Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: leica M9 as good as Phase P40, P30 and P21  (Read 12753 times)
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7426


WWW
« Reply #40 on: January 19, 2011, 11:03:59 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

Yes characteristics of optical glass affect color and so may antireflex coating do that. Still maintain that sensors as such only count photons, so there is no difference between CCD sensors and CMOS. The color interpretation of the sensor is entirely decided by what is in front of it. Once photons are detected they are converted to a voltage (which lacks color) and that voltage is converted to a number, Thee numbers are also without color. The color is assigned in interpretation, taking different factors into account.

So I cannot see any advantage of CCDs vs CMOS regarding color.

Best regards
Erik

You're a pretty brave man to take on someone with Doug's knowledge, experience and real-world acumen on this issue. I can't wait for the reply.

My understanding of colour in the digital era is that what happens on/in the sensor is but a part of an interconnected complex. The variables include optics, anti-reflection coatings, the sensors behaviour, analog-digital conversion, image processing and not to forget final display media to name but a few.

You are entitled to your view, but I think it's very simplistic.
« Last Edit: January 20, 2011, 03:58:13 AM by ErikKaffehr » Logged

eronald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4036



« Reply #41 on: January 19, 2011, 11:14:10 AM »
ReplyReply

CCD does live video very well, as one can see whenever one watches a moon landing Smiley just "full frame CCD" doesn't.

As for Moiré, one can fight it optically by using a low-rez lens, no high frequencies ergo no Moiré. Of course, Leica lenses are not known for their low resolution, but my P45+ clearly outresolves the Mamiya lens it was delivered with, so no Moiré risk.

I'm slowly getting tired of battling the BS back and forth. Current MF cameras are cr*p bodies with decent sensors.

Edmund

CCD doesn't do high ISO or live view or video. Lack of AA filter can lead to moire (not as much of a problem as in the days of 9 and 12 micron CCDs but still an occasional annoyance).

99% of consumers (and that is market that the vast vast majority of what Canon/Nikon sells to by revenue) would not be willing to make that compromise for the better color, tonality, DR, and overall image quality.

It's that simple.
Logged
ondebanks
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 833



« Reply #42 on: January 19, 2011, 11:25:15 AM »
ReplyReply

You're a pretty brave man to take on someone with Doug's knowledge, experience and real-world acumen on this issue. I can't wait for the reply.

Doug may be an expert on camera systems, usage, adaptation, processing, sales and so on, but he wouldn't be human if he didn't make the odd scientific slip.

From my time on this forum, it's become clear to me that Erik really knows his tech - I concur with everything he's said (apart from the fact that I know nothing about Leica design generations).
This is simple physics/engineering, universal in application and coldly objective: "real-world acumen" doesn't arise.

My understanding of colour in the digital era is that what happens on/in the sensor is but a part of an interconnected complex. The variables include optics, anti-reflection coatings, the sensors behaviour, analog-digital conversion, image processing and not to forget final display media to name but a few.

The point in dispute here is CCD vs. CMOS. So take away all of the variables which are common to both: "optics, antireflection coatings" - eliminate those because we can use the same lenses in front of both types of sensors; "image processing and not to forget final display media" - likewise, eliminate those: we can process and display CCD/CMOS images identically. What out of your list are we left with? "the sensors behaviour" - yes; but Erik already explained which aspects of the sensor's behaviour matter. And "analog-digital conversion" - I can see no physical reason why the ADC should have any impact on colour; the ADC operates on electrons (CCD) and voltages (CMOS), neither of which are coloured phenomena! The incoming photons brought the colour information, and they're long gone by the time we get to the ADC.

You are entitled to your view, but I think it's very simplistic.

Sometimes the truth is surprisingly simple.

Ray

Logged
Mario Francesco Dotti
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1


« Reply #43 on: April 18, 2011, 11:05:32 AM »
ReplyReply

@ tim jones: did you use the M9 for the  - brilliant ! -commercial work shown on your website ?

Mario
Logged
donaldt
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 199


« Reply #44 on: April 18, 2011, 10:01:26 PM »
ReplyReply

good for you
if you cant tell the difference, you saved yourself a lot of bucks



Thats what I've found. You can't tether with the Leica but I use the P21, P30 and P40 from phase and I find the image quality of the Leica to be at least as good as the Phase backs. I don't find any difference in quality between the phase backs, there all slightly different but only slightly and I wouldn't put one above the others in terms of IQ. Unless your doing massive prints of course.. Up to 17 by 13 inches or so though the Leica is as good and has very similar image characteristics. Oh yes, the lenses on the Leica are better too.
Logged
eleanorbrown
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 625


WWW
« Reply #45 on: April 19, 2011, 09:08:49 AM »
ReplyReply

I have used Phase backs ever since the P25 was released...now have the P65+ on an H2 body.  A year ago I decided to get an M9 after reading many good reviews on the system, including the one on LL.  I have been mesmerized by the camera and lenses..I would say, pixel for pixel, the M9 is all as good as my P65+....files are much smaller...18 mega pixels vs 60, but the light weight and portability is a good trade off.  I will be going on an expedition to the high arctic Svalbard in early june and will be on zodiacs and kayaks, and shore landings and have chosen to take only my Leica M9 system and travel very light.  I use primarily C1 to process my M9 files, but on occasion use Lightroom too. Eleanor
Logged

Tim Jones
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 53


« Reply #46 on: April 19, 2011, 12:14:59 PM »
ReplyReply

 Mario,

yes, i would say about 50 % of the content on my site has been shot with the M9 .
I usually  bring it along and pull it out and shoot a few while my canons are being unloaded.
The stuff i get out of the M9 always destroys the canon . I shoot with all the canon L primes, with the the 5Dmkii, EOSs 1 D mark iv
and the EOS  1 DS iii . The Leica kills it. I haven't been brave enough to shoot any jobs with it yet, but i'm getting there. It gets me jobs, though. I have a leaf aptus 22 back which is a really nice file maker . I would put the M9 right there with it.
Thanks,
Tim
www.tjphoto.net
Logged
geesbert
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 537



WWW
« Reply #47 on: April 19, 2011, 01:50:42 PM »
ReplyReply

recently I bought a second M9, now I finally feel 'brave enough' to use it commercially. This camera nailed the coffin of all my medium format attempts. In a controlled studio situation on a tripod my Canon delivers what I and my clients need beautifully. Off the tripod it's now only Leica M9 with aspherical glass for me. that's a sweet combination.
Logged

-------------------------
WWW.RANDLKOFER.COM
Christoph C. Feldhaim
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2509


There is no rule! No - wait ...


« Reply #48 on: April 19, 2011, 02:21:15 PM »
ReplyReply

[envy]
M9, M9, M9,.....
I mean - doing great images is one thing ... but to impress the ladies ..... Tongue
Nothing beats the beauty of an old Zeiss Ikonta or a huge Deardorff ...
[/envy]
Logged

rgmoore
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 53


WWW
« Reply #49 on: April 20, 2011, 12:14:45 AM »
ReplyReply

Fascinating reports on M9. For those of you who use M9 for landscape work, have you attempted stitch panoramas? I understand than one disadvantage of a rangefinder is that framing is not as precise
as that of a DSLR.  I've used Canons and Nikons for stitching work, not because of need for big prints, but because I like the look stitch panorama using normal or mild telephoto lenses rather than a
cropped wide angle shots. So I have been seriously considering Leica M9 for travels and shooting in remote locations where a small lightweight kit would come in handy.

Thank you,

Richard 
Logged
Jost von Allmen
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 44


WWW
« Reply #50 on: April 20, 2011, 12:41:37 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi Richard
(This topic really has not much do do anymore with medium format, anyhow...)

I use a Leica M9 for outdoor photography (besides my Nikon gear and a P45+) and am extremely pleased with it!
There's simply no other system on the market offering the same great quality in such a small package.
I use it mainly with the 24 mm, 35mm and 75mm, the 18mm and 135mm I only carry when I expect to really need them.
To shoot panoramics isn't any more difficult than with a single lens reflex, you get used to the range finder quickly, even hand held.
On the tripod, I use and recommmend the nodal point adapter from PT4Pano, a small German manufacturer
http://pt4pano.com/en/products/kiss-panorama-system
It's a great little smart and lightweight adapter, which lets me produce very precise panoramas with great detail.
Any stitching software will be able to render seamless images from those captures, I use Photoshop (CS5) and AutoPanoPro.

Mind you, if you never used a Leica before, you have to be aware that it's a whole different style of shooting: More demanding but at the same time more rewarding.

Good luck

Jost von Allmen

Logged

Jost von Allmen
Switzerland
http://www.jostvonallmen.com
JV
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 624


« Reply #51 on: April 20, 2011, 02:18:15 PM »
ReplyReply

Mind you, if you never used a Leica before, you have to be aware that it's a whole different style of shooting: More demanding but at the same time more rewarding.

May I ask in what sense?  Except for the rangefinder difference are there other things that would make it different from MF or 35mm?  Thanks, Joris.
Logged
Wayne Fox
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2847



WWW
« Reply #52 on: April 20, 2011, 07:23:58 PM »
ReplyReply


Mind you, if you never used a Leica before, you have to be aware that it's a whole different style of shooting: More demanding but at the same time more rewarding.
As a recent Leica owner, I would agree shooting it is more "demanding".  Very old school.  Difficult to master in some ways, and for those used to SLR's it takes some time to visualize the crop.  Being left eye dominant makes it a little more challenging because it's really hard to use your left eye. Cropping is much less accurate, and focusing can be extremely challenging.

What I might dispute is your latter statement ... more rewarding.  If by making something harder to do and then being able to still get great results offer some extra level of satisfaction ... not to me, I personally don't see that as a reward.  I would describe the experience often as acceptable frustration ... much like when I shoot my p65+ on my Alpa.

I like the Leica because of its quality vs size.  It's a great backup system for my MF gear, better than cameras like the GH2 and Sony A55 (although they are very good for the size as well).  What would make it a much more usable landscape system would be liveView, so cropping and focusing aren't more like guess work.

I'm still not sure I"m going to keep mine ...
Logged

rgmoore
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 53


WWW
« Reply #53 on: April 20, 2011, 10:59:33 PM »
ReplyReply

Thank you for the feedback Jost von Allmen, JV, and Wayne Fox.  I appreciate all the comments, suggestions made as well as the questions raised.

This may turn out to be another "try before you buy" adventure like shopping for medium format. Years ago I was able to focus accurately on 4x5 and 8x10 ground glass, but I am not sure my
aging eyes would be up to that now - or the Leica rangefinder. The remarks lead me to believe it might be challenging. Will need to find a dealer who may be willing to rent over a weekend.

(Sorry about wondering off MF topic.)

Richard
Logged
E_Edwards
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 228


« Reply #54 on: April 21, 2011, 02:45:42 AM »
ReplyReply

Being left eye dominant makes it a little more challenging because it's really hard to use your left eye. Cropping is much less accurate, and focusing can be extremely challenging.


This is interesting because I focus with my left eye too and I don't find it any different or more difficult on DSLRs. Could you briefly explain why it would be more difficult for "left eye focusers" to focus on the Leica rangefinder?
Logged
Gigi
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 419


WWW
« Reply #55 on: April 21, 2011, 06:54:30 AM »
ReplyReply

Focusing the M8 isn't a problem at all. May come from some years of using film Leicas, but just look for a vertical and its pretty crisp. In fact, its one of the best features of the camera: you know what you are getting sharp.

Cropping is another matter entirely, although much better in the M9.
Logged

Geoff
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #56 on: April 21, 2011, 09:40:09 AM »
ReplyReply

Focusing the M8 isn't a problem at all. May come from some years of using film Leicas, but just look for a vertical and its pretty crisp. In fact, its one of the best features of the camera: you know what you are getting sharp.

Cropping is another matter entirely, although much better in the M9.

Yes, as long as that 'vertical' is what you want sharp and you don't change the framing. Regarding DOF, it has nothing to do with being RF or SLR. The best advice I can give anybody is that DOF doesn't exist: you have a single sharp plane and nada mas: the rest is slow or rapid failure depending on size of image (and print) and stop selected. The best psychology is to think of the most important feature of the image and make that where you focus.

Focussing on one thing and then moving the camera to recompose is also a nonsense. Because you substitute-focus on a pole six feet from the camera you shouldn't assume that when you move slightly to frame another, difficult-to-focus subject also six feet away, that the two will both be sharp. Doesn't work like that; for it to happen, instead of your plane of sharp focus being flat, it would have to be a shell-shaped one or, in the extreme, a circular one allowing you to shoot behind your own back - something that HC-B might have appreciated. And unless you run riot with a tape, how do you know you've estimated the distance of the substitute correctly and that the real subject is exactly the same distance away? Guesswork...?

Easy answers are only to be found in advertisements.

;-(

Rob C
Logged

KLaban
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1671



WWW
« Reply #57 on: April 21, 2011, 11:20:45 AM »
ReplyReply

The best advice I can give anybody is that DOF doesn't exist: you have a single sharp plane and nada mas: the rest is slow or rapid failure depending on size of image (and print) and stop selected.

Rob, true enough, or rather was true enough, but the world is changing, focus-stacking is here. How long before we all have the option of auto in-camera focus-stacking?
Logged

Guy Mancuso
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1110


WWW
« Reply #58 on: April 21, 2011, 12:04:58 PM »
ReplyReply

Rob, true enough, or rather was true enough, but the world is changing, focus-stacking is here. How long before we all have the option of auto in-camera focus-stacking?

 I use focus stacking pretty often and in some cases you just have too. This is a IQ 180 5 shot focus stack done in Helicon Focus..

On the M9 i did a review on it many moons ago here http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=10265 . I also tested it against my P30+ at the time. Too me it is the closet you will get to MF in 35mm. It is not there in resolution and DR but it is damn good and if it fit in my work I would have one again but the Sony 850 really is the versatile tool here for me along with my Phase P40+ which I love. Is it close the M9 yea but I would shoot the Phase kit over it any day when it counts. M9 for travel and street type work , can't be beat.
Logged

Guy Mancuso
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1110


WWW
« Reply #59 on: April 21, 2011, 12:10:52 PM »
ReplyReply

BTW that is with a prototype IQ 180 with the new 35D lens but I had a hood on it that vignetters slightly ( off brand metal hood). I liked it so kept it in there
Logged

Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad