icebear
Veteran
The most useful statement in the current AA / non AA-filter discussion is this one:
There are two kinds of photographers:
those who are interested in what a particular camera can't do,
and those who are interested in what it can do.
There are two kinds of photographers:
those who are interested in what a particular camera can't do,
and those who are interested in what it can do.
furcafe
Veteran
True enough, but the last time I checked, photography is not a mere technical problem, i.e., if removing the anti-aliasing filter results in better photography, whether perceived by the photographer or his viewers/clients, where's the harm? Some of us use uncoated lenses &/or toy cameras, even though the technical superiority of coated glass & "real" cameras is obvious.
Also true, but again, I think that if Sony & Canon could figure out a way to make money off cameras without anti-aliasing filters, they would (& doesn't Sony make the sensor for the D800E?). The market's simply too small.
Also true, but again, I think that if Sony & Canon could figure out a way to make money off cameras without anti-aliasing filters, they would (& doesn't Sony make the sensor for the D800E?). The market's simply too small.
SDK
Exposing since 1969.
There is an interesting comparison available for the D800 vs. D800E done by DxO mark that showed a small, but measurable, increase in MTF for the D800E. Of course, both cameras have very high resolution sensors that will oversample a lot of older Nikon lens designs.
As for the M Type 240, I am hoping to see some example shots with wider lenses than 35mm, to see how it handles corner discoloration that can be a problem with the M9 series. I have been shooting a lot of snow recently, I and find that some of Leica’s lens profiles for the M9 don’t do an a great job on flatfield correcting color errors in the corners for a couple of my wideangles. With my 24mm/3.8 and 28mm/2.8 ASPH lenses, I get noticeably discolored corners in subjects like snow with a cyan tint to the upper left corner and a magenta/red tint to the lower right corner. Because I am doing diptychs and triptychs, this is really annoying because it’s obvious when I place two or 3 vertical frames adjacent to each other. I’ve done some manual flatfield correction in Photoshop with images of a white board, but this is slow and needs lots of tweaking with adjustment layers. I’ll have to try the Lightroom plugin and Cornerfix to see if one of those works better for me.
But I’d rather not have to do any flatfield correction at all. It looks like the M 240 may not need correction due to the aspheric microlenses of the CMOSIS sensor, but I would like to see some proof of superior color performance before I trade up from the M9P.
As for the M Type 240, I am hoping to see some example shots with wider lenses than 35mm, to see how it handles corner discoloration that can be a problem with the M9 series. I have been shooting a lot of snow recently, I and find that some of Leica’s lens profiles for the M9 don’t do an a great job on flatfield correcting color errors in the corners for a couple of my wideangles. With my 24mm/3.8 and 28mm/2.8 ASPH lenses, I get noticeably discolored corners in subjects like snow with a cyan tint to the upper left corner and a magenta/red tint to the lower right corner. Because I am doing diptychs and triptychs, this is really annoying because it’s obvious when I place two or 3 vertical frames adjacent to each other. I’ve done some manual flatfield correction in Photoshop with images of a white board, but this is slow and needs lots of tweaking with adjustment layers. I’ll have to try the Lightroom plugin and Cornerfix to see if one of those works better for me.
But I’d rather not have to do any flatfield correction at all. It looks like the M 240 may not need correction due to the aspheric microlenses of the CMOSIS sensor, but I would like to see some proof of superior color performance before I trade up from the M9P.
douglasf13
Well-known
The problem with the DxO Mark correction, if I recall correctly, is that they didn't optimize sharpening for each before comparison. That is the difference. You have to sharpen an AA'd sensor more/differently than an AA-less sensor for optimum results.
Agreed about the flat field correction. Hopefully these new micro lenses improve that.
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
It's the "people don't cover their mouth when they cough, specially when riding the crammed train" bug. I had escaped the flu season all Winter until now. Thanks for the sentiment, though.
Leica should really create an Image Department. In the digital age, first impressions from "pre-production" cameras make or break a launch, and is a strong marketing tool. Polaroid suffered from poor marketing, and despite of making great gear, they sank their own ship.
Apple's success was based on the fact that, despite their highly-priced offerings, they were widely accepted. Apple still gets a lot of flak, like Leica, about "it's expensive", "it's a cult", "it's a niche [blah blah blah]". But they mastered their image and made it match expectations. I don't think Leica quite understands that. If they do, it's evident something is getting filtered as tone-deaf along the line.
