nehemiahphoto wrote:
Great list and some good thoughts. I might add the ZM 21 2.8 on the sub 1k list. That lens seems to have wonderful rendering and strong technical IQ.
Anyone care to speculate on why Leica just doesn't buy Sony sensors like others? Price doesn't seem to be a concern for their products, and they are billed as premium. Maybe the Leica demo is less inclined to care, but I don't think that's true.
I can't believe getting sensors on the same level as the E/Z/S lines wouldn't help.
Apparently with a screw driver and maybe some Gaffer tape Viola! Ha Ha
Leica used same 47MP sensor on Q2 and SL2 which has the high dynamic range at ISO 50. Again ISO 50 might be a push as dpreview review said that you have to watch the highlights and Q2 doesn't have ISO 50 in auto ISO. At other ISO's the sensor behaves similar to apsc sensors... Somehow Panasonic S1R gets higher dynamic range with 47MP sensor, maybe the processors... It is shown in photons to photos:
I tested the Leica S2 against my Phase One IQ 160. The Leica was not even close. I love leicas but I have yet to see one with a great sensor. I know that just pissed off the Leica fanboys. Remember I was one too.
Apr 26, 2020 at 02:40 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
nehemiahphoto wrote:
Great list and some good thoughts. I might add the ZM 21 2.8 on the sub 1k list. That lens seems to have wonderful rendering and strong technical IQ.
Anyone care to speculate on why Leica just doesn't buy Sony sensors like others? Price doesn't seem to be a concern for their products, and they are billed as premium. Maybe the Leica demo is less inclined to care, but I don't think that's true.
I can't believe getting sensors on the same level as the E/Z/S lines wouldn't help.
Good point about the Zeiss ZM 21 f/2.8. I hadn't realized the price had dropped below $1,000 on that one. I added it to the list.
As I understand it Tower Jazz makes Leica sensors (or at least the M10 sensor) and they seem to be doing a pretty good job (it isn't a great sensor in the M10, but a pretty good one). In fact, I think the one in the M10 is close to my ideal if they would just add the Aptina dual gain to the pixels to increase high ISO performance. That would put the high ISO performance right up there with Sony and I am fine for this sort of camera not being at quite the bleeding edge in low ISO performance. I am not sure Sony would make them sensors in such a small batch that would have the required an ultra thin sensor cover. Maybe they would, but I can see how Sony might not feel that is worth their while with so many people wanting them building sensors.
GMPhotography wrote:
I tested the Leica S2 against my Phase One IQ 160. The Leica was not even close. I love leicas but I have yet to see one with a great sensor. I know that just pissed off the Leica fanboys. Remember I was one too.
Can I make a case for Leica color science ?
Honestly I don't think it's a secret even among Leica photogs who produces the highest scoring camera sensors. Let's see if Canon with the R5 is able to challenge the current status quo or not.
LBJ2 wrote:
Can I make a case for Leica color science ?
Honestly I don't think it's a secret even among Leica photogs who produces the highest scoring camera sensors. Let's see if Canon with the R5 is able to challenge the current status quo or not.
Lol
Honestly the Phase One CCD sensors are really really hard to beat. Now there all CMOS
Does anyone remember how bad CMOS sensors where back when. They come a long way
I've heard more than one describing how much they admire the CCD noise pattern/grain compared to CMOS. Before my time. As of 2020, I don't want any noise pattern if I can help it.
LBJ2 wrote:
I've heard more than one describing how much they admire the CCD noise pattern/grain compared to CMOS. Before my time. As of 2020, I don't want any noise pattern if I can help it.
If I remember correctly, that was about chroma noise vs luminance noise where luminance noise is more pleasing to the human eye. Or was this a Sony CMOS vs Canon CMOS debate. In the latter case Sony was of course best.
LBJ2 wrote:
I've heard more than one describing how much they admire the CCD noise pattern/grain compared to CMOS. Before my time. As of 2020, I don't want any noise pattern if I can help it.
Whereas I want every grain of attractive noise I can get. Currently the M246 at ISO 5000 suits me nicely. My one (admittedly small) reservation about getting an M10M is that I’ll have to factor in the cost of a complete set of neutral density filters from 39mm to 62mm.
genji wrote:
Whereas I want every grain of attractive noise I can get. Currently the M246 at ISO 5000 suits me nicely. My one (admittedly small) reservation about getting an M10M is that I’ll have to factor in the cost of a complete set of neutral density filters from 39mm to 62mm.
Same here. "Pretty" noise does not bother me, however, I find banding a bit distracting and avoid it if I can. One way is to have darker shadows without much recovery. I have not seen in M240 files yet but I have not pushed it.
Here is a sample at ISO 6400 with a M240. I don't find the noise bothersome even at this setting and in low light.
Steve Spencer wrote:
This lens (and your and Fred's talking about Leica M cameras) has had me thinking of getting an M10 again. I had an M10 and a nice set of Leica lenses that was unfortunately stolen. I couldn't replace it right away, but I am thinking I might be able to do so before long. What Voigtlander (and to some extent 7 Artisans) has provided in the last couple of years is a whole set of fast lenses for Leica M that are relatively low in price. Look what our option include for fast M mount lenses:
All of these lenses (except the 7 Artisans 75) are reasonably small and all can be had for under $1,000. The Voigtlander lenses are all really high quality and the 7 Artisans lenses (if not quite up to the Voigtlander lenses) are surprisingly good with decent bokeh and incredibly cheap. In my mind these lenses really change the game for getting a Leica system. You can now setup a 4 lens Leica system with lenses that are no more expensive (and maybe even a bit less expensive) than a similar system for mirrorless.
