Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 48 of 48

Thread: DxOMark tests the Leica Typ 240 - great news!

  1. #1
    Member animefx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Springfield, IL
    Posts
    166
    Post Thanks / Like

    DxOMark tests the Leica Typ 240 - great news!

    DXOMark doesn't *really* matter in the grand scheme of things but it's always good news if the camera your wanting tests well.

    Leica typ 240:
    Overall 84
    Portrait 24 bits
    Landscape 13.3 Evs
    Sports 1860 ISO

    I'm very impressed. The dynamic range was rated better than I had expected, although I knew it would be higher than the Canon 6D. All of the tests except for ISO rated better than any of Canon's current DSLR models. The ISO tests slightly better than the 5D Mark II which is great news because the 5D Mark II is no slouch in low light and 3 less megapixels than the M 240.

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

    Re: DxOMark tests the Leica Typ 240 - great news!

    DxOMark Tests and Compares Leica M

    It comes pretty close if not exceeds the Canon 1Dx, etc. in some metrics. Obviously not high ISO, but that's okay. Still 1.5+ stops better than the previous generation.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,173
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxOMark tests the Leica Typ 240 - great news!

    What's the big fuss about some DxO test. Never read one in my life and probably never well. I ready at some forum today some guy is selling his M9 cheap because of the horrible review from DxO. Then steve huff is making a big deal of it on his website. What's the big deal?
    Likes 6 Member(s) liked this post

  4. #4
    Not Available
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,864
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxOMark tests the Leica Typ 240 - great news!

    ^ Agreed. People are free to do what they want, but I love my M9... And that's all that matters in the end.
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    691
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxOMark tests the Leica Typ 240 - great news!

    Quote Originally Posted by mmbma View Post
    What's the big fuss about some DxO test. Never read one in my life and probably never well. I ready at some forum today some guy is selling his M9 cheap because of the horrible review from DxO. Then steve huff is making a big deal of it on his website. What's the big deal?
    I thought it was a marketing gimmick from a company that made raw-processors but couldn't compete, that makes certain aspects of a 'sensor' more or less favourable so that a particular manufacturer always wins the sensor war by being 'best', at the same time providing lots of categories for different sensors to excel, despite making no rational judgement of real-world needs or usage, thus encouraging fan-boys to rant and blow off steam with bullshit but seemingly justified arguments (in the face of people with limited knowledge) ruining otherwise great and friendly forums to justify their purchases of equipment they don't need, as they have no other means of justifying what they are doing.

    Call me cynical, call me anything, just don't call me too late for me supper.

    (not directed at the op or anyone on getdpi, as we're a friendly knowledgeable bunch over here mostly)
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  6. #6
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Shashin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Posts
    4,497
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    141

    Re: DxOMark tests the Leica Typ 240 - great news!

    Quote Originally Posted by mmbma View Post
    What's the big fuss about some DxO test. Never read one in my life and probably never well. I ready at some forum today some guy is selling his M9 cheap because of the horrible review from DxO. Then steve huff is making a big deal of it on his website. What's the big deal?
    What is wrong with information? DxO marks give a fairly simple metric to make comparisons so you can judge something. If someone sells their camera because of a score, then it is a little silly, but that does not invalidate the usefulness of DxO.

    People are excited about the new M and there is little quantifiable information on it. This is the first real measurement. For some folks, this is very interesting.

    That fact that you have no interest does not mean that it is useless.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    92
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxOMark tests the Leica Typ 240 - great news!

    I don't know much about all this sophisticated testing, although I never knew that a sensor by itself could take a picture. Does DXO report any of their data with a lens attached? And, if so, wouldn't these #'s change as a function of the attached lens? Just asking... Steve Huff LOL The new Ken Rockwell

  8. #8
    Senior Member Taylor Sherman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    390
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxOMark tests the Leica Typ 240 - great news!

    What is interesting to me is simply the fact that it doesn't perform as well as many other sensors of the same generation in the quantifiable areas - DR and high-ISO performance. It might be that Leica made trade-offs to get what they believed was better image quality in other ways, but I don't know that.

    It wouldn't prevent me from getting one, eg I wouldn't get an RX-1 or D800 simply because the sensors test better. I'm just curious in a geeky sort of way. Is it an engineering question? Artistic? Cost?
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  9. #9
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Shashin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Posts
    4,497
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    141

    Re: DxOMark tests the Leica Typ 240 - great news!

    Quote Originally Posted by anthonysemone View Post
    I don't know much about all this sophisticated testing, although I never knew that a sensor by itself could take a picture. Does DXO report any of their data with a lens attached? And, if so, wouldn't these #'s change as a function of the attached lens? Just asking... Steve Huff LOL The new Ken Rockwell
    How would the performance of the sensor change the optics? So how can the optics change the performance of the sensor? DxOmark is just giving a baseline on which to judge a sensor.

    But these testing is not very useful to you by what you have said. That does not mean others don't find it useful. I don't think a position of not understanding something is a very good position for evaluation of that thing.

  10. #10
    Senior Member CharlesK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    730
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxOMark tests the Leica Typ 240 - great news!

    Quote Originally Posted by Taylor Sherman View Post
    What is interesting to me is simply the fact that it doesn't perform as well as many other sensors of the same generation in the quantifiable areas - DR and high-ISO performance. It might be that Leica made trade-offs to get what they believed was better image quality in other ways, but I don't know that.
    I feel it is wrong to criticize DXO for their test results. The results are objective and don't consider the system and really how the different lenses work as a whole. For the new M, no doubt some compromises were made to achieve IQ with the huge array of M lenses. The colors and IQ with the new M look quite amazing, even with the initial showing of images so far.

    As for the M9/ME, it is a wonderful system, even though the sensor is supposedly very dated, according to DXO, and yet yields wonderful shots, and only limited by the photographer. Do we look at the DXO results for the M9/ME and feel all of a sudden, we cannot take great shots!! Of course not, but it is a great yard stick for manufacturers to lift their game
    Charles Kalnins
    Tallai, Queensland Australia.

    http://kalnins.zenfolio.com
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  11. #11
    Senior Member Amin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Boston, MA (USA)
    Posts
    1,809
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxOMark tests the Leica Typ 240 - great news!

    I'm a big fan of DxOmark, but the usual caveats apply:

    1) Their summary scores can be misleading. You really have to look at the graphs to understand the results.

    2) Small differences between DxOmark results aren't meaningful. They can be within the error of measurement (typically seems to be about half a stop, give or take) or can be real differences that are too small to matter.

    3) Many sensor performance issues are not captured at all by DxOmark testing. For example, sensor resolution isn't tested. Banding issues, if any are still present with the latest firmware, wouldn't turn up on a DxOmark test.

    With all that said, I find their results to be both interesting and useful, and the new M results are very promising!
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  12. #12
    Not Available
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,864
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxOMark tests the Leica Typ 240 - great news!

    Even with their "combined score" it's really just part of an even bigger picture. As pointed out, it's all about sensor metrics for them. Interesting by itself, fun to debate... But as with many things, there's more to it. All the little things, personal things. Like for example lens performance or characteristics. System size and weight. Simplicity or feature rich? No M shooter is going to look at these values alone and say, "damn, I've get me some of that Canikon!" Just as the reverse is true. Different tools and all that too.

    Still, "worst image quality" was kinda funny.

    Most M shooters shoot them because, well, they're "M cameras." Whatever that means to them, regardless of "score." At least I do. I have Canon gear. I just don't shoot it much since I got the M!

  13. #13
    Senior Member edwardkaraa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Bangkok
    Posts
    1,470
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxOMark tests the Leica Typ 240 - great news!

    As mentioned above, these are just sensor metrics, fun to debate, that's all. As far as I'm concerned, I trust my own eyes. I like the M9 look much more than my previous Canon and Sony cameras, even though they score much higher, and they do have better high iso performance doubtlessly. I am starting to like what I see from the 240 files and I think Leica did an excellent job with the general look of the files. That is what matters to me.
    M262 ZM 25/2.8 35/1.4 50/2 85/2

  14. #14
    Workshop Member ptomsu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Austria, close to Vienna
    Posts
    3,862
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxOMark tests the Leica Typ 240 - great news!

    I do not care too much about DXOMark tests, but it is impressive how Leica could improve in the last years and meanwhile is nicely playing in the top range of available sensors. Also much better than some of the heavyweight competition. They came a long way!

    KUDOS to Leica!

  15. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    804
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxOMark tests the Leica Typ 240 - great news!

    We love DXOMark tests and find them relevant. Unless, of course, our favorite Leica camera sucks in their test and scores at the bottom of the bunch.

  16. #16
    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: DxOMark tests the Leica Typ 240 - great news!

    It seems that IF it is just sensor performance being measured, then to my eye the M9 gestalt must have made more of a worse sensor than others did with vastly superior ones. Which in turn begs the question why strive for a superior sensor then fall so short on the rest of the imaging chain? Doesn't make sense.

    The dichotomy of opinion seems to be between subjective aesthetics and the more quantifiable science of measurement: I like what I see ... verses I like what I read, so I should like what I see.

    Perhaps yet another example of the science of photography telling us what we should subjectively like? Could this be the hallmark of the digital age, where so many really aren't sure what they like and welcome some quantifiable data to decide for them? (present company excepted, to avoid a heated, but un-winnable quarrel )

    After all, quantifiable data is quite a verbal sledgehammer to beat subjectivity into submission ...not to mention how well it plays in the marketing mix because the science of measurement has set the evidential criteria ... leaving subjective judgment to fend for itself ... thus making "to my eye" or other aesthetically discriminatory pronouncements seem less valid.

    Although I no longer have a M9, I've yet to see anything from any other camera that "to my eye" provides that certain aesthetic look and feel that is so hard to put into words. So far, this includes the new M images which look closer to the other stuff out there then it does the M9 aesthetic. I'm hoping that changes as we all work with it.

    -Marc
    Likes 6 Member(s) liked this post

  17. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Reykjavik, Iceland
    Posts
    2,310
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    9

    Re: DxOMark tests the Leica Typ 240 - great news!

    I agree. Personally, I think these kinds of tests are about as useful as dropping two cameras off a cliff and rating them by which one hits the ground first. I can see how people find them very interesting, but from my perspective, they are just too far from a real-world evaluation to be worth even looking at. Give me both cameras to photograph with, and that is how I will decide which are better. For me, the lenses, handling and color response are the most important, followed by the resolution, followed by high iso performance, followed by "features".
    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
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  18. #18
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    3,670
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxOMark tests the Leica Typ 240 - great news!

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    It seems that IF it is just sensor performance being measured, then to my eye the M9 gestalt must have made more of a worse sensor than others did with vastly superior ones. Which in turn begs the question why strive for a superior sensor then fall so short on the rest of the imaging chain? Doesn't make sense.

    The dichotomy of opinion seems to be between subjective aesthetics and the more quantifiable science of measurement: I like what I see ... verses I like what I read, so I should like what I see.

    Perhaps yet another example of the science of photography telling us what we should subjectively like? Could this be the hallmark of the digital age, where so many really aren't sure what they like and welcome some quantifiable data to decide for them? (present company excepted, to avoid a heated, but un-winnable quarrel )

    After all, quantifiable data is quite a verbal sledgehammer to beat subjectivity into submission ...not to mention how well it plays in the marketing mix because the science of measurement has set the evidential criteria ... leaving subjective judgment to fend for itself ... thus making "to my eye" or other aesthetically discriminatory pronouncements seem less valid.

    Although I no longer have a M9, I've yet to see anything from any other camera that "to my eye" provides that certain aesthetic look and feel that is so hard to put into words. So far, this includes the new M images which look closer to the other stuff out there then it does the M9 aesthetic. I'm hoping that changes as we all work with it.

    -Marc
    Lets set aside for the moment sensors and think lenses. Take any number of well known pairs of lenses that are often compared. For example, the 50mm Lux asph and it's predecessor the pre asph; the 35mm Lux asph FLE and the lens it replaced, the Lux asph pre FLE; or the 35mm cron asph vs ver. IV that came before it. In each one of these cases and dozens of others, few would disagree that based on quantifiable optical measurements, the most recent versions would win hand down. Yet as we all know, there is a large percentage of those who would choose the earlier versions for their optical esthetics...the way they capture and present an image whether it be on film or with a digital sensor.

    Quantifiable measurements in any "art", whether it be photography, audio equipment, even in a comparison of two cars, can only reveal part of the story and how one objectively feels about seeing, listening or enjoying the output of a given product. In addition, there are usually other elements within these designed products that contribute or work in concert with the measured component, so using quantifiable numbers to make a judgement can only reveal performance characteristics of that one component, no matter how integral that component is to the "whole" in terms of output and ultimately its level of performance vs. others.

    Please don't get me wrong. There is "quantifiable measurements" and their is "subjectivity" and both are important. I think the answer is not to ignore that which can be measured and often times it can be a good predictor of performance, but generally only up to a certain point. Conversely we should not ignore that which cannot be measured but is still held in high regard by our senses

    The esthetic component...what we hear in the case of using a particular piece of audio equipment or in the case of a visual art, what we see in an image produced by a camera is just as important as how it measures up in terms of lab values as Marc pointed out. What many ultimately see with their own eyes, is maybe the most important element in choosing any camera or lens...or at the very least, should lead the way when also considering scientific measurements made on some of its components as a predictor of it's ultimate performance.

    Dave (D&A)
    Last edited by D&A; 15th March 2013 at 06:57.
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  19. #19
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,623
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxOMark tests the Leica Typ 240 - great news!

    The fact that people dicuss if they like the IQ of the new "M" as much as that of the M9 while the sensor of the new "M" is tested much better by DXO says a lot about DXO IMO.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  20. #20
    Senior Member johnnygoesdigital's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,579
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxOMark tests the Leica Typ 240 - great news!

    As mentioned previously, having empirical data as a base reference for sensor performance is most certainly useful, especially when understanding dynamic range. (imo, the most important criteria for a sensor). Being objective to the review is another key factor, and this transferable knowledge will apply to your personal shooting styles and lens/camera choice.

    The M is a Leica with most features that people complained the M9 didn't have, add the amazing lenses and extreme portability, and you've got one really nice camera.

  21. #21
    Workshop Member ptomsu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Austria, close to Vienna
    Posts
    3,862
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxOMark tests the Leica Typ 240 - great news!

    @ shashin

    maybe you speak German - then here we go: "Wer viel misst, misst viel Mist" - an old saying which especially in case of DXO proves to be true again and again :-)

    Anyway I find it amusing why some fight so much for things they are not really affected or threatened - I hope never to understand why ....

  22. #22
    Senior Member stephengilbert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Santa Monica, CA
    Posts
    2,272
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: DxOMark tests the Leica Typ 240 - great news!

    "I find it amusing why some fight so much for things they are not really affected or threatened."

    It's the internet.

  23. #23
    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: DxOMark tests the Leica Typ 240 - great news!

    Who said anything about real world "tests" Shashin? You added that "test" notion to other people's ideas of evaluative judgement, and then ran with it for four paragraphs.

    Some people are far more interested in how a camera performs in their world, not someone else's. It isn't a scientific test, it is an evaluation of how well a camera's gestalt, including the sensor, fits their aesthetic values. As previously said, One lens may scientifically outperform all those that came before it, yet many prefer the older optic for aesthetic reasons ... because we are making art, and that is subjective.

    In Sean Reid's comparison, the M9 clearly showed more of a look and feel that I personally like over the new M's ... however, I am still interested in the new M because my friend Irakly used the camera to shoot with (not "test"), and is certain that it can deliver close to M9 "presence" while increasing imaging performance in other areas. Since we share similar aesthetic values, his word means more than 1,000 bench tests ... to me.

    In short, I for one do not blame the DOX tests of anything ... they may hint at something worth exploring, but I've been burned by highly touted test results only to find the actual experience the tests seemed to promise to be aesthetically dismal and exceedingly disappointing.

    Had Leica made a M-10 using a CCD that delivered a 2 stop increase in ISO performance while maintaining the same signature look and feel, I wouldn't even be pondering whether to get it. I'd have it. I do not need a camel M that shoots video, and can use R lenses which require CMOS. I need a M rangefinder that evolves the aesthetic I already had ... but increases the areas of darkness I can use it in. Nothing less, nothing more. Hopefully, the M can do that.

    -Marc
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  24. #24
    Senior Member edwardkaraa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Bangkok
    Posts
    1,470
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxOMark tests the Leica Typ 240 - great news!

    I think the main point here is that many people these days forget to look at the photographs. I personally curse Zeiss for inventing MTF charts. I have missed many lens beautiful rendering because they have less than stellar MTF. Even today, while I know for a fact some lenses are really spectacular, I am still not able to pull the trigger because of the MTF. DXO mark is no different. People should definitely look at the photographs.
    M262 ZM 25/2.8 35/1.4 50/2 85/2
    Likes 5 Member(s) liked this post

  25. #25
    Not Available
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,864
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxOMark tests the Leica Typ 240 - great news!

    Case in point - the much-maligned Zeiss Biogon T* 2,8/28 ZM. Just because its MTF charts don't quite match the rest of the ZMs... It's the black sheep of the family. Yet in looking at the images it produces, there's NO fault to be found.

    Charts are for geeks - photos are for artists. (though we all cross lines)
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  26. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Reykjavik, Iceland
    Posts
    2,310
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    9

    Re: DxOMark tests the Leica Typ 240 - great news!

    Hi Shashin,
    Yes, I most certainly do test, but I think the criteria and WHAT you test is also critical. So what I mean is that DxO doesn't really seem to line up with what my eye tells me is good in a camera. The M cameras and medium format backs were mostly pretty poor in the testing in comparison to cameras from Canon, yet I never liked the looks that came from Canon or Nikon as much. I think another really good way to look at it is like evaluating a restaurant's ingredients before their chef makes the dish. Ingredients are extremely important, but if you give good ingredients to a great chef you will get a much better meal than if you give the absolute best ingredients to a mediocre chef. I don't test my cameras scientifically, and don't really see much need to at this point.

    So while I do color profile and test papers and so on, I don't always choose a paper because it has the largest gamut or the brightest white and blackest black. Hahnemühle German Etching is a beautiful matte paper, but it has a tiny gamut in comparison to most any gloss or semi-gloss paper, even the worst ones. But it makes a much nicer print!
    So while I was a bit harsh in saying that DxO has as much use as dropping two cameras off a cliff and rating them on how fast they reached the ground, I stand by my point that it is not really particularly useful information in evaluating a camera. At least not for me. I really don't care how anyone else decides on their cameras!
    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
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  27. #27
    Senior Member The Smoking Camera's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Hawaii
    Posts
    530
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxOMark tests the Leica Typ 240 - great news!

    I find this discussion quite interesting (even though I do not own a Leica). I must admit, I enjoy Leica threads just because of their gestalt.

    Here is my simple football (American) - DXO analogy. Each year college players attend a combine in preparation for the NFL draft. They are tested on a number of important factors such as speed, strength, agility, etc. The test scores are tangible and comparative, however, they do not predict the success or failure of a player in the NFL. Success on the field is the result of much more than test scores. A good example is Jerry Rice who came out of college in 1985. At the combine he ran 40 yards in 4.71 seconds which is terribly slow for a wide receiver. Nevertheless, he was drafted by the 49ers and went on to became the greatest NFL receiver of all time.

    I view DXO marks similarly to NFL combine test scores - interesting and useful, but not a predictor of success.

    I wonder if Jerry Rice owns a Leica M9?
    ........................................
    Joe Marquez
    www.thesmokingcamera.com
    Likes 9 Member(s) liked this post

  28. #28
    Workshop Member ptomsu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Austria, close to Vienna
    Posts
    3,862
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxOMark tests the Leica Typ 240 - great news!

    Quote Originally Posted by Shashin View Post
    But that is really not the case and you are assuming that I don't understand the other side of the equation (a position for one side does not mean I am holding a position against the counter argument--both have a place). What I am objecting too is this bashing of resources we have. People who bash it simply don't understand it. We have a new camera and folks are interested. We just got a piece of data on it. It is not the only piece of data either.

    I don't understand the math behind Fourier transforms. How can I judge its relevance? Just because I evaluate my own pictures and cannot comprehend the transforms, does not mean the transforms are useless.

    You don't like the science behind photography, that is fine. But don't throw the baby out with the bath water.
    I think that arguing is going nowhere ......

  29. #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Brooklyn NY
    Posts
    457
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    8

    Re: DxOMark tests the Leica Typ 240 - great news!

    I'd love to see DXo test film in the same way they test a sensor. How would they do that? Maybe like Erwin Putts and his film tests I guess.

    We do live in a time of amazing technology- almost any modern dslr outperforms film of the same format by a wide margin, yet I still stuff portra into my RZ and like the results.

  30. #30
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    271
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxOMark tests the Leica Typ 240 - great news!

    I'll just put this here....

    SONY A900
    Always outnumbered, never outgunned.
    My Site|Facebook Fanpage|

  31. #31
    Not Available
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,864
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxOMark tests the Leica Typ 240 - great news!

    The problem with digital cameras is they've got an inherent lifespan - and when it comes to technology there's a lot of churn. The "numbers" (specs) are a large part of that. They also appeal to the average "gadget nerd" and give rise to things like "GAS" and "upgraditis." A slippery slope with brief peaks of happiness amongst ragged cliffs.
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  32. #32
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Shashin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Posts
    4,497
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    141

    Re: DxOMark tests the Leica Typ 240 - great news!

    Quote Originally Posted by ptomsu View Post
    @ shashin

    maybe you speak German - then here we go: "Wer viel misst, misst viel Mist" - an old saying which especially in case of DXO proves to be true again and again :-)

    Anyway I find it amusing why some fight so much for things they are not really affected or threatened - I hope never to understand why ....
    Because you are implying that I and other that understand the scores are somehow fools. That is why.

  33. #33
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    53
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxOMark tests the Leica Typ 240 - great news!

    Quote Originally Posted by Stuart Richardson View Post
    ...dropping two cameras off a cliff and rating them by which one hits the ground first.
    They would both hit the ground at the same time. How do you like them apples? I believe that we have entered into a time where people have forgotten about science. Falling back onto arguments like; the aesthetic is all that is important is all good and I get this too, but having a working knowledge of the science behind photography is also important, isn't it?

  34. #34
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    3,670
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxOMark tests the Leica Typ 240 - great news!

    Quote Originally Posted by Auni View Post
    They would both hit the ground at the same time. How do you like them apples? I believe that we have entered into a time where people have forgotten about science. Falling back onto arguments like; the aesthetic is all that is important is all good and I get this too, but having a working knowledge of the science behind photography is also important, isn't it?
    That is exactly why I expressed this in detail in my post "above". Both have their place and are important and how much emphasis is placed on each is very much dependent on the individual.

    Dave (D&A)

  35. #35
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    53
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxOMark tests the Leica Typ 240 - great news!

    Dave -

    Hi. I think you missed my first sentence.

    Auni

  36. #36
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Reykjavik, Iceland
    Posts
    2,310
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    9

    Re: DxOMark tests the Leica Typ 240 - great news!

    Quote Originally Posted by Auni View Post
    They would both hit the ground at the same time. How do you like them apples? I believe that we have entered into a time where people have forgotten about science. Falling back onto arguments like; the aesthetic is all that is important is all good and I get this too, but having a working knowledge of the science behind photography is also important, isn't it?
    Haha, I didn't think I needed to state that the cliff was not in a vacuum! But I would reiterate that I don't think these metrics are very useful. They are tests, and scientific, but I don't think they are measuring something that provides much useful information, since they are leaving out the majority of factors that lead to the overall image quality, something which is subjective anyway!
    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

  37. #37
    Workshop Member ptomsu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Austria, close to Vienna
    Posts
    3,862
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxOMark tests the Leica Typ 240 - great news!

    Quote Originally Posted by Shashin View Post
    Because you are implying that I and other that understand the scores are somehow fools. That is why.
    Are you trying to qualify

    Sorry but you obviously completely misunderstood everything ...

    And actually I do not want to clarify any further - waste of time for both of us.

    Enjoy further!

  38. #38
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    rayyan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    5,887
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxOMark tests the Leica Typ 240 - great news!

    Quote Originally Posted by Auni View Post
    They would both hit the ground at the same time. How do you like them apples? I believe that we have entered into a time where people have forgotten about science.....
    Unfortunately, and without any further qualification to your statement, you are wrong!!

    Right you are; some have indeed forgotten about science...that is the elephant in the room, and people make a feather of it.

    Regards.

  39. #39
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Northampton, Ma
    Posts
    532
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxOMark tests the Leica Typ 240 - great news!

    "I need a M rangefinder that evolves the aesthetic I already had ... but increases the areas of darkness I can use it in."
    Marc- Kind of why I got the MM.......Peter

  40. #40
    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: DxOMark tests the Leica Typ 240 - great news!

    Quote Originally Posted by Auni View Post
    They would both hit the ground at the same time. How do you like them apples? I believe that we have entered into a time where people have forgotten about science. Falling back onto arguments like; the aesthetic is all that is important is all good and I get this too, but having a working knowledge of the science behind photography is also important, isn't it?
    I'd argue the opposite. Science has become predominate since digital has rapidly evolved, and we spend inordinate amounts of time measuring, scrutinizing, debating, posturing, over every new development ... developments which have increased in incidence at an exponential rate. Mind-boggling actually.

    Reviewing this stuff has become an industry unto itself ... where the debaters now endlessly compete for the latest greatest, and make pronouncements regarding minutia as earth shattering advancements ... everything is now carnival barkers proclaiming a "Game Changer" and we have the science to prove it!

    Show me a similar scenario regarding the art of photography that has such a swell of followers hanging on every work, saliva dripping from their lips in anticipation, and a psyche tuned to snap up the all powerful next innovation secretly thinking themselves as armed to the teeth to make "better" photos.

    Frankly, with the time I have to piss away on the internet I'd rather follow "Burn" Magazine, follow the lighting techniques of master photographers, or look at how someone has used a new camera for real, etc. than decipher DXO findings or the like.

    But that's just me.

    -Marc
    Likes 6 Member(s) liked this post

  41. #41
    Workshop Member ptomsu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Austria, close to Vienna
    Posts
    3,862
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxOMark tests the Leica Typ 240 - great news!

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    I'd argue the opposite. Science has become predominate since digital has rapidly evolved, and we spend inordinate amounts of time measuring, scrutinizing, debating, posturing, over every new development ... developments which have increased in incidence at an exponential rate. Mind-boggling actually.

    Reviewing this stuff has become an industry unto itself ... where the debaters now endlessly compete for the latest greatest, and make pronouncements regarding minutia as earth shattering advancements ... everything is now carnival barkers proclaiming a "Game Changer" and we have the science to prove it!

    Show me a similar scenario regarding the art of photography that has such a swell of followers hanging on every work, saliva dripping from their lips in anticipation, and a psyche tuned to snap up the all powerful next innovation secretly thinking themselves as armed to the teeth to make "better" photos.

    Frankly, with the time I have to piss away on the internet I'd rather follow "Burn" Magazine, follow the lighting techniques of master photographers, or look at how someone has used a new camera for real, etc. than decipher DXO findings or the like.

    But that's just me.

    -Marc
    Marc,

    exactly see it as you do!

    What I do with DXO is have a look from time to time WRT a camera I am interested in and then I decide if I continue wanting this camera or not. In many cases I then no longer care about DXO if the camera fulfills my needs otherwise. In case of Leica M I find it a positive add that it scores relatively high with DXO and I actually am very happy Leica could make it into the DXO top range of cameras (sensors) finally - it will further help them. But I would buy it anyway, as it is the best I can get for my M glass today. And so DXO diminishes pretty much in the final overall decision.

    Peter

  42. #42
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    691
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxOMark tests the Leica Typ 240 - great news!

    I've had a look at their website, first time in years. I want to understand two things:

    1. D800/IQ180 comparison. The IQ180 fails miserably in the sports section, a vast vast difference, yet overall still comes in at 91. Can someone point me to the area of the website that has the formula they use to calculate the overall score as I would like to verify what they do.

    2. Colour, depth in bits. Well now they claim the best measurement of colour is sensitivity: "Color sensitivity indicates to what degree of subtlety color nuances can be distinguished from one another". So if my device has a limited gamut or colour space of unnatural reds (Nikon, ahem), but can determine more shades of impossible reds that a camera with a limited gamut of natural colours, then it wins. Colour theory is vast, why don't they use measurements from colour theory?

    And why over complicate using 'bits' as the unit? They could use steps, I presume the score of 26.5 bits for an IQ180 would mean 2^26.5 steps? I'm assuming thats what they mean by bits, they're talking about digital representation of numbers. Can anyone actually point to anything that can give meaning to this number, because last time I checked, my computer it didn't have half bits in it.

    Frankly, unless someone can point to the exact specification of this supposedly scientific scoring, then I maintain it is nonsense. There's no such thing as a 1/2 bit, sorry. 2^26.5 = 94906265.62425156, if you're talking about the number of discrete steps a piece of digital hardware can differentiate, then what is the .62425156 portion? Again it makes no sense.

  43. #43
    Senior Member edwardkaraa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Bangkok
    Posts
    1,470
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxOMark tests the Leica Typ 240 - great news!

    I'm very interested to know that the M has good high iso performance, but I'm not interested to know that the Nikon D800 or Sony RX1 have better performance. I can't use my ZM lenses on them, so why bother. In fact, I already know that the M performs well at high iso thanks to the generosity of Jono and others posting samples online. I also already know about the high iso banding, that DXO failed to recognize, but is quite obvious from Jono and others photos (admittedly with older FW). I also prefer the color palette of the M9, that scored so lowly on DXO color depth.
    M262 ZM 25/2.8 35/1.4 50/2 85/2
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  44. #44
    Senior Member douglasf13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, California, USA
    Posts
    1,965
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: DxOMark tests the Leica Typ 240 - great news!

    Well, the new M sensor looks to test about exactly where I though it would, fairly ahead of the M9, and a bit back from current Sony sensors, BUT...who cares?

    As I just mentioned on another forum, since I don't work for clients, the look of my images comes down to my own taste, and what is better or worse technically has no real bearing in the world of fine art. Whether one paints with broad or fine strokes is up to the artist, and I'm not sure that I even care if my images become less grainy or hold another stop of DR. If anything, I'm probably better off with keeping a consistent look using my current equipment, rather than giving myself more choice. As the oft quoted Orson Welles said, "The enemy of art is the absence of limitations."

    The new M looks great in most regards, but it's just not something I need. I think I'll keep working within the M9's limitations for a while.
    Last edited by douglasf13; 16th March 2013 at 12:12.
    Likes 5 Member(s) liked this post

  45. #45
    Not Available
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,864
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxOMark tests the Leica Typ 240 - great news!

    The latest statistics out show that if you take banal and insipid photographs... The M240 still won't help.

    Likes 5 Member(s) liked this post

  46. #46
    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: DxOMark tests the Leica Typ 240 - great news!

    Quote Originally Posted by innerimager View Post
    "I need a M rangefinder that evolves the aesthetic I already had ... but increases the areas of darkness I can use it in."
    Marc- Kind of why I got the MM.......Peter
    Me too.

    -Marc

  47. #47
    Not Available
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,864
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxOMark tests the Leica Typ 240 - great news!

    Quote Originally Posted by innerimager View Post
    "I need a M rangefinder that evolves the aesthetic I already had ... but increases the areas of darkness I can use it in."
    Marc- Kind of why I got the MM.......Peter
    Another +1 here.

  48. #48
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    95
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxOMark tests the Leica Typ 240 - great news!

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    I'd argue the opposite. Science has become predominate since digital has rapidly evolved, and we spend inordinate amounts of time measuring, scrutinizing, debating, posturing, over every new development ... developments which have increased in incidence at an exponential rate.
    -Marc
    I might emphasize a distinction between science and data. Science is just an approach to answering questions.

    Some of us (including me) are not interested in the questions asked, and data gathered, about sensor performance and mtf charts. And some of us do not use the data from such tests in choosing equipment. But that data, sometimes quantified with a scientific approach, is used to differentiate and market equipment, sell software tools, and bring eyeballs to websites.

    But that is not 'science'. That's people using data for their own purposes, whether to make a buck or decide how they want to spend their bucks. And I agree, people select their gear using odd data these days...
    Likes 1 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
  •