The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

the monochrom - CCD vs CMOS

jonoslack

Active member
It was me and my “wisdom” to blame. My apologies.

Atleast, I am happy to take away from this excahnge that I did not kill “Henry”.

Good that there is agreement that CCD or CMOS would make no difference!
Hi Vivek - indeed we missed that one!
Why not change your pendulum to say €982 and then nobody will be misled?
Have a great evening.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
Sorry to break it to you. It will go. A ticking time bomb.



Not to worry. €982 (per Leica) will get you a replacement though. :)
Can’t edit that post.

Instead of €1500, it should have been $1500 (that was the original intent).

It is more like $1200 as of now. I believe that amount also is not cast in stone and might change.

Let me also add this, in resposne to David (DwF), money though I tend to be very careful with, is secondary. Loss of trust and or causing a dent in the passion icould be much more costly.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DwF

New member
Can’t edit that post.

Instead of €1500, it should have been $1500 (that was the original intent).

It is more like $1200 as of now. I believe that amount also is not cast in stone and might change.

Let me also add this, in resposne to David (DwF), money though I tend to be very careful with, is secondary. Loss of trust and or causing a dent in the passion icould be much more costly.
Vivek,

I understand how you are feeling, but I also look at how Leica chose to handle these issues. For the M8, they gave out free UV?IR filters, and hey, by many peoples standard M8 is still a gem of a camera.....resale nearly the same as a used D800. Then honoring (however slowly) the sensor issue, and given the cost and "outdated" technology of CCD, I can see where a deadline needed to happen for a company of this size.

I certainly have my issues with decisions I see Leica make and so it's not that the company walks on water but I keep coming back because of how the M camera handles, range/viewfinder and so on. Also I've held on to my X 113 longer than any other digital camera because I like most everything about that camera. It's been trouble free and the files it makes really satisfy me.

David
 

scott kirkpatrick

Well-known member
Not about monochrome or CCDs, but since this is the "bashing" thread of the moment -- let me alert you all to Robin Wong's review of the Panasonic G9. It's a good example of how the rest of the market moves along, as opposed to Leica. Robin's a valuable reviewer because he is thorough and clear about what he sees and what he doesn't care about and he doesn't get overly excited. He points out that Panasonic has apparently caught up to Olympus in IBIS and multi-shot high resolution. They now offer 5-axis IBIS that couples to OIS in certain lenses. And they do half-pixel resolution by superimposing 8 shifted images to Oly's 6. The G9 has the same viewfinder resolution as the SL (3.86 MPx). But he finds the G9 falling short on several areas, so in catching up in some (with Olympus, Sony and Leica) they have fallen short in others. But they are out in the marketplace, warts and all. Two failings are apparent. The color profiles in camera are strange, and in several places the high speed features are incomplete. For example, the lenses require software distortion correction for up to 5% barrel distortion, but in the viewfinder in real time the view is corrected but not cropped back to a rectangle. This makes some engineering sense (it's the actual image with the distortion taken out), but is pretty odd-looking, like something Sigma did a while back in Foveon cameras.

So in contrast, Leica chose a subset of these sexy advances, did them in a complete and correct way, and got those to market two years ago. That's not so bad, and you might choose to go with that. And it will someday let them sell some pretty profitable lenses.
 

jonoslack

Active member
Not about monochrome or CCDs, but since this is the "bashing" thread of the moment -- let me alert you all to Robin Wong's review of the Panasonic G9. It's a good example of how the rest of the market moves along, as opposed to Leica. Robin's a valuable reviewer because he is thorough and clear about what he sees and what he doesn't care about and he doesn't get overly excited. He points out that Panasonic has apparently caught up to Olympus in IBIS and multi-shot high resolution. They now offer 5-axis IBIS that couples to OIS in certain lenses. And they do half-pixel resolution by superimposing 8 shifted images to Oly's 6. The G9 has the same viewfinder resolution as the SL (3.86 MPx). But he finds the G9 falling short on several areas, so in catching up in some (with Olympus, Sony and Leica) they have fallen short in others. But they are out in the marketplace, warts and all. Two failings are apparent. The color profiles in camera are strange, and in several places the high speed features are incomplete. For example, the lenses require software distortion correction for up to 5% barrel distortion, but in the viewfinder in real time the view is corrected but not cropped back to a rectangle. This makes some engineering sense (it's the actual image with the distortion taken out), but is pretty odd-looking, like something Sigma did a while back in Foveon cameras.

So in contrast, Leica chose a subset of these sexy advances, did them in a complete and correct way, and got those to market two years ago. That's not so bad, and you might choose to go with that. And it will someday let them sell some pretty profitable lenses.
HI There Scott
First a correction - as far as I’m aware the EVF on the SL is 4.4Mp - certainly it’s bigger than the one on the G9.

I shot the dress rehearsal of a pantomime yesterday, with both the G9 and the SL with their respective ‘kit’ zooms.

It was an interesting experience, certainly both cameras were up to the job.

 

fotografz

Well-known member
I am looking to pick up a monochrom M

could you guys give me your feedback on how the 2 versions compare ?
My preference is and remains the original MM. Mine went off to Germany and had the sensor replaced last spring. Then it developed a dead pixel which causes a thin white line. That is a quick fix done locally.

I would not say the tonality is superior to the next version ... just different. The MM(9) better fits my B&W aesthetic acquired during years of darkroom work. I am primarily a people/street/event/portrait shooter as opposed to landscape/still life/architecture shooter.

I also work with a Sony A7R-II. It is a fine camera, but it is not a rangefinder. For me the B&W conversions do not have the same presence as those from the MM. That includes using M lenses on the A7R-II.

- Marc
 

scott kirkpatrick

Well-known member
HI There Scott
First a correction - as far as I’m aware the EVF on the SL is 4.4Mp - certainly it’s bigger than the one on the G9.
Right. I just checked on DPreview. Part of the apparent size difference could be optical as well.

I shot the dress rehearsal of a pantomime yesterday, with both the G9 and the SL with their respective ‘kit’ zooms.

It was an interesting experience, certainly both cameras were up to the job.

Nice shots. Fulltime electronic shutter? How can you tell the two cameras apart in the pictures? I noticed that faces were much yellower in some of the shots (leaving aside the obvious lighting effects in green).
 

jonoslack

Active member
Right. I just checked on DPreview. Part of the apparent size difference could be optical as well.


Nice shots. Fulltime electronic shutter? How can you tell the two cameras apart in the pictures? I noticed that faces were much yellower in some of the shots (leaving aside the obvious lighting effects in green).
I started using fulltime electronic shutter, but then changed my mind (they’re both so quiet).
You can click on info and look at the file names - the SL files begin with S.
. . The yellow colouring could be improved on, but some of the (quickly changing) lighting was rather odd.

What do you think?
Did you know the difference?
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
@ Jono,

great images and thanks for that shootout comparing the SL and G9. I must say I do not really see differences, so from looking at these images I could barely tell if it was shot with SL or G9.

Speaks for the G9 I think? :clap:
 
V

Vivek

Guest
I also work with a Sony A7R-II. It is a fine camera, but it is not a rangefinder. For me the B&W conversions do not have the same presence as those from the MM. That includes using M lenses on the A7R-II.

- Marc
Given the price and the unreliability, it is difficult to switch back and forth from a range finder to a mirrorless camera.

This is the reason I got a Sony A7rII converted to monochrome. It is far better.

My MM, along with my film RF cams are fun and they occupy a very special niche slot.

Those interested in G9 etc, also can get them converted to monochrome cameras (or do it themselves- there are detailed instructions on the web).

I was going to convert a Panasonic G1 to monochrome for comparison (for a forum friend). That project should be restarted, I guess.
 

jonoslack

Active member
@ Jono,

great images and thanks for that shootout comparing the SL and G9. I must say I do not really see differences, so from looking at these images I could barely tell if it was shot with SL or G9.

Speaks for the G9 I think? :clap:
Hi There Peter
It was an interesting experiment - worth noting that I took around 400 images with the G9, and around 200 with the SL - whereas in the final gallery it’s much closer to 50/50.

Truth be told if I was forced to make a decision between the two cameras for event stuff in low light, then I’d pick the SL, but the G9 did a great job, probably with slightly faster AF as well.

All the best
 

Bob

Administrator
Staff member
I have heard that some like the ccd tonality more, some the cmos.
Actually, tonality is a lot more complicated than just sensor type and actually fairly loosely coupled.
Like the H&D curve of old, camera manufacturers assign conversion curves for each sensor (and for each color if there be color), so being at the risk of being pummeled about the head and shoulders with a wet trout, the best tonality is the one YOU like best subject, of course, to whatever adjustments YOU make.

On the subject of sensor replacement pricing, remember that as tech gets older, it becomes no longer manufactured generally at some point in time. This forces those who support stuff like cameras and old tube radios :) to do what is known as an end-of life purchase from the manufacturer for the remaining lifetime of the stuff that is being maintained.
That inventory is expensive, and further, a smart manufacturer will price that inventory to manage its depletion based on statistics that it alone is capable of producing. When the shelves go bare on the older stuff, it is the end of the road.
I am encouraged to see that there are still parts available at any price, and at SOME point, prices will get to the point where replacement of the equipment will be the best economic choice for the consumer.

Anyway, my two bits on the kerfuffle.
thanks
-bob
 

jonoslack

Active member
I have heard that some like the ccd tonality more, some the cmos.
Actually, tonality is a lot more complicated than just sensor type and actually fairly loosely coupled.
Like the H&D curve of old, camera manufacturers assign conversion curves for each sensor (and for each color if there be color), so being at the risk of being pummeled about the head and shoulders with a wet trout, the best tonality is the one YOU like best subject, of course, to whatever adjustments YOU make.

On the subject of sensor replacement pricing, remember that as tech gets older, it becomes no longer manufactured generally at some point in time. This forces those who support stuff like cameras and old tube radios :) to do what is known as an end-of life purchase from the manufacturer for the remaining lifetime of the stuff that is being maintained.
That inventory is expensive, and further, a smart manufacturer will price that inventory to manage its depletion based on statistics that it alone is capable of producing. When the shelves go bare on the older stuff, it is the end of the road.
I am encouraged to see that there are still parts available at any price, and at SOME point, prices will get to the point where replacement of the equipment will be the best economic choice for the consumer.

Anyway, my two bits on the kerfuffle.
thanks
-bob
I have a wet trout in my hand Bob . . But I’ll have to find something else to pummel with it!

I think that both the M9 and MM have their charm, and indeed, I was involved (as a contributor) in an academic experiment to see which camera output people actually LIKED (the same image taken with a number of different cameras and the same lens). Indeed, the M9 came in top.

It’s a great camera, as is the MM - and it’s still properly supported by Leica (albeit at a price if it’s more than 5 years old).
Best
 

Bob

Administrator
Staff member
Et tu Jono?
LOL I did a study in 1970/71 for a firm long forgotten by the name of Eastman Kodak while I was at RIT. We provided several sorts of folks with both B&W and color images and asked them to rank them and score their favorites. At the time I have to admit I was a strict Zone System devotee (I think I still have the cincture with four knots to go with it) "His throat was white as lily of the May;Yet strong he was as any champion." ahem, and on to the subject." Anyway, we determined with much study that folks liked over-saturated colors and had a cultural bias with regard to skin-tones. ABSOLUTELY NOBODY preferred accuracy.
Same was true with B&W. Strong blacks and a slow curve to a gentle roll-off on the highlights seemed to match what folks THOUGHT they saw in the original subject.
recently, there has been even more push for over-saturation. At a local gallery most of the images shown are all tone mapped and over-saturated. My eye doctor has recommended I avoid the place.
-bob
 

fotografz

Well-known member
I appreciate Bob's comments. I found that Nik Silver Effects provided everything I needed to get exactly the look and feel I desired . The various pre-sets in Nik have a wide range of heal-toe responses that work very well with the MM CCD files ... that and other techniques learned initially in the dark-room and migrated to digital have allowed me to perpetuate that look and feel.

There is something to be said for sticking with something and mastering it until all aspects are second nature and most energy goes toward making the image with somewhat effortless continuity.

- Marc
 

DezFoto

New member
Just ignore Jono, this is his MO as the resident "Leica Apologist", he jumps in to the defence of Leica even when they're not being unfairly criticized. He's also very accomplished at blowing things out of proportion, in a general sense.

For what it's worth, the "top plate" is nearly 3rd of the camera's body and it's machined from a solid piece of brass. This is the main reason that Leica's are heavier than they look. With modern materials and paints, there's absolutely no practical reason for a brass top plate, it's mostly there for the people who obsess over "build quality" a reassuringly heavy camera (A.K.A the followers of Steve Huff and the like) because they equate "heavy" with "well built" and for the people that think that paint rubbing off is a feature.

Also to be fair to Leica, the flaw in the sensor was Kodak's fault and Leica was under no legal obligation to replace sensors on cameras that were out of warranty, so it was a gesture of good will, which I appreciate. I chose to take advantage of their trade-in programme instead of getting my M9's sensor replaced.

Jono, I am merely pointing out that you are literally blowing things out of proportions- of what I responded to someone posting that the M10 was a brass body (it was implied to be a bit more precise). You misinterpreted what I posted and are running away with it. Give it a break.

AFAIK, a chassis makes a body and not a logo or a top or a bottom plate or a few hinges.

It is a fact that the blue green cover glass used on the MM sensor is the wrong choice and it will deteriorate.

Design flaw and not user error.
 
Last edited:

docmoore

Subscriber and Workshop Member
Just ignore Jono, this is his MO as the resident "Leica Apologist" ...
Last person I would ignore is Jono ... your read of him is a bit shallow. He has never been a Leica Apologist. He calls things
as he sees them ... and strangely enough those at Leica want his feedback. So he gets to play with all the new toys, and
is invited to the soirees in the Motherland.

I appreciate his candor and the ability to stand against the tide ... I imagine that as a business owner he discerns the fatuity
of lifetime responsibility for a product defect from a supplier.

Don't misunderstand me ... I have had a share of Leica service disasters ... it is why I have a Q and the rest is Hasselblad at
the present time. Major S system flaws.

To my knowledge he is not paid for his input and it is not beholding to the access that he has had within the company. I do think
that his friendships have strengthened his love for great glass and improving platforms to mount it.

Bob
 

DezFoto

New member
Last person I would ignore is Jono ... your read of him is a bit shallow.
Very true, my read of him is shallow as I can only judge on posts that I've read here and elsewhere. My impression of him is not particularly favourable, especially when he lays into another user about things that were not really central the conversation. Fact correcting in such a strong and arrogant way gives the impression of someone who's trolling the conversation looking for an opportunity to post something that will reinforce the impression he's trying to give that he's an expert, not someone who's trying to actually contribute to the conversation.
 

MGrayson

Subscriber and Workshop Member
Very true, my read of him is shallow as I can only judge on posts that I've read here and elsewhere. My impression of him is not particularly favourable, especially when he lays into another user about things that were not really central the conversation. Fact correcting in such a strong and arrogant way gives the impression of someone who's trolling the conversation looking for an opportunity to post something that will reinforce the impression he's trying to give that he's an expert, not someone who's trying to actually contribute to the conversation.
I could not disagree with you more strongly, and I have read posts, and seen photography, from both these gentlemen over quite a few years. With VERY few exceptions, Jono keeps the tone light, defuses tension, promotes civility, and freely acknowledges the strengths and weaknesses of the products under discussion.

My 2p,

Matt
 
Top