In addition to these fast lenses there are also cheap new slower lenses and Zeiss ZM and even in some case Leica M lenses have dropped in price enough to allow lots of options. Here is an even longer list of sub $1,000 lenses (ZM and Leica M are used prices):
Voigtlander 10 f/5.6
Voigtlander 12 f/5.6 III
Voigtlander 15 f/4.5 III
Zeiss ZM 18 f/4
Zeiss ZM 21 f/2.8
Voigtlander 21 f/3.5
Zeiss ZM 25 f/2.8
Zeiss ZM 28 f/2.8
Voigtlander 35 f/1.7
Voigtlander 35 f/2
Leica M 35 f/2.5 (you have to shop carefully to get this under $1,000)
Zeiss ZM 50 f/1.5
Zeiss ZM 50 f/2
Leica M 50 f/2.5
Voigtlander 50 f/3.5 (and we can hope for a Voigtlander 50 f/2 APO for not much more than $1,000)
Leica M 75 f/2.5
Zeiss ZM 85 f/4
Leica M 90 f/2 E55 non-AA (you have to shop carefully but this can be found for less than $1,000)
Leica M 90 f/2.5
Leica M 90 f/2.8 (latest model with built in hood, you have to shop a bit carefully but this can be found for less than $1,000)
Voigtlander 90 f/3.5 APO (this is a screw mount not Leica M model)
Leica M 135 f/4 (latest 46mm threads model with built-in hood)
I think all of these are at least reasonably good performers.
Surprisingly you can now even get these really nice Leica M lenses for less than $2,000 a piece as well (all prices used)
Leica M 18 f/3.8 SEM
Leica M 21 f/3.4 SEM
Leica M 24 f/3.8 Asph
Leica M 28 f/2.8 Asph
Leica M 35 f/2.4 Asph
Leica M 50 f/2 (Pre-AA; last version before AA)
Leica M 50 f/2.4
Leica M 75 f/2.4
Leica M 90 f/2 AA
Leica M 90 f/2.4
Leica M 135 f/3.4 APO
So, I am seeing that you can put together a really nice kit for Leica M without the lenses breaking the bank. The camera of course will be expensive, but it is unique and there is no competition so that price has to be incurred but if you like shooting a rangefinder, then there are not many options.
Great list! I concur and would add the 7artisans Photoelectric 50mm f/1.1 to it as well for really great shots with not too much weight penalty. Also much less expensive than a noctilux
I find that the output of the M-240 reminds me of that of the E1. An imaging architecture approach that the 4/3 consortium started out with, using kodak sensors. The noise signature on those CCD bodies was deliberate...
Steve, I'd add the VM 40mm Nokton; 21 f/1.8 Ultron & 28mm f/2 Ultron; plus the 28mm & 35mm LTM Ultrons.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Here is a sample at ISO 6400 with a M240. I don't find the noise bothersome even at this setting and in low light.
Heliar 50 in Nokton 75 thread, high-grain image, Fred shooting a Leica M—I'm become dizzy and disoriented.
I have admired that 50/3.5 since it was released and available only with a bundled C/V film rangefinder. Over the years, it has been set into different barrels: collapsible, Nikon S mount, nickel finish, and the faster f/2 version. Am still giving it thought even though I have the Elmars 50/2.8 and 50/3.5. It's refreshing to put down the boat-anchor primes now and then.
rico wrote:
Heliar 50 in Nokton 75 thread, high-grain image, Fred shooting a Leica M—I'm become dizzy and disoriented.
Sorry, got carried away. Should have posted a 75/1.5 at 6400 instead.
I like the CV 50/3.5 on the Leica because it's so easy to nail focus on the rangefinder and I really like its rendering. I tried the 50/1.2 and it was challenging wide open on the Leica as far as focus accuracy.
Focusing with accuracy with the CV 75/1.5 wide open less challenging but I'm getting great success at mid distance wide open and @f/2.5 at close distance.
When I stumbled upon the 7Artisans 75/1.25 for an incredibly low price a couple of months ago I couldn't resist. It's a good lens and I enjoy the change of perspective after not having used anything longer than 40mm for some time. However, I'm starting to regret that I didn't go for the CV 75/1.5 instead, because the weight of the 7A bothers me more than expected and I rarely use it at larger apertures than f/2. I'll start looking for a CV for a decent price and try and sell the 7A, but neither will be easy here in Norway, so we'll see.
Anyway, really enjoyed viewing the photos in the thread. Thanks everyone!
HelenaN wrote:
When I stumbled upon the 7Artisans 75/1.25 for an incredibly low price a couple of months ago I couldn't resist. It's a good lens and I enjoy the change of perspective after not having used anything longer than 40mm for some time. However, I'm starting to regret that I didn't go for the CV 75/1.5 instead, because the weight of the 7A bothers me more than expected and I rarely use it at larger apertures than f/2. I'll start looking for a CV for a decent price and try and sell the 7A, but neither will be easy here in Norway, so we'll see.
Anyway, really enjoyed viewing the photos in the thread. Thanks everyone!...Show more →
Are you not using it below f2 on the 75A because you don't like the rendering/it's a stylistic choice or it's technically poor?
Should have posted a 75/1.5 at 6400 instead.