents.
    andy

    Quote Originally Posted by John Black View Post
    Hi Jack - Push or pull, it's all relative to which end you're on I'm interested to see how the first M8.2 feel about pushing/pulling with the updated 16-bit DNG file. And I'd really like to see that option available via firmware update for the original M8. Seems like that's possible since Leica's FAQ document states they did not see an appreciable difference. That implies the M8 can generate a 16-bit DNG.

  47. #47
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    819
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M lens rumors

    According to the June 2008 Leica M8 FAQ (http://us.leica-camera.com/service/d.../m8/index.html) in section 1.5:

    1.5 Why is RAW data stored in the 8-bit format?

    The LEICA M8 is equipped with a nearly loss-free compression of the image data in the case of files in DNG format. This doubles storage speed while requiring only half of the storage capacity. During the prototype phase, tests were performed with a 16 bit version, but they did not reveal any image quality advantages. As a result, Leica opted for the 8 bit technology.

  48. #48
    35mmSummicron
    Guest

    Re: M lens rumors

    I'm all for TRUE 16bit DNG's as an option--the more *options* Leica gives current and future M8.xx users, the longer (seemingly) the lifespan the camera will have until an M9 replacement arrives.

    My point is though, I don't think the new M8.2 will have this feature.....hopefully I'm wrong.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •