Poll

Why do you own a digital M Leica?

Because I prefer shooting with a rangefinder.
- 9 (45%)
Because I want to use Leica and other M lenses.
- 11 (55%)

Total Members Voted: 20

Voting closed: October 30, 2011, 08:03:58 AM


Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 ... 12   Go Down

Author Topic: M Leica Camera or Lenses?  (Read 135100 times)

Erick Boileau

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 244
    • http://
Re: M Leica Camera or Lenses?
« Reply #140 on: August 19, 2012, 09:46:57 AM »

and diffraction ?
and for what do you need exactly so many pixels ?
Logged

georgl

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 140
Re: M Leica Camera or Lenses?
« Reply #141 on: August 19, 2012, 10:10:46 AM »

With 4m pixel-pitch (54MP on 24x36 or 24MP on APS-C) you would start notice diffraction with the very best lenses somewhere between f5.6-f8, but even diffraction-limited, the IQ would still be superior to the native 24MP-file, it could even be used (stopping down beyond f8) to avoid aliasing without the need of an AA-filter.

54MP (or 6000x9000) would be sufficient for flawless 76cm wide prints (@300ppi) - which would be nice for some of us indeed, altough I don't print all pictures this large, of course...

Long story short: A cleverly implemented 54MP-sensor (4m) instead of a common 24MP-design (6m pixel-pitch) would increase IQ and versatility. The only downside would be the higher effort in R&D. When you seriously can't handle the file-size with your computer, you can still use in-camera-downsampling and still yield superior IQ.
Logged

Erick Boileau

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 244
    • http://
Re: M Leica Camera or Lenses?
« Reply #142 on: August 19, 2012, 10:12:53 AM »

I really hope they will never do that
Logged

georgl

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 140
Re: M Leica Camera or Lenses?
« Reply #143 on: August 19, 2012, 01:10:03 PM »

why not?
Logged

Erick Boileau

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 244
    • http://
Re: M Leica Camera or Lenses?
« Reply #144 on: August 19, 2012, 01:20:38 PM »

because for A2  you don't need so many pixels, it's heavy and un-necessary, and diffraction will be worst than it is now
Logged

georgl

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 140
Re: M Leica Camera or Lenses?
« Reply #145 on: August 20, 2012, 03:20:35 AM »

In practice, diffraction is an issue of magnification (sensor size vs. output size), not the pixel-count!

One example: you have to make a 76cm-wide print and you use two cameras with identical MP-count but one is equipped with a 4/3-sensor (18mm wide -> 40x magnification), the other one with a 24x36-sensor (36mm wide -> 20x magnification). The 24x36-system can be stopped down two stops further at a similar level of diffraction.

But when you compare cameras with the same sensor size but different pixel count (we stick with the 24x36 24MP vs 54MP comparison) diffraction effects will be the same on both prints. On a pixel level, the 54MP-file will degrade earlier (let's say from f8 on) but this is compensated for by the higher pixel count. At the same stop, the 54MP-sensor will always result in a superior IQ compared to the 24MP-sensor.  Only the IQ-advantage over the 24MP-sensor degrades.

A hypothetical 24x36 camera with 54MP-sensor could also offer internal downsampling (e.g. to 24MP or 13.5MP) and would just behave like a camera with lower native pixel count. Most likely, the downsampled 24MP-file will be superior to the native 24MP-file. No disadvantages for the user whatsoever!

We have reached that level of technology now, we just have to implement it. No need for two cameras (like Nikon D3x vs D3s) - high-sensitivity vs high-resolution - anymore.

Yes, for a 300ppi-print (which is needed for a fine-art-print in demanding landscape-photography, not a portrait-poster viewed at several m distance...) A2 "just" takes 7000 pixels horizontally, A1 already 10000 pixels.

Logged

Erick Boileau

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 244
    • http://
Re: M Leica Camera or Lenses?
« Reply #146 on: August 20, 2012, 06:46:34 AM »

georgl  I know all that theory

but thanks for your answer
Logged

jfirneno

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 60
Re: M Leica Camera or Lenses?
« Reply #147 on: August 20, 2012, 07:30:20 AM »

Looks like there may soon be another full-frame camera to attach Leica lenses to.  Rumor has it that Sony is developing a full-frame camera with an 18mm flange to sensor dimension (e-mount).  From all the buzz on the various Sony sites there seems to be a lot of enthusiasm.  Of course it's just a rumor, but stranger things have happened.  This would be a direct way of polling how many people want Leica just for their lenses.
Logged

Erick Boileau

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 244
    • http://
Re: M Leica Camera or Lenses?
« Reply #148 on: August 20, 2012, 07:54:04 AM »

Looks like there may soon be another full-frame camera to attach Leica lenses to.  Rumor has it that Sony is developing a full-frame camera with an 18mm flange to sensor dimension (e-mount).  From all the buzz on the various Sony sites there seems to be a lot of enthusiasm.  Of course it's just a rumor, but stranger things have happened.  This would be a direct way of polling how many people want Leica just for their lenses.
if Sony does that FF  for 2000  I shall never buy a Leica for 8000
it's a good answer to the question I guess :-)
Logged

Petrus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 814
Re: M Leica Camera or Lenses?
« Reply #149 on: August 20, 2012, 09:54:56 AM »

because for A2  you don't need so many pixels, it's heavy and un-necessary, and diffraction will be worst than it is now