I also suspect that the big wigs muddle their message, much like a good film gets lots of opinions from investors and actors and producers. If they let someone with an innate sense of these things, and let him/her operate the image operation (image as in "marketing") without "do this, do that / ooh! I have a great idea" from the big wigs, they may just pull it off.
I think this sense of tone-deafness has recently been demonstrated in: http://blog.leica-camera.com/photog...zstan-a-photographic-journey-with-jean-gaumy/ where "The blog will follow Jean Gaumy as he revisits Kyrgyzstan on a photographic journey with the new Leica M" and then after the scrutiny, they stated "Jean Gaumy went to Kyrgyzstan with a Leica M9 in his package, because the Leica M prototype wasn’t ready".
Somebody/a department dedicated to the "online image" would smooth out these wrinkles that are very distracting.
Ron (Netherlands)
Well-known
+1 what isn't helping Leica is the messing around with digital files like here admitted by the same Jonoslack (taken from GetDPI) - actually exif files were changed in order to presume they were shot with an M9 (guess some people would call this fraud):
"jonoslack
Super Duper
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
Posts: 9,396
Images: 1
Re: New M files available from Jono
HI Vivek
Well - the M pictures thread is about images, not about technicality, and pixel peeping at that resolution isn't very useful - I plead guilty to one or two pictures having their exif stripped and files renamed. There didn't seem to be any harm done.
all the best
__________________
Pioneer
Veteran
Well, based on the samples I still want my M9 to last a looonnnnggg time. There is no pressing need to upgrade. If I want CMOS images like these I'll pull my Canon 1Ds Mk II out of semi-retirement.
cam
the need for speed
he was showing happy snaps of his family, ffs, in a best of M images thread (which, technically this is). calling it fraud is absurd. seriously. really silly comment from you, and i've normally got huge respect for you :bang:
that said, i, too, totally agree with Gabriel.
jonoslack
Member
NoNo Ron - I just removed the exif (is that fraud?)
Anyway - I've read the comments - of course the files posted were not chosen to show my photographic talents (such as they are, or are not). They were chosen variously for other reasons (thus also explaining f stop settings which one might not choose). I like some of the images - and some are a little anodyne. On the other hand my style is not 'macho', and doesn't suit everyone's taste (I was roundly slagged off around here for the DNG files I posted for the MM).
Having read most of the forum posts (from leica rumours to LUF) the one thing that shines forth is that each forum has it's 'bad images' and usually also it's 'good images'. . . . . but they are always different
Some of these were taken with a very early version of the camera - and sometimes it shows (some pattern in the background of the 'bread' shot if you radically boost the exposure for instance.)
Personally I'm not professional (FWIW) but I have done plenty of professional work over the years (mostly wedding and commercial). I have various skills which Leica presumably find useful for purposes of testing - and I'm willing to have my unprocessed photographs posted on the internet (examine your consciences please!).
Any questions?
all the best
Jonathan Slack
ps - thank you Cam for the spirited support.
Jono, kudos for the courage to post in this thread, some of the above posts were rather brutal as I mentioned previously.
-Robert
-Robert
Ron (Netherlands)
Well-known
If they were just moved, Its certainly not fraud, so if that was the case I take back what I said, although I it was stated indirectly.
the point made was that if you change information and make a deliberate misrepresentation in public, this can be called fraud. Apparently looking at the explanation, that is not what was done by Jono and I am glad for that. However if such action would be done under the name of Leica, Leica would be in serious trouble.
SDK
Exposing since 1969.
Thank you Jono, did you do any snow shots with the M 240 prototype and wideangle lenses like the 28mm/2.8 ASPH or 24mm/3.8 ASPH? I was wondering how improved the color consistency may be in the corners, compared to the M9 series cameras (my M9P, as I posted above, has some annoying color shifts in the left corners for me with some wideangles).
Thanks, again, Steve Keirstead
jonoslack
Member
Hi There Steve.
Yes . . . well, I did plenty with the 28 f2.8 and with the WATE - there is a little visible vignetting, which is still being finessed, but I've seen no colour shift. Perfect would be a big word, but the situation is hugely improved over the M9.
I hope this helps.
all the best
Yes . . . well, I did plenty with the 28 f2.8 and with the WATE - there is a little visible vignetting, which is still being finessed, but I've seen no colour shift. Perfect would be a big word, but the situation is hugely improved over the M9.
I hope this helps.
all the best
MCTuomey
Veteran
nerd machismo, drizzled snark, and imaging arcana rule! (better discussion over at getdpi)
sincere thanks for posting, jono - you're a brave fellow
i'm more interested in the camera as a result of your posts and responses and appreciate you sharing the files too
sincere thanks for posting, jono - you're a brave fellow
i'm more interested in the camera as a result of your posts and responses and appreciate you sharing the files too
jonoslack
Member
HI There - thank you for the message (and thank you to Robert as well) - I'd have posted earlier, but I'm zapping around like the proverbial bluearsedfly!
.The point of the files is the files - not the photographs (and certainly not the photographer) - and I think the files stand up pretty well - I've looked at thousands of them, and my feeling is that the colour is slightly better than the M9, and that the high ISO is nearly two stops better.
All the best
maitani
Well-known
HI There - thank you for the message (and thank you to Robert as well) - I'd have posted earlier, but I'm zapping around like the proverbial bluearsedfly!
The point of the files is the files - not the photographs (and certainly not the photographer) - and I think the files stand up pretty well - I've looked at thousands of them, and my feeling is that the colour is slightly better than the M9, and that the high ISO is nearly two stops better.
All the best
Hi Jonos
thanks for dropping in, if you feel it's two stops better than M9 I will definitely buy one, I just hope they get the firmware done until release, as some problems are obvious in the files, nothing to do with photographic skills but some files just don't hold up to what an M9 does between ISO 160 AND ISO 400.
I still feel the M240 will be a very good camera, added speed, finally something like 'metering' , 3 focusing techniques in one camera (real RF, loupe focusing, focus peaking) if they don't mess the sensor up completely this is the best camera on the market in this size dimensions. and an universal digiback for all 35mm lenses of the last decades.
maybe you could add some more shots later on your blog, as M240 are still scarce on the web.
SDK
Exposing since 1969.
Good to know Jono, Thanks!
BNLee
Established
Are people always this harsh towards the "new comer"?
If they are, then I suspect back in 2009, most people were also disappointed/not impressed/disgusted by the sample images released for the Leica M9, which in any case, still became the wildly successful camera... And MANY people still bought it...
Well, many people still bought the M8 even though it had the IR issues. Perhaps if people weren't so negative towards the Leica M9, it's because of the vast improvement of not having the IR issues that the predecessor had.
We'll see, after all these fight and debating about the Leica M's "disappointing" images, most will still have a go at that bad boy after it is released.
Look alert people, we are still in the age of CMOS and CCD sensors, unless Leica decides to buy the technology from Sigma and put the Merril sensor into their future Leica M's, we are not going to get pinpoint microscopic-fantastic results from any existing smaller format sensors! That is, unless we wait another, say, 10 years until they develop the "UELS-Ultimate Ernst Leitz Sensor (TM To me)"!
P.S.: Some of the pictures, the snow shot and the scenery shot by the river shows that the Leica M's sensor was dirty... Or gets dirty easily...
If they are, then I suspect back in 2009, most people were also disappointed/not impressed/disgusted by the sample images released for the Leica M9, which in any case, still became the wildly successful camera... And MANY people still bought it...
Well, many people still bought the M8 even though it had the IR issues. Perhaps if people weren't so negative towards the Leica M9, it's because of the vast improvement of not having the IR issues that the predecessor had.
We'll see, after all these fight and debating about the Leica M's "disappointing" images, most will still have a go at that bad boy after it is released.
Look alert people, we are still in the age of CMOS and CCD sensors, unless Leica decides to buy the technology from Sigma and put the Merril sensor into their future Leica M's, we are not going to get pinpoint microscopic-fantastic results from any existing smaller format sensors! That is, unless we wait another, say, 10 years until they develop the "UELS-Ultimate Ernst Leitz Sensor (TM To me
)"!P.S.: Some of the pictures, the snow shot and the scenery shot by the river shows that the Leica M's sensor was dirty... Or gets dirty easily...
Ron (Netherlands)
Well-known
Not the M9 I'm quite sure, but the M8(.2) prices may be upheld quite well
jonoslack
Member
Thanks for the response - I'm pretty convinced of the quality of the files myself.
As for the dirty sensor - I've always found M sensors tend to get dirty easily when they're new, and settle down later - I'm not sure why. The snow shots were taken at quite a small aperture where dirt tends to show up. Of course - easily fixed (both in the image and on the camera).
I plead guilty to not doing enough cleaning - maybe if the sensor was badly prone to dirt I'd have cleaned it more often! (I've done it twice).
all the best