MVCG
Established
I'm on a new M T240 waiting list and was thinking whether I would lose anything (photographically) by selling my M9 when buying the new M? 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?
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
The theoretical differences are quite irrelevant. The practical differences are more to the point. Right now they are known only to the beta testers and they are not breaking their NDA. So we just have to wait and see.
Certainly will be interesting to see what this 'unknown' sensor company can do.
Joosep
Well-known
icebear
Mentor
I assume no one has the crystal ball on RFF and there are no published files or prints available shot with the M (aka M10). Rumors speak of ISO 6400 with no grain at all, which would be a significant improvement over the M9. We will see.
prosophos
Established
My prediction, since the M was announced:
At low ISO values the M9 will have superior IQ
(http://prosophos.com/2012/09/15/the-m9-and-ccd-sensor/)
and
(http://prosophos.com/2012/10/04/cmos-that-sinking-feeling-again/).
Do I know for sure? No. But I bet I'm correct, based on previous experience with CCD vs CMOS sensors.
Cheers,
Peter.
www.prosophos.com
At low ISO values the M9 will have superior IQ
(http://prosophos.com/2012/09/15/the-m9-and-ccd-sensor/)
and
(http://prosophos.com/2012/10/04/cmos-that-sinking-feeling-again/).
Do I know for sure? No. But I bet I'm correct, based on previous experience with CCD vs CMOS sensors.
Cheers,
Peter.
www.prosophos.com
ChrisP
Grain Lover
My prediction would be to compare the output of your M9 to whatever D600 samples you can get a hold of. I'm going to guess the M's 24 mpx sensor will look remarkably similar to the one in D600.
gustavoAvila
Established
I certainly hope not!
With Sony sensors in every new consumer camera (except for the larger sensor Canon's and the Nikon 1's), digital images are becoming boringly similar.
Hopefully the CMOSIS sensor brings something new and unique to the table with regard to image esthetics!
sleepyhead
Well-known
I thought the aim of digital imaging technology was to capture as technically perfect image as possible, leaving the "character" of the image to postprocessing. At least that's what I would want if I didn't still shoot film, where I can change the chacrater to some extent by changing the type of film.
Sorry to get off topic - was just surprised to read this sentiment.
Last edited:
Range-rover
Mentor
It's not the sensor guy's it's each of the cameras company's processor's, they tweek
the outputs here and there till they get what they want, and remember there's only
three colors on a sensor red, green and blue and you mix that all together and you
get oh my what a mess! where's my film camera!
Range
the outputs here and there till they get what they want, and remember there's only
three colors on a sensor red, green and blue and you mix that all together and you
get oh my what a mess! where's my film camera!
Range
doolittle
Well-known
Thanks for the link - interesting!
I'm am sure there will be lots of comparison tests between the M9 and the M when it is finally released.
The fog in my crystal ball tells me that there will be subtle nuances which many will prefer in the M9 low iso files (more film like will be the quote). However the M files won't be half bad either and more than acceptable, and at higher iso there will be no contest. What should really win everybody over is the bigger buffer and faster electronics which will banish many of the quirks of the M9 (speaking as an M8 user, which is, I gather, a degree quirkier again than the M9).
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
The reason Sony sensors have assumed a dominant position is their technical superiority. What the photographer does pre- and post- exposure determines how the image looks. The sensor, one hopes, is as neutral, efficient, and linear a transducer of the lens's projection as possible.
Ron (Netherlands)
Well-known
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. M8 and M9 are really very bad on high iso so if you shoot a lot in the dark, go for the cmos sensor. If you altogether want something which produces 'better' files, go for the D800 - I saw stunning files coming out of that camera (of course you'll loose the rangefinder experience)!
v_roma
Well-known
Sensors may or may not be neutral (I'm not sure if there aren't inherent qualities to a sensor when it comes to color capture and other things) but the processors used by a camera/company certainly aren't neutral, as Range-rover pointed out. And that affects both RAW and JPEG files. And, even if you intend to do post-processing, it's a lot easier to start with a camera that produces whatever colors you are happy with (because they are accurate or you just find them pleasing).
Pioneer
Mentor
Yes. Those of you who prefer to shoot in a low light environment will definitely want to buy the new M...
...and then one of you will feel strangely compelled to sell your lightly used Monochrom to me for a VERY low price.
Just focus on the swinging disc and repeat after me...
...and then one of you will feel strangely compelled to sell your lightly used Monochrom to me for a VERY low price.
Just focus on the swinging disc and repeat after me...
douglasf13
Well-known
A big difference in the output between the new M and something like a Nikon will likely be the color filter that Leica uses on top of the sensor, assuming they use something similar to the M9's. Leica (and, btw, Sony cameras) tends to focus on good color over great low light performance, whereas Nikon and Canon tend to use weaker color filters to improve low light performance.
Another thing to consider is, while the M will surely perform better in lowlight than the M9, it'll likely also have better dynamic range at low ISO. We'll see. Either way, digital cameras are to the point where they're all pretty good to me, so upgrading would be like trying a new film, which, although it sounds fun, it doesn't sound all that enticing for another $7K. Unless the new M's output is outrageously preferable to me, I'll likely stick with my M9 until it dies. I rarely print over 13x19, anyways, so the M9 does a great job.
Another thing to consider is, while the M will surely perform better in lowlight than the M9, it'll likely also have better dynamic range at low ISO. We'll see. Either way, digital cameras are to the point where they're all pretty good to me, so upgrading would be like trying a new film, which, although it sounds fun, it doesn't sound all that enticing for another $7K. Unless the new M's output is outrageously preferable to me, I'll likely stick with my M9 until it dies. I rarely print over 13x19, anyways, so the M9 does a great job.
Tom Niblick
Well-known
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. That might be why there is such a slow release planned for this new camera. $1,000 less than the MM, weatherproof, live view, video...
Personally, I need a second body. There are a lot of good choices out there. M, MM, M8, M9 or Nikon D800E. Being patient for the next 6 months in order to see samples and hear the user reports will be the hard part.
Personally, I need a second body. There are a lot of good choices out there. M, MM, M8, M9 or Nikon D800E. Being patient for the next 6 months in order to see samples and hear the user reports will be the hard part.
Lachie C
Member
I think you'll find live-view is more or less 'free' on modern sensors. The most expensive thing about live-view for leica would be 2 extra buttons, video (liveview with compressed data output to memory card...) and make sure the battery could take it.
One would hope Leica have learnt a lot about power management in cameras...
The new M is also in a new body with a new image processor; only a fool would develop either without video capabilities in the current climate.
Plus all that stuff.
flyalf
Well-known
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.
Well, that may be a little overboard. If anyone can get away with it, it's Leica.