Diffraction is always the same, with lesser systems you just can not see it. Sharper sensor will always make pictures sharper than a less sharp (less resolving) sensor, diffraction or no diffraction.
Logged

Erick Boileau

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 244
    • http://
Re: M Leica Camera or Lenses?
« Reply #150 on: August 20, 2012, 09:58:13 AM »

Diffraction is always the same, with lesser systems you just can not see it. Sharper sensor will always make pictures sharper than a less sharp (less resolving) sensor, diffraction or no diffraction.
no diffraction is not always the same
Logged

Petrus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 814
Re: M Leica Camera or Lenses?
« Reply #151 on: August 20, 2012, 11:49:08 AM »

no diffraction is not always the same

Diffraction is only dependent of the f-stop. Not sensor size, sensor resolution, image circle, lens quality. It can be calculated from a simple physical formula. That way it is always the same for the same f-stop. If the sensor and lens resolution* is better than the diffraction limit, it shows. If the sensor and lens resolution is less, it does not show (as much**). As the tests and common sense has proved, a sensor with better resolution than the diffraction limit makes sharper pictures even with diffraction coming into play than a sensor which falls short of the diffraction limit.

* meaning that the lens is diffraction limited, not optical quality limited.
** all quality constrictions affect the final output to some extent. It is like a chain of quality damaging factors (=>1) where the product of all the factors determines the final quality. If one of them approaches 1 its effect becomes negligible. With a truly good lens diffraction "factor" is practically 1 when using large apertures below the diffraction limit of the system.
Logged

Erick Boileau

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 244
    • http://
Re: M Leica Camera or Lenses?
« Reply #152 on: August 20, 2012, 03:16:36 PM »

Diffraction is only dependent of the f-stop. Not sensor size, sensor resolution, image circle, lens quality. It can be calculated from a simple physical formula. That way it is always the same for the same f-stop. If the sensor and lens resolution* is better than the diffraction limit, it shows. If the sensor and lens resolution is less, it does not show (as much**). As the tests and common sense has proved, a sensor with better resolution than the diffraction limit makes sharper pictures even with diffraction coming into play than a sensor which falls short of the diffraction limit.

* meaning that the lens is diffraction limited, not optical quality limited.
** all quality constrictions affect the final output to some extent. It is like a chain of quality damaging factors (=>1) where the product of all the factors determines the final quality. If one of them approaches 1 its effect becomes negligible. With a truly good lens diffraction "factor" is practically 1 when using large apertures below the diffraction limit of the system.
diffraction depends on the pitch,  the distance between 2 pixels
Logged

Petrus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 814
Re: M Leica Camera or Lenses?
« Reply #153 on: August 20, 2012, 03:35:02 PM »

diffraction depends on the pitch,  the distance between 2 pixels

True, maybe I was not precise enough. I meant sensor resolution measured as pixel pitch, not number of pixels in the image. To nitpick: diffraction LIMIT depends on the pitch, diffraction itself is just dependent of f-stop, even if the lens was not attached to anything...

Diffraction limits can of course be calculated for different pitch resolutions for each sensor size just as easily. See the local chart for diffraction limits for each sensor size: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/resolution.shtml , end of the article.

In any case the diffraction limit is the same for all (pitch) resolutions irregardless of sensor size. If we have different size sensors with different pixel pitch we get different diffraction limits. See the chart at the end of the linked article.
« Last Edit: August 20, 2012, 03:37:24 PM by Petrus »
Logged

Erick Boileau

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 244
    • http://
Re: M Leica Camera or Lenses?
« Reply #154 on: August 20, 2012, 04:06:36 PM »

Thanks Petrus
Logged

Quentin

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1179
    • Quentin on Facebook
Re: M Leica Camera or Lenses?
« Reply #155 on: September 08, 2012, 11:45:20 AM »

Basically we should just use bigger sensors. Cramming ever more pixels on to a redundant format that was not even ideal for still photography when it was first introduced is becaming increasingly ridiculous.
Logged
Quentin Bargate, ARPS, Author, photographer entrepreneur and senior partner of Bargate Murray, Law Firm of the Year 2013, 2014 & 2015

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13230
Re: M Leica Camera or Lenses?
« Reply #156 on: September 11, 2012, 11:10:13 AM »

Basically we should just use bigger sensors. Cramming ever more pixels on to a redundant format that was not even ideal for still photography when it was first introduced is becaming increasingly ridiculous.



If you refer to 35mm cameras (135 format) then I have to say you are mistaken; I made most of my career out of 35mm and Kodachrome, despite owning two 500 Series 'blads at the same time as the Nikons. What 35mm did for me, it did very well and better than I could do by going larger; it's seldom all about one factor.

Rob C

lowep

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 496
    • http://sites.google.com/site/peterlowefoto/
Re: M Leica Camera or Lenses?
« Reply #157 on: September 18, 2012, 03:33:00 AM »

How about "Texas Leica" MF digital rangefinder cameras like this one???
Logged

Erick Boileau

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 244
    • http://
Re: M Leica Camera or Lenses?
« Reply #158 on: September 21, 2012, 05:12:31 AM »

now both are perfect  and my M9 for sale in february  :P
« Last Edit: September 21, 2012, 05:17:01 AM by erickb »
Logged

John Gellings

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 31
Re: M Leica Camera or Lenses?
« Reply #159 on: November 29, 2012, 09:59:42 AM »

The only reason I use a M8/M9 is because of the rangefinder.  
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 ... 12   Go Up