New M CMOS sensor vs M9 CCD, any thoughts??

[jaapv]

I'm mostly curious to see the dynamic range of the new M. If this sensor allows for 1-2 stops more shadow detail compared to the M9, then it could produce better B&W files than the MM.

😀 We can file this one under wishful thinking. The strength of the Monochrome comes from the removal of the Bayer filter with its attendant elimination of the (chromatic) aberrations it produces and the lack of interpolation artifacts. Neither of which is implemented in the M. That one will be a superb color camera, outperforming just about any current camera, but the Monochrome will still rule in the B&W domain.

 

[mani]

That one will be a superb color camera, outperforming just about any current camera

As someone who loves my Leica cameras and (particularly) lenses, I still cringe with embarrassment at statements like this, about a totally unknown future quantity.

 

[jaapv]

Cringe away - it won't be film 😉

'T is just a prediction based on what I pick up in the field....

 

[maitani]

from my photokina hands on I dare to say the new M will have super clean 3200, usable up to 5000 iso (alright i have no crystal ball, but this was my impression on the pre-production display pics zoomed to the maximum)

where the M9 hits the limit at around iso 1600.

The main advantege of the new M is that you can use just about any lens ever produced on it.
OM's nikkors, pentax, whatever you like..
thanks to focus peaking and the big and nice display, (also the elecronical finder) not my thing, but can be useful for longer lenses as visoflex. but if you want this it's there. it's the closest to a universal digiback we've seen yet.

the projected framelines, video, etc. are all pluses too, for whom needs it. the processing speed on the new M is amazing, quick write times, quick re-shoot times (this is a slight weakness of the M9 too, rather slow write times due to CCD sensor readout)

If you're the pure rangefinder guy and plan to use M lenses only. and the experience is important to you an M9 might still be the way to go.

I'm most curious if they manage to transfer 'some' of the CCD magic, to the new tweaked CMOS(is) technology, I'm certain it will be beat the M9 at high-iso, but I'm even more curious if it will beat the M9 at base iso.




one of the tech guys on the photokina booth told me it's the goal to retain the special look of CCD as far as possible, and don't look to different to the previous Leica bodys.

 

[douglasf13]

Not making any guesses about the M, I would comment on the M9. I dont think we are limited to 13x19 with M9, I've made 1m prints that suits me 🙂.

Not meaning to nitpick.

Sure, you can print larger with the M9. I'm just saying that I rarely print larger than 13x19, so I'll likely stick with the M9.

 

[doolittle]

Is there any indication when the first M reviews and image samples will come out? I am guessing the firmware must be approaching release version and that pre-production review copies are soon to be (or already?) out there, with non-disclosure agreements attached?

 

[jaapv]

I'm sure the betatesters have been at it for a while already. Leica wants to get this one right, clearly. My guess is that the first meaningful publications will not appear before early spring.

 

[semilog]

They built in live view, that is a pity because without live view they would have used a bigger part of the sensor for the actual still photography.

Nope. You misunderstand how live view works on current CMOS sensors. There is not a penalty for still images, except that live view can heat the sensor up somewhat, resulting in slightly increased noise. On the other hand, one can actually achieve exact rather than approximate focus, which is particularly important to extract the performance of really good fast lenses and subjects not at the center of the frame. Live view is, in other words, essential to extract the full optical potential of modern Leica M lenses.

 

[doolittle]

I'm sure the betatesters have been at it for a while already. Leica wants to get this one right, clearly. My guess is that the first meaningful publications will not appear before early spring.

I am really hoping that the user experience of the M is the biggest improvement. More so than the sensor performance.

At lower iso at any rate the output produced by the M8 and M9 are phenomenal.

Maybe my view is coloured too much by personal experience, but I have developed a prejudice that the M8 (and by extension the M9, though I have never used one!) have a firmware that at best could be described as quirky and at worst possibly down right flakey.

I am really hoping the bigger battery, combined with better power management and speedier electronics and the bigger buffer will be a revelation.

 

[NazgulKing]

People are getting ridiculously high on "oh I don't need that feature", "oh this is not just for still photographers" or "why didn't they fulfill my every single whim and needs" etc. etc. Everytime they get dragged out of their comfort zone, they have to be dragged screaming and shouting. Some of these features hardly impede their normal shooting habits, but it hasn't stopped the chest thumping that is getting ridiculous.

AT the core of it all, the question of the "look" will ultimately depend on what kind of data is extracted out of the sensor and how it is processed. CCD and CMOS tech these days perform very similarly. To wit: http://www.teledynedalsa.com/corp/markets/CCD_vs_CMOS.aspx

As for live view, it's just real time read out of the sensor. Nothing to it. Even CCD sensors can be used to do that. Just slap a heat sink if it gets too hot that's all.

 

[jaapv]

Not much slapping space for heat sinks in M bodies I would say🙄
Anyway, you are forgetting one thing: the M (8,9,M,MM) is not about image quality as long as it is good to excellent. The whole point of the camera is about ergonomics, RF experience, intangible Leica feel etc. Otherwise we would all be using some DSLR brick.
So it is quite normal for users to get nervous when Leica starts changing -to them (us)- essentials and to ask whether Live View and Video do not impinge the gestalt of the camera.
Of course the rationale is clear - the camera needs to become more mainstream to remain viable, but Leica carefully kept building the pure digital M in the form of the ME, very aware as they are of these sensibilities.

 

[douglasf13]

Not much slapping space for heat sinks in M bodies I would say🙄
Anyway, you are forgetting one thing: the M (8,9,M,MM) is not about image quality as long as it is good to excellent. The whole point of the camera is about ergonomics, RF experience, intangible Leica feel etc. Otherwise we would all be using some DSLR brick.
So it is quite normal for users to get nervous when Leica starts changing -to them (us)- essentials and to ask whether Live View and Video do not impinge the gestalt of the camera.
Of course the rationale is clear - the camera needs to become more mainstream to remain viable, but Leica carefully kept building the pure digital M in the form of the ME, very aware as they are of these sensibilities.

Agreed, Jaap. Not to compare Sony to Leica, but a similar thing happened to Sony with their A900 DSLR. IMO, that's still one of the best DSLRs around, in terms of user experience. It had the best viewfinder of any DSLR to date, the controls were fantastic, and the IQ, while not quite as clean as today's cameras, was very good. When that camera arrived, the biggest complaint was that it didn't have live view or video, which never bothered me one bit. Fast forward four years, and we have a new Sony A99 which has completely reversed course by being based off of live view, and it doesn't even have an OVF at all.

I'm not saying that Leica will remove the rangefinder altogether, but I personally started using the M9 to go back to a simpler form of rangefinder shooting, so all of the bells and whistles of the new M don't really interest me, outside of maybe the quieter shutter and weather sealing.

Either way, as long as Leica doesn't get rid of the classic features of the M series, like the rangefinder, I'm ok with more features that I personally won't use. However, if the success of these new features sends Leica in a new direction, that would be a disappointment.

 

[colonel]

Live view is, in other words, essential to extract the full optical potential of modern Leica M lenses.

I don't agree. I get pin sharp at f1.4 everytime with the M9/MM

My 2 cents is that for off centre subjects, live view is ok on a tripod, but impractical for hand held
Focus and re-compose works fine as long as the subject is not close.

The only way for fast accurate off-centre focus at very close distances is using contrast detect AF.

Off centre can also be achieved comfortably using cropping with 18mp, especially as the M9 is usualy pixel level sharp.

the M (8,9,M,MM) is not about image quality as long as it is good to excellent.

oh it is. thats the whole rationale behind Leica lenses' unequaled excellence optically
its the sensor + lens combination, and the M9 sensor can deliver at 160 and 320
Of course the workflow and ergonomics are also key to the Leica experience. more difficult to master then a DSLR, but once mastered better pictures result.
Love it or hate it!

 

[semilog]

The whole point of the camera is about ergonomics, RF experience, intangible Leica feel etc.

I do not think that that word, "intangible," means what you think it means.

 

[jaapv]

I think I do ;http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/intangible

 

[semilog]

I don't agree. I get pin sharp at f1.4 everytime with the M9/MM

MTF falls off precipitously with even slight focus error, and focus-recompose (necessary of any subject not at the center of the frame) is inherently inaccurate. Field curvature adds to the difficulties.

You may be happy with your results. That is not the same thing as saying that you are extracting the full potential of M system optics.

Leica's engineers know this, and that is precisely why they have designed the new M in the way that they have.

 

[hellomikmik]

... I don't really know the theoretical difference between these sensor types (CCD vs CMOS) so thought to ask all of you informed and experienced followers if you can predict or know of any possible differences?

The main theoretical difference is that Leica's new FF sensors supplier is "brand new". That means: or 1) they are going to make something exceptional or 2) it's going to be a little fiasco. I wish them good luck and hope for them the sensor and camera will work as announced, charged for and expected.

Not on the subject:
I think the camera announced on 9/9/09 can start to be called Leica M9 "classic" (means it's not M9-P, MM or ME or this Hermes thing). Isn't it romantic?... It probably represents something with its rather special Kodak (RIP) CCD. After lot of sympathy for M3 and M6, I see only one successor for them - No 9 ("MM" is also nice but that's personal, not mathematical).

 

[semilog]

I think I do ;http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/intangible

Look at the word's etymology. Something tangible is, literally, something that may be touched.

Latin: tangere -- to touch.

A camera's ergonomics and feel are -- by definition -- the tangible aspects of the device.

 

[hellomikmik]

I do not think that that word, "intangible," means what you think it means.

for example price is something that is "intangible" 🙂

 

[colonel]

MTF falls off precipitously with even slight focus error,
Leica's engineers know this, and that is precisely why they have designed the new system in this way.

At 2 metres with a 50mm lens at f1.4 the DOF is 13cm.
We can all make far less error then this and I don't think the MTA would be effected.
For 35mm it's more then double

Live view was introduced to keep up with the joneses, allow video, allow longer telephoto lenses and allow a different focus technique that many people like using a tripod.
I don't think it had anything to do with the quality of detail.
R lens compatability was just a bonus. I am sure that Leica will be bringing out long focal length M lenses at some point.

IMHO obviously this could be speculated endlessly, but I am pretty sure that detail was not an objective of live view.