The M10 and its guts..

The M10 and its guts..

  • Kodak CCD

    Votes: 159 37.3%

  • Japanese CMOS (canon/sony)

    Votes: 142 33.3%

  • Foveon X3 (sigma/kodak)

    Votes: 109 25.6%

  • Japanese Nikon/Sony

    Votes: 16 3.8%
  • Total voters
    426
gavinlg

gavinlg

Veteran
Local time
11:23 AM
Joined
Feb 5, 2007
Messages
5,503
This is a fun poll, I'm curious as to what RFFers want in the successor to the m9 (lets hope it's not for a number of years yet!), and where digital M buyers priorities lie. So please vote what you'd like to see!


Option 1 - Kodak CCD sensor
+ more DR, decent high iso noise (useable iso 2500-3200), better colors than rival CMOS sensors, very good low ISO performance
- no live view, no match for Japanese CMOS rivals at high ISO

Option 2 - Japanese CMOS sensor (sony/canon)
+ best in class high ISO noise (usable iso 6400-12,800), ability to have live view, good low ISO performance
- lower color fidelity than CCD potentially(?)

Option 3 - Sigma/Kodak manufactured FOVEON X3 sensor
+ amazing per pixel sharpness, extremely high color fidelity, able to match leica lenses resolving power, best low ISO IQ
- no live view, worst high ISO performance (only usable up to iso 800-1250), big files will need powerful processor to match
 
Last edited:
I'll start off - I was looking through a bunch of sigma SD1 photos on flickr earlier today and it struck me how amazingly high fidelity they are. The Foveon sensor is pretty amazing IMO with the way it handles textures and colors at low ISO, but it sort of wasted in sigma's weird dslr's, with sigmas lenses.

The M10 has gotta be one of the best candidates for a Foveon style sensor IMO - it's shutter allows low speeds without shake, fast and tiny lenses mean the high iso problems of the Foveon can be forgotten for the most part... So I'm voting Foveon, providing it had a useable ISO 1250.
 
No M10, the 10/10/2010 is past.

Maybe an M11 revealed on the 11/11/2011 at 11:11:11 by 11 members of Leica direction?
 
Super performing Foveon sensor would be the best of course (pixel peeping does not get any better than that ;) ), but I think that that technology has still a long way to go.

In reality I guess that the producer for the sensor of the M9 will remain the same for the M10. Why? The camera sells very well and it would be logical that in such case one would continue developing and not starting from the scratch (so to speak) elsewhere. I would guess that the M10 will have few more pixels and better high ISO performance than M9. Major changes are not very probable IMO.
 
It is guts?


Edit: I see one week later it's been edited from the contraction to the possessive. ::thumbs up::
 
Last edited:
Matus said:
Super performing Foveon sensor would be the best of course (pixel peeping does not get any better than that ;) ), but I think that that technology has still a long way to go.

In reality I guess that the producer for the sensor of the M9 will remain the same for the M10. Why? The camera sells very well and it would be logical that in such case one would continue developing and not starting from the scratch (so to speak) elsewhere. I would guess that the M10 will have few more pixels and better high ISO performance than M9. Major changes are not very probable IMO.
Click to expand...

I would agree that an improved kodak CCD is the most probable case for the next M, however this is a thread about what you'd like to see! :)
 
How about Leica M10 A La Carte. You choose your sensor and the corresponding processor and software for the chip is used. :)

Joel
 
This is a silly poll. The M8 and M9 are perfect. Nothing on the planet can match the results from these two cameras. Of course no change is required.
 
I am not holding my breath for a super-performing Foveon either. I have a Sigma DP-1 which is a lovely little camera but its sensor has its share of issues which are not limited to high-ISO. Channel clipping and color errors can be an issue which I believe is inherent to the stacked layers approach. While Foveon colors are unique, I would not call them always accurate.

I would have bet on CCD but the recent words of Leica wrt to future sensors for S2's replacement makes me believe that CMOS will be with us sooner than later. As long as they manage to tweak it for the short backfocus of Leica lenses and can do without an AA filter, I'm all in! Live view would be nice to have for that posed shot @ f/0.95 ;)
 
willie_901 said:
This is a silly poll. The M8 and M9 are perfect. Nothing on the planet can match the results from these two cameras. Of course no change is required.
Click to expand...

Well if the M8 is perfect, there should be no M9 in the first place based on this logic.

I vote for Japanese sensors!;)
 
fiatlux said:
I am not holding my breath for a super-performing Foveon either. I have a Sigma DP-1 which is a lovely little camera but its sensor has its share of issues which are not limited to high-ISO. Channel clipping and color errors can be an issue which I believe is inherent to the stacked layers approach. While Foveon colors are unique, I would not call them always accurate.

I would have bet on CCD but the recent words of Leica wrt to future sensors for S2's replacement makes me believe that CMOS will be with us sooner than later. As long as they manage to tweak it for the short backfocus of Leica lenses and can do without an AA filter, I'm all in! Live view would be nice to have for that posed shot @ f/0.95 ;)
Click to expand...

I would bet on backlit CMos -if the problem of the thin layer mechanical stability is solved. The results should be more CCD-like than CMos. And it might well be by Dalsa.
 
Last edited:
I want it to have the ability for me to use a CCD or a CMOS sensor just by flicking a switch. :)
 
While I am interested in the Foveon sensor, I also believe it would be terrible for a rangefinder camera.

The Foveon process mesures the colours at different layers on the sensor, making it a "thick" sensor. With many rangefinder lenses giving very acute angles for the light exiting them, the colour shift issues would probably be much stronger than in the M9 sensor.
 
I bought my M8 and M9 shortly after release. I'm more satisfied with my M9 than I was with my M8. Short of the high ISO not being the greatest, it's perfect. So when the M10 comes around I don't plan on buying it until the 2nd version whether it be an M10.2 or M10-p is available.

I really like that the digital M's use Kodak sensors. It's just a warm fuzzy feeling that there really is the digital equivalent of fim in there. But Kodak needs to bump up that ISO performance, and if Sony figures out how to deal with the issues a digital M faces, then I welcome their placement in the M10.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom