M10 has destroyed the used market

nobbylon said:
Strange as I've taken a few sunsets and sunrises and never had problems.

http://www.johnwhitfieldphoto.com/album/thailand_jan_2016#ps-img-1222357
Click to expand...

Not sunset or sunrise, but more middle of the day thing. Low camera angle so I can frame upwards to my subject with the sun in the image.
Like this. I had to remove the line in LR w/ the cloning tool.

Traffic%20circle%20girl%20S-5_zpszq7q3pil.jpg
 
Gregm61 said:
Is anyone even developing the CCD image sensor anymore? I would imagine no. That ship has sailed.

I'm not sure who is supplying Leica with the M9 replacement sensors, one of which was installed on my M9-P last May, but it pretty much duplicates what the M9 was capable of when it was new 7 years ago, which isn't all that great above about ISO 800, but beautiful, even gorgeous if you can keep it between ISO 160-400. It's a perfect backup body, backup being something you only resort to when your main body isn't available.
Click to expand...

Really? Teledynedalsa thinks otherwise...
Typical applications are industrial and scientific, including aerial and satellite imaging. Custom variants of this process supply many of the image sensors used in the industry-leading digital cameras of Teledyne DALSA's Machine Vision division. NASA's JPL chose Teledyne DALSA to fabricate several of the image sensors on the Curiosity Mars Rover, just as it did for the earlier Spirit and Opportunity Rovers.
Click to expand...

Truesense - ON semiconductor developed the improved corrosion proof CCD for replacement in the M9.
 
Huss said:
One thing that I really really didn't like about the CCD sensor in my M-E is that often if I had the sun in the image it would create solid thick vertical or horizontal lines from the point of light source which is some sort of sensor artifact. Something that I never got with the CMOS M240 sensor...
Click to expand...

This is consistent with sensor blooming. Excessive charge in a few photos-diode sites leaks into other sites in the same electrical circuit. Blooming depend directly on the amount of overexposure.

CMOS is inherently less susceptible to blooming. With current chip designs blooming is rarely seen. Of course profound overexposure can cause and, or reveal all sorts of undesirable artifacts. So CMOS blooming is not impossible, but even so it will be more localized.
 
willie_901 said:
This is consistent with sensor blooming. Excessive charge in a few photos-diode sites leaks into other sites in the same electrical circuit. Blooming depend directly on the amount of overexposure.

CMOS is inherently less susceptible to blooming. With current chip designs blooming is rarely seen. Of course profound overexposure can cause and, or reveal all sorts of undesirable artifacts. So CMOS blooming is not impossible, but even so it will be more localized.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the info, I had read the explanation before but had forgotten the details.
I don't want the sensor I am using to limit my creativity, film does not, nor does CMOS and so this is one of many reasons why I do not miss my M-E. Having sensor issues at base ISO does not work for me.
 
Gregm61 said:
Is anyone even developing the CCD image sensor anymore? I would imagine no. That ship has sailed.

I'm not sure who is supplying Leica with the M9 replacement sensors, one of which was installed on my M9-P last May, but it pretty much duplicates what the M9 was capable of when it was new 7 years ago, which isn't all that great above about ISO 800, but beautiful, even gorgeous if you can keep it between ISO 160-400. It's a perfect backup body, backup being something you only resort to when your main body isn't available.
Click to expand...

I don't think CCD in advance camera will happen again. This is why I like to hold to my M-E and M8. As film shooter who is using grainy 400 ISO films and pushing them to 1600 I see no problem with M8 ISO 1250 and M9 ISO 2500 for color. If it isn't extremely dark, noise looks like film grain on scans.

If I need clean image under low light, I use Leica TTL flash. Actually, with any camera I prefer flash. Even if it is FF CMOS and ISO6400 is well supported. One of our daughters takes same approach for paid photography. Instead of chasing low light with ISO6400 and fast prime, she is flashing it at f5.6 and lower ISO with TTL flash.

Here is one thing I like in Leica M-E and it is also present in M8 files, but less (I don't use IR-cut filter). With CMOS sensors I was never into pixel, 100% zoom. It is nothing to see with CMOS, but pixels. With Leica CCD it is really facilitating to look at image details. I never seen images to be so clean and so full of details. At 100% zoom with CCD it looks like it will take another 100% zoom before it starts to show some pixels.
 
jaapv said:
...

Truesense - ON semiconductor developed the improved corrosion proof CCD for replacement in the M9.
Click to expand...

Are you saying Truesense and, or ON Semiconductor uses an improved (i.e. different) CCD photo-diode array components and ancillary electronics design compared to the Kodak manufactured sensor assemblies?

Obviously the On Semiconductor M9 sensor assembly has an improved passive component, i.e. the IR filter/cover glass. Perhaps Truesense or ON Semiconductor improved upon Kodak's manufacturing methods.

I don't how using CCD technology for corrosion-proof replacements contradicts the assertion that advancements in CCD technology for still-photography has ceased. What other option was there to solve the M9 problem?

Industrial and scientific applications are a completely different story as CCD provides specific advantages for specialized usage.
 
nikonhswebmaster said:
Some restaurants serve Pepsi but no Coca Cola, but I never go back, and have been known to leave during ordering. :)
Click to expand...

Good for you.

Personally, I dislike all cola drinks and prefer water. I've never had to walk out of a restaurant on the basis of not being able to get a good glass of water... :)

G
 
Huss said:
One thing that I really really didn't like about the CCD sensor in my M-E is that often if I had the sun in the image it would create solid thick vertical or horizontal lines from the point of light source which is some sort of sensor artifact. Something that I never got with the CMOS M240 sensor, or of course never got on film.
Base ISO, f11 or f16

Sensor remapping didn't help, and it was not a corroded sensor (that happened later)
Click to expand...

It happened also a lot on my M8 and also on my Monochrom at times. The reason if I get it right is the way the sensor is mapped and read out. The power supply probably gets slightly depleted in one of the array's (or a whole bunch) when these are over exposed. There was a lot written about it some 10 yeras ago.

On the M8 it annoyed me and was on the list of why to change;
on my MM with its deliberate choice of camera I happily made a trade-off and by the way it does not happen all that often anymore.
 
It is light from a source on the edge of the frame falling on the reference pixels outside the image,which are supposd to be sealed.
This was mainly on the M8, but there are a few examples from the M9.
 
Godfrey said:
Good for you.

Personally, I dislike all cola drinks and prefer water. I've never had to walk out of a restaurant on the basis of not being able to get a good glass of water... :)

G
Click to expand...

My point I guess is I am kind of a simple midwestern guy, brand wise. I buy DELL or Apple, Leica or Nikon, Jack Daniel's or Coca Cola.

And lately I most wholeheartedly agree with you regarding water with meals.
 
The saddest part about this are those trying to sell their M240s that they bought a couple of months ago for $5000+.
I've seen these ads, along with the text saying they will include the receipt that shows they just paid $7K for it..
 
M10 has destroyed the used market

Or should the title be:

M10 is creating exciting new ownership possibilities for the less well heeled...

Joe
 
I bought only used M8 and M9, with a partial trade, and I am getting my money's worth.
 
Huss said:
The saddest part about this are those trying to sell their M240s that they bought a couple of months ago for $5000+.
I've seen these ads, along with the text saying they will include the receipt that shows they just paid $7K for it..
Click to expand...

I don't think that's so bad at all really for a camera that's a few years old. Even the most recent of cameras (in stock cameras) go for 75-80% of new price once used.
 
Looking digital-M prices in Europe, don't think they have changed much since the introduction of M10. M9 prices are still on same level as before. M240 may have taken little dive, but considering how high it still is, not major change either.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom