The Leica M mount Pixii has a top shutter speed of 1/32,000 global shutter and a flash sync of 1/2000
What cameras have higher top speeds and sync?
What pics are possible with a 1/32,000 global shutter that are not possible at slower speeds with conventional shutters?
-- distortion of moving subjects is one factor --
EDIT 4/12/2022
The first version Pixii was speced as a global shutter.
The 2nd version Pixii does not have a global shutter. oh well.
I doubt the 2nd version Pixii has working flash sync, although there are plans for it, SFAIK,
DXOmark rates the smaller Pixii sensor higher than the full frame Leica M240 or M9.
--quite an achievement which is often lost in Pixii discussions.
So the camera is capable of hi quality images, even if not full frame.
What cameras have higher top speeds and sync?
What pics are possible with a 1/32,000 global shutter that are not possible at slower speeds with conventional shutters?
-- distortion of moving subjects is one factor --
EDIT 4/12/2022
The first version Pixii was speced as a global shutter.
The 2nd version Pixii does not have a global shutter. oh well.
I doubt the 2nd version Pixii has working flash sync, although there are plans for it, SFAIK,
DXOmark rates the smaller Pixii sensor higher than the full frame Leica M240 or M9.
--quite an achievement which is often lost in Pixii discussions.
So the camera is capable of hi quality images, even if not full frame.
keytarjunkie
no longer addicted
I believe the Leica Q2 has 1/2000 flash sync and 1/40,000 electronic shutter. And it’s full frame.
Thanks,
I double checked, the Q2 sync speed is 1/500, with an electronic shutter at 1/40,000 full frame.
However the Q2 is a fixed lens camera.
The Pixii is Leica M mount.
Stephen
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Q is not RF.
Where are three dRF cameras. Odd ball Epson with shutter which needs to be manually cranked, digital M and this, another odd ball which doesn't seems to have mechanical shutter at all. Between all three this one is less prone for the shutter failure.
Where are three dRF cameras. Odd ball Epson with shutter which needs to be manually cranked, digital M and this, another odd ball which doesn't seems to have mechanical shutter at all. Between all three this one is less prone for the shutter failure.
As Ko.Fe pointed out to me in another thread...global shutter (as opposed to electronic shutter). I do not know of any other global shutters that go to 1/32000th of a second or any other global shutters.
Larry Cloetta
Mentor
Maybe they could put that shutter in a camera which didn't have a sensor from 1991. Maybe that camera would be worth buying. Maybe not, given the noisy sensor on offer.
Even at that, there's no reason to earnestly believe that this company has somehow snagged a shutter which is, in real world practice, better than anything that one of the major manufacturers has seen fit to put in a camera. Sure, could happen. Likely, not so much. You don't even have to be a cynic to feel this way. Global shutters are coming, few doubt that; the reason they are not in widespread use already is that there are "issues" with current tech.
Maybe these amateur adventurers have solved the issues. Maybe it's just pixii dust. Nobody knows at this point. We'll see.
Even at that, there's no reason to earnestly believe that this company has somehow snagged a shutter which is, in real world practice, better than anything that one of the major manufacturers has seen fit to put in a camera. Sure, could happen. Likely, not so much. You don't even have to be a cynic to feel this way. Global shutters are coming, few doubt that; the reason they are not in widespread use already is that there are "issues" with current tech.
Maybe these amateur adventurers have solved the issues. Maybe it's just pixii dust. Nobody knows at this point. We'll see.
Well Larry, you can buy one yourself in about a month to prove it doesn't have a global shutter... good luck with that
Larry Cloetta
Mentor
If you were to respond to something that I actually said, I would be in a better position to fashion a measured response.
A global shutter would be interesting, perhaps the only interesting thing about this camera, given the reported sensor ISO liabilities and the rumored price. I’d be mildly interested in the tech, for the sake of the tech, if it actually happens glitch free, as it has been “coming” for years now, but not the camera. Personally. Some people are excited about this camera, I’m not. It’s an opinion. People have them. 1/32,000 shutter speed. 2 stops faster than the 1/8,000 on a 25 year old Leica R8. Whoopee. I expressed doubts that they can pull off a working global shutter when others with more resources and experience have not. Is that doubt so unreasonable given the circumstances? But it’s just a doubt, not a belief system. I made it plain that I understood it could happen. Or, at least I thought I did. Doing so now, if the prior phrase, “sure, could happen” did not make that obvious before.
About the shutter then, “We’ll see.” Which is what I did say, and there was no hidden meaning.
aizan
Mentor
Was the flash sync confirmed to be 1/2000? It's not on their website or on 35mmc. Because of the global shutter, shouldn't it presumably be able to sync at all speeds, limited only by the duration of the flash at the chosen power setting? That would make it an interesting camera to use for fill flash.
Orthogonal
Established
So you think the company is attempting to defraud both to their investors and customers about the sensor, easily the key feature of this camera and something that could easily be confirmed with a basic flash sync test? That instead of using an unusually specc'd sensor that sacrifices SNR for sensor readout speed they somehow managed to overclock the readout of an out of production NEX 3 sensor to match the top speed of the latest Fuji X electronic shutter? That after years of tedious RnD and high production costs they decide to save a few extra dollars by using sensors fished out of a Towerjazz factory dumpster?
Neat.
boojum
Mentor
I have been following the threads on here about the Pixii. Most threads are denigrating. It is not like IBM coming to market with the PC. That machine was revelatory. Nothing compared because there was not much around to compare. Pixii is jumping into a crowded, sagging market. There is the Leica fanboy Masochist Choir which suffers bad service and so-so incremental improvements for the price of a good used car with a watermelon eating grin. My hat is off to the choir. They are mostly in tune.
But I desire something reflective of 2020 not 1920. No electronic do-over of the M3. Non, non, non. The Pixii has gone through some changes, gotten a huge capital injection and some keen assistance with Barbier, from GoPro, and will be offering more than haircuts. The newest model caught my fancy and I took the plunge. If it works as well as I believe it will I can say, "I told you so." If it does not, you can, the Masochist Choir, can say, "I told you so."
Judging from the Burling review and his images, Barth et cie have tuned this sensor pretty nicely. It has also occurred to me that tuning the sensor is what we do when we get into an image editor. We can fool around with luminescence, saturation, white balance and so on. But Barth et cie have the curse of tuning these parameters in a fashion which will charm just about all of us, not just one, or some. Burling, again, has some lovely color images in his video showing just how good the images can look. I do not know if they are SOOC. That would make a difference. The story continues.
As for me, I just wish the damned camera were here. ;o)
But I desire something reflective of 2020 not 1920. No electronic do-over of the M3. Non, non, non. The Pixii has gone through some changes, gotten a huge capital injection and some keen assistance with Barbier, from GoPro, and will be offering more than haircuts. The newest model caught my fancy and I took the plunge. If it works as well as I believe it will I can say, "I told you so." If it does not, you can, the Masochist Choir, can say, "I told you so."
Judging from the Burling review and his images, Barth et cie have tuned this sensor pretty nicely. It has also occurred to me that tuning the sensor is what we do when we get into an image editor. We can fool around with luminescence, saturation, white balance and so on. But Barth et cie have the curse of tuning these parameters in a fashion which will charm just about all of us, not just one, or some. Burling, again, has some lovely color images in his video showing just how good the images can look. I do not know if they are SOOC. That would make a difference. The story continues.
As for me, I just wish the damned camera were here. ;o)
Darthfeeble
But you can call me Steve
Stephen, you seem pretty positive about this camera, will you be selling it? Or do they plan to continue as an in-house point of sale business?
boojum
Mentor
I have been re-reading the comments on the Pixii, especially vis à vis other cameras, especially Leica. The constant chorus of "it is not as good as . . . " makes me wonder. Why the defensive sensitivity? Who is feeling threatened? Many cameras come to market without a Donnybrook. Indeed, many are greeted with vigor and applause. So, what is the problem with the Pixii?
Does it slurp its soup? Does it pick its nose and pass gas? Does its underwear stink? Is it impertinent? Yes, I think it is the impertinence. The impertinence to challenge Die Kaiserin from Leitz. And why is this a problem? The camera world is awash in DSLR's and that is acceptable. There are even a few APS-C sensor cameras and no one seems to mind. But have the gall to present to market an RF camera which accepts M mount lenses and you are suspected of causing curvature of the spine and losing the war for the allies.
Come on. No one here champions a dictatorship of the marketplace or a non patent-protected monopoly. The form and format of the 35mm camera, and lets call the Pixii a 35mm camera for the sake of this argument, are pretty much settled. Departures of the past have failed. Which is why the all seem to have a lens in about the center and a wing on each side: it works. If there were a better form or format we would be using it.
No one will be obliged to buy one against their will or even use one if they do not care to. I do enjoy a spirited discourse and I am sure others do, also. But we could tone it down a bit. Some of us are embarrassing ourselves. It's just a camera.
Does it slurp its soup? Does it pick its nose and pass gas? Does its underwear stink? Is it impertinent? Yes, I think it is the impertinence. The impertinence to challenge Die Kaiserin from Leitz. And why is this a problem? The camera world is awash in DSLR's and that is acceptable. There are even a few APS-C sensor cameras and no one seems to mind. But have the gall to present to market an RF camera which accepts M mount lenses and you are suspected of causing curvature of the spine and losing the war for the allies.
Come on. No one here champions a dictatorship of the marketplace or a non patent-protected monopoly. The form and format of the 35mm camera, and lets call the Pixii a 35mm camera for the sake of this argument, are pretty much settled. Departures of the past have failed. Which is why the all seem to have a lens in about the center and a wing on each side: it works. If there were a better form or format we would be using it.
No one will be obliged to buy one against their will or even use one if they do not care to. I do enjoy a spirited discourse and I am sure others do, also. But we could tone it down a bit. Some of us are embarrassing ourselves. It's just a camera.
First of all...this thread is about the 12mp global shutter version that was not very competitive.
Now, based on the second unit which is much nicer...
Generally speaking people seem to blame APSC, the preference of used Leica M models and the fear of spending $3000 for something that isn't supported longterm. For me, as a Fuji user, modern APSC is kind of great once you get used to it, but I am not a wide angle fan. Used Leica cameras at $3000 or less are either problem cameras like the M8 and M9 (still cool cameras I get it), the outdated, but cool Epson R-D1 cameras or the fatty M240. I like them all, but I would have to say the Pixii looks good here in comparison if you are not an APSC hater. Now, $3000 is a lot, but unfortunately in our world, it is not a lot for a digital camera with a mechanical rangefinder. $3000 also makes it the most expensive APSC in a long time. That said, the next brand new model with a mechanical RF is $5000 more if I am not mistaken. Now, that does not mean there aren't better deals if you do not care about mechanical rangefinders. Of course there are. A lot of them. However, I still am of the opinion that Pixii has done something very cool even if I am not ready to buy one. That said, if they are on the used market in the future...who knows?
Now, a bit of a tangent... I have owned too many cameras. There are not many I care about anymore in digital that I do not have already (and I only have 3 digital cameras: Fujifilm GFX-50R, Fujifilm X-Pro3, Ricoh GR IIIx). The Hasselblad 907x with the "small" 45mm F4, the Ricoh GR III (28mm equiv), the Leica M, Q, CL and basically the Pixii are the only cameras I even think about anymore that I do not have. Anything else is kind of boring in digital. Why don't I buy them? Well, I will add the GR III. It is relatively cheap. However, the others are a bit expensive...and I like what I have more.
boojum
Mentor
All of what you say in paragraph three is true. And, as you say, it looks like some camera. These guys are either the past masters at blowing smoke, doubtful, or onto something, probable. Defined by price, sensor size, used Leica prices and other measures it can seem pricey, yes. But Burling and Ranger9, both pros, are pleased with the camera across the board. Granted, it took a second shot to convince Ranger9 but IIRC the camera changed, software/firmware. I have checked prices on used Pixii's on eBay. There are none. Likely a reflection that few are out there.
I care little about what the naysayers are about. The do not pay my bills or put any money in my pocket. I do not think any of them have even held a Pixii no less worked with one. I am not obligated to them in any way. I do enjoy what they have to say, though. And if I have bought a dog they can relish that and remind me that I have, right here and in print. OTOH, . . .
Coldkennels
Barnack-toting Brit.
I really hope you see the irony in that sentence, Boojum? I've seen far more over-the-top rambling from the pro-Pixii camp than the anti. In fact, I don't think I've seen anything get as much rhapsodical (and untested) praise outside of politics. It's a bit weird, to say the least.
Personally, I've not waded in much on the Pixxi posts. I think it's cool. Interesting, even. And I like the photos I'm seeing out of it. But the one thing I can't get over is the "crop factor" for a lens mount with lenses designed for 35mm film. That's an insurmountable hurdle for me, just as it was with the M8.
As I've said elsewhere, I've got nothing against APS-C. I've got APS-C Fuji bodies I use for work without complaints. But they have lenses designed for that sensor size. I don't particularly want to be using my (frankly far too large) collection of 50mm lenses and getting a ~75mm equivalent out of them. It's just annoying, which is why I don't use them much on the X-mount bodies. Similarly, I don't want to go hunting for secondary viewfinders to use with super-wide lenses I already have viewfinders for, just because the sensor size is different.
That alone makes the Pixii a very limited option for me, and I think that's a valid viewpoint to have.
M.B
Member
If there where APS-C lenses for M-Mount, I cant see myself ever buying them. Full frame M-glass on APS-C makes so much more sense imo.
It crops cut out the worst part of the lens, covers full frame if needed on another camera (native or adapted) and the FF M-glass is already small and compact.
just my 2c.
Same thing as back in the APS-C DSLR days. FF glass all the way for better IQ and future proofing.
It crops cut out the worst part of the lens, covers full frame if needed on another camera (native or adapted) and the FF M-glass is already small and compact.
just my 2c.
Same thing as back in the APS-C DSLR days. FF glass all the way for better IQ and future proofing.
aizan
Mentor
There are so many former and current M8 users who are quite vocal about how Leica should go back to 1.3x.
ptpdprinter
Mentor
There are vocal groups for a lot of stuff that is never going to happen. Who would manufacture APS-H sensors and what would they cost in a small run?