Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: M9 picture better than Nikon D800-samples

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Warsaw, Poland
    Posts
    188
    Post Thanks / Like

    M9 picture better than Nikon D800-samples

    You must go there for full size samples:
    D800=M9 resolution-- raw pictures: Nikon D3 - D1 / D700 Forum: Digital Photography Review

    Leica M9 is 18 Mpix, D800 36 Mpix.
    I pulled relevant raws from Imaging Resource comparometer (Still Life at base ISO, dng and nef).
    I developed them in Raw Therapee at default, no post. I saved them at full jpegs: 11MB for Leica and 20MB for Nikon. The jpegs do not differ visually from raws, if somebody offers bandwidth I can deliver tiffs (100MB in case of D800).
    I do not see any differences in real detail between the two cameras. But please help to find any. In fact I prefer the Leica picture. When printed in A2 on my Epson 3880 the preference for Leica is even stronger.
    See the attached jpegs which you can pull from my gallery in their full glory of 11MB and 20MB respectively (full original download enabled).

  2. #2
    Not Available
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,864
    Post Thanks / Like

  3. #3
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Shashin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Posts
    4,501
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    141

    Re: M9 picture better than Nikon D800-samples

    Dude, you are so right. Just look the M9 is the hands down winner. Just pick the best and that obviously is the M9 which is on the left, or is that the right, but never mind. I took both images and washed them in the back pocket of my jeans and buried them in soft peat for a month and showed them at the bottom of a deep well and I can tell you the D800 does not compete with the M9 image. And since the D800 blows medium-format digital away, the M9 is like a 20x24 film camera in terms of detail, IMHO.

    Sorry, but I gotta go and pick up my new glasses.

  4. #4
    Member Agnius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Santa Monica, California
    Posts
    135
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M9 picture better than Nikon D800-samples

    Quote Originally Posted by Shashin View Post
    Dude, you are so right. Just look the M9 is the hands down winner. Just pick the best and that obviously is the M9 which is on the left, or is that the right, but never mind. I took both images and washed them in the back pocket of my jeans and buried them in soft peat for a month and showed them at the bottom of a deep well and I can tell you the D800 does not compete with the M9 image. And since the D800 blows medium-format digital away, the M9 is like a 20x24 film camera in terms of detail, IMHO.

    Sorry, but I gotta go and pick up my new glasses.
    I think the image on the left is larger. I think there is a little bit more "detail", but it is like splitting hairs - sometimes I see it, and sometimes I don't. New glasses coming soon too.

    To double the resolution of 18MP it would take 72MP sensor, so the gain is not even doubled - only X1.5.

    What I am interested in is improved dynamic range and high ISO - M9 sensor is a noisy one for anything above 640 ISO. If D800 might be able to have the same (lack off) noise at 1600 ISO, that would be an improvement. But for me debating M9 vs. D800 is pointless as M system weights so much less and that makes it a winner for travel. Yes, high ISO sucked compared to other systems, but I think a new sensor in M10 will remedy that. I hope for some weather sealing too.

    Oh, and I just scanned in some TMY negs from couple decades back - and sure they are grainy and difficult to make out "fine detail", but I can see what was photographed and make reasonable size enlargements. In comparison M9 file would be better in every regard, so in that sense digital is better than film. But so what?

    Happy shooting!

  5. #5
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Shashin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Posts
    4,501
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    141

    Re: M9 picture better than Nikon D800-samples

    Agnius, those are 100% crops, hence the different sizes. Personally, I think the emphasis on pixel resolution is neither here nor there. Both cameras can make great images and there are more reasons to own a camera than being able to count up to 36 million. But likewise, the OP's claim is silly.

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Warsaw, Poland
    Posts
    188
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M9 picture better than Nikon D800-samples


  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Warsaw, Poland
    Posts
    188
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M9 picture better than Nikon D800-samples

    Quote Originally Posted by Shashin View Post
    Agnius, those are 100% crops, hence the different sizes. Personally, I think the emphasis on pixel resolution is neither here nor there. Both cameras can make great images and there are more reasons to own a camera than being able to count up to 36 million. But likewise, the OP's claim is silly.

    It's a pity that 100% pixel peeping is the current mode of pictures technical quality comparison.
    The A2 prints show the story, the "old" story for those who still print their pictures...

  8. #8
    berlinfoto
    Guest

    Re: M9 picture better than Nikon D800-samples

    I am thinking about a Nikon D800, most of the images that I take these days are made with a Leica M9-P.
    But for images that I consider more personal, I use a Leica MP, usually with some of my remaining stock of Fuji Astia film.
    With the Leica MP and one of the two Leica telephotos, 75 mm or 90 mm Apo lens the prints appear to have been made with a middle format camera. I can not say that about images made with the M9-P, they are good but simply not as good as film.
    I will say that even with a older sensor digital camera the secret to sharpness appears to be more with the lens than the sensor.
    Super sharp digital lens make better images with both film and digital cameras. I have tried this with a digital back and a film back on a different camera system.
    May be my software, is not as good as what others are talking about, I use the latest version of Lightroom, I even use Lightroom to open my scans in Camera Raw to get the best white balance or color temperature adjustment.

  9. #9
    Spiritshooter
    Guest

    Re: M9 picture better than Nikon D800-samples

    This is my first post here so I will be objective and hope that I don't get run off

    First, let me say that I am a Leica Fanboy. Not a dentist, but a fanboy none the less. I have owned a number of Leica cameras and lenses for a very long time and love their handling and product.

    I also do not typically pixel peep unless I am researching a new product or see a problem. I am a design professional and my work is printed large. Sometimes, very large.

    I own and use an M9 (with Summicron 35, 50 and 75mm lenses), a Sony Nex 7 and a Nikon D800 (with AF-s 24/1.4G, 50/1.4G, 85/1.4G and AFs 70-200 2.8G ED VR II. I recently sold a Phase One P45+ with a Contax 645 so I have had something with a MF sensor to compare with.

    After reading much of the commentary on the web and on the forum boards, I have to say that a lot of the banter is nonsensical and designed to generate hits for their advertising specs.

    When I do compare cameras and lenses, I do so in real world conditions looking for real world results. So, with that said, here is what I know and have seen.

    My M9 is a magnificent camera. The images are amazing. Processed in C1 the colors are lovely and exciting. Processed in LR4 the highlights are more easily recovered if blown.

    My D800 is a special camera. It feels good, handles well, the AF is excellent and the image quality is as as good as or exceeds the Phase P45+ in resolution. Obviously the Nikkor lenses have difficulty competing against the Contax/Zeiss lenses but that is another story.

    When comparing the same image in Photoshop at 200% magnification, made on a tripod with the D800 and M9 there are differences. The M9 files are smaller, they show more noise, and are not quite as crisp. These are all subjective and as such represent what I saw. BUT, do these differences translate into real world differences?

    When processed and printed 16x20, 20x24 there is little or no visible difference in the image quality when printed on Epson Hot Press Natural (which is what I print on) using ImagePrint 9 and my Epson 9900. When printed larger, say 36"x48" the D800 files do look smoother and sharper. However, the M9 files still look good as I know I am being overly critical.

    So the bottom line is this, both cameras are excellent. Both are different and may function for you based upon you needs and type of work, and both will produce commercial quality or art quality results.

    The rest is up to you.
    Likes 5 Member(s) liked this post

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
  •