Why Leica is staying at 37.5MP for the S (Typ 007)

[paratom]

Sir,

Very much indeed! The Leica has large pixels, around 6 microns and sharp lenses. So it will render as the image on the left. Would Leica opt for smaller pixels it would render as on the right.

So, if you prefer rendition on the left buy a Leica S-007. If you prefer rendition to the right wait for an MFD with 150 MP. If you cannot wait for an MFD with 150 MP buy one with 80 MP.

If you cannot wait for a 150 MP MFDB and don't want to spend 40k$ US for an 80 MP one, buy a Nikon D810 for 3k $US and pretend to be happy.

I don't see any problem, do you?

Best regards
Erik

It seems the image on the right is taken with an A77. So are you telling us one can achieve better IQ with an A77 vs the S?

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi Ken

You may consider reading the article, posted here: http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/index.php/photoarticles/78-aliasing-and-supersampling-why-small-pixels-are-good

The fact is that those images are taken from same tripod position at 150 mm focal length. They show the advantage of small pixels, neither more or less.

Use a 150 MP pixel MFD sensor and you will see the same benefits!

Best regards
Erik

Erik, you keep posting those cropped in feather pics out of context. Show each frame as taken or at least explain that the feather on the left represents a MUCH smaller percentage of the frame so even though it was made with a rig with more megapixels. In the image on the right you are putting much more pixels on the feather itself. (same focal length, much less angle of view on a smaller sensor). Duh, 150 MP would be awesome and virtually eliminate moire. (no need to do a test to be convinced of this).

At any rate, let's talk about the Leica S...

[Theodoros]

Sir,

Very much indeed! The Leica has large pixels, around 6 microns and sharp lenses. So it will render as the image on the left. Would Leica opt for smaller pixels it would render as on the right.

So, if you prefer rendition on the left buy a Leica S-007. If you prefer rendition to the right wait for an MFD with 150 MP. If you cannot wait for an MFD with 150 MP buy one with 80 MP.

If you cannot wait for a 150 MP MFDB and don't want to spend 40k$ US for an 80 MP one, buy a Nikon D810 for 3k $US and pretend to be happy.

I don't see any problem, do you?

Best regards
Erik

Soooo... what you are basically saying... is that CMOS sensor of other technology and with micro lenses, will behave the same as CCD sensor of previous technology with NO micro lenses... ...and you expect people to take your "testing" seriously as "how many pixels Leica should choose for its sensor" ...because you know better... is that right?  

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

With 150 mm lens at 3.8 meter distance, definitively so! Based on P45+, that is!

But, the relevant way to interpret the images is that they show the difference between  37 MP sensor and a 90 MP sensor. It essentially shows what you would gain  with a 90 MP sensor on that Leica S2 vs. the present 37 Mp sensor.

In my view, a 90 MP sensor on the Leica S2 would yield widely superior results to the present 37 MP sensor, and these images are the best representations I can get. Please don't forget, these are real world images under real world conditions. The lenses used here are Sonnar 150/4 at f/8 and Sony 70-400/4-5.6G at f/8, both at 3.8m and at f/8 on P45+ (6.8 micron pitch) and Sony SLT 77 (3.8 micron pitch).

The sample is intended to demonstrate the resolution advantage of small pixels. The test does not in any way say that a small sensor APS-C camera would be superior to an MFD have larger pixels. What it demonstrates is that smaller pixels give better image quality than larger pixels at low ISO settings.

I would just love to demonstrate these effects on a 80MP to 150 MP MFD back if anyone would be nice enough to burrow me one.


Best regards
Erik

It seems the image on the right is taken with an A77. So are you telling us one can achieve better IQ with an A77 vs the S?

[Theodoros]

In my view, a 90 MP sensor on the Leica S2 would yield widely superior results to the present 37 MP sensor.

Best regards
Erik

I trust you'll apply for Leica's chief engineer... will you Erick? ...you've proven their current engineers "stupid" alright... it'll be "sitting ducks" for you if you do...

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

Lets put it this way, I know basic physics and can tell apart BS from reality, OK?

Best regards
Erik

Soooo... what you are basically saying... is that CMOS sensor of other technology and with micro lenses, will behave the same as CCD sensor of previous technology with NO micro lenses... ...and you expect people to take your "testing" seriously as "how many pixels Leica should choose for its sensor" ...because you know better... is that right?  

[Theodoros]

Hi,

Lets put it this way, I know basic physics and can tell apart BS from reality, OK?

Best regards
Erik

Soooo, Leica is BS ...right? ..they don't know basic physics to your "Einstein" level... right?

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

It is not me making stupid statements…

Regarding the Leica engineers, I don't know. Their statements don't really match physics and they are talking about products that are not in the market yet.

To me it sounds like quite a bit of snake oil, but some day they may post some usable images, like DNG files you know… than we ca  do some real world comparisons.

Best regards
Erik

Soooo, Leica is BS ...right? ..they don't know basic physics to your "Einstein" level... right?

Just to say, basic physics has nothing to do with relativity (Einstein stuff), it used to be high school stuff in my time. But I am an old man, almost 59.

I trust you'll apply for Leica's chief engineer... will you Erick? ...you've proven their current engineers "stupid" alright... it'll be "sitting ducks" for you if you do...

[Theodoros]

Hi,

It is not me making stupid statements…

Regarding the Leica engineers, I don't know. Their statements don't really match physics and they are talking about products that are not in the market yet.

To me it sounds like quite a bit of snake oil, but some day they may post some usable images, like DNG files you know… than we ca  do some real world comparisons.

Best regards
Erik

Soooo, Leica is BS ...right? ..they don't know basic physics to your "Einstein" level... right?

[Theodoros]

But I am an old man, almost 59.

Is that why you don't apply for a major company chief engineer Erik? ...Is Lula all your retirement interest? ...don't you care as to "teach" Leica on how they can improve their sensor analysis decisions?

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi Theodoros,

I am quite happy with my job in reactor physics. I am working in training operators of power plants and not in a marketing department of any company. I have still eight years to retirement, BTW.

If you want to find out more you may look for me on Linked In, OK?

Best regards
Erik

Is that why you don't apply for a major company chief engineer Erik? ...Is Lula all your retirement interest? ...don't you care as to "teach" Leica on how they can improve their sensor analysis decisions?

[Theodoros]

Hi Theodoros,

I am quite happy with my job in reactor physics. I am working in training operators of power plants and not in a marketing department of any company.

If you want to find out more you may look for me on Linked In, OK?

Best regards
Erik

But you do know more than Leica engineers ...right? It's just that you have a better job than they can offer you if you apply to them, that keeps you from "teaching" them... right?

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

It depends, if the BS they publish is all they know it is obviously the case. The rest, I don't know.

You know, you can just reproduce any experiment I have done and prove me wrong, have you ever tried that?! How hard can it be? Shoot a feather at medium aperture at 150 mm f/8 using any decent lens at 3.8m with decent focusing using an MFD and a high resolution APS-C camera and publish the results.

You can of course substitute the feather for any object with fine details.

Best regards
Erik

But you do know more than Leica engineers ...right?

[Ken R]

Hi,

It depends, if the BS they publish is all they know it is obviously the case. The rest, I don't know.

You know, you can just reproduce any experiment I have done and prove me wrong, have you ever tried that?! How hard can it be? Shoot a feather at medium aperture at 150 mm f/8 using any decent lens at 3.8m with decent focusing using an MFD and a high resolution APS-C camera and publish the results.

You can of course substitute the feather for any object with fine details.

Best regards
Erik

Erik. Why would one do that when the result is quite obvious. Put more pixels on a target and of course the target will look better. That is all you did by using a 150mm lens on a smaller format. Given equal composition / framing the P45+ will render the feather better.

Post after post of this tech talk scares away photographers looking for answers from other photographers who actually use the gear to make photographs.

Have you at least handled a Leica S and a few lenses?

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi Ken,

Now I have not. I am only talking about image quality. Some aspects of image quality are measurable/observable, some may be more subtle.

What I say is that the Leica S needs more pixels to match the rendition capability of their lenses. With the large pixels they produce artefacts in lieu of details. My samples illustrate it in a way. Try to do a similar shoot with a P25 and an IQ-280 and you will see a similar result.More pixels on target are good.

I don't think a discussion like this scares away potential Leica buyers, but may give some thoughts on choice of equipment before investment. There are plenty of options around from 24 MP full frame 135 up to 80 MP MFD from Phase One and Leaf, but also including the Sony based 50 MP options like the Phase One IQ-150/IQ-250, Leaf Credo 50 and Hasselblad backs.

Personally, I shoot with 24MP Sonys and a P45+ back on a Hasselblad 555ELD, my experience is based on that. The P45+ ant 39 MP is not that far from the S2 at 37.5 MP, although the S2 has somewhat smaller pixels. The S2 has probably better lenses which would exaggerate any aliasing artefacts compared to my images. Better lenses need higher resolution.

Personally I like Leica, but I don't think that gives them an artistic license to spread information of dubious value. Putting things in perspective never harms.

Best regards
Erik

Have you at least handled a Leica S and a few lenses?

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

Can you substantiate? Why?

• Is it the red dot?
• Is it the resolution Leica 37 MP vs . Phase One P45+mat 39 MP?
• Is it the microlenses?
• Is it the smaller pixels of the Leica, 6 micron vs 6.8 micron? Could be the case!
• Or are you just looking at the price tag?

My take is that a better lens would give higher edge contrast, but would not improve rendition as it is most limited by pixel level artefacts on the P45+ image.

Best regards
Erik

Hi Erik,
I am sure it is simple to take a better image of a feather with the S.

[synn]

Nobody expects the spanish inquisition feather picture!!!

[JV]

Personally I like Leica, but I don't think that gives them an artistic license to spread information of dubious value.

Erik,

I just re-read David's article once more.  

A simple question.  Could you highlight exactly which statements in that article are factually incorrect?  

I have re-read your comments as well and quite frankly it is not entirely clear to me.

Thanks, Joris.

[peterv]

Personally I like Leica, but I don't think that gives them an artistic license to spread information of dubious value. Putting things in perspective never harms.

Erik, I'm a photographer and I'm not scared by your technical posts, I enjoy reading them. Whether I understand everything you write and whether that's necessary for me in the so-called 'real world' is another matter Anyway, I appreciate your effort.

Question: What exactly did Leica say where that is information of dubious value?

BTW I think that in general this thread would benefit from less snarky remarks and more constructive discussion about the new S.

[mjrichardson]

I'm going to be really disappointed when Feathers R Us come looking for a photographer to produce their catalogue images with the strict stipulation that they must be shot at 3.8m and enlarged massively, my S will be straight in the bin!

This really is an absurd conversation, there is so much more to a system than picking one ridiculous test and then banging on about it ad neusem. Just forget it Eric, it's not a system you own, have used, will ever own or will ever understand, that's ok, it's not designed for you, same as many other systems out there. Keep taking test images as long as that makes you happy and let photographers work with the equipment that suits their style and more importantly their clients requirements.