– 1 stop of additional highlight recovery and ISO performance over M10-R (Steve's testing so far)
– Highlight recovery sounds just like the SL2-S, which in practice makes the highlights seem un-blowable
– Lower res modes don't lose any IQ
– Lower res modes don't reduce noise – 60mp files viewed at the same size look very close
– Supposedly an increase in DR for lower res modes, but no confirmation from testing
Very curious about the IQ and DR and binning. Also think it’s stupid Leica doesn’t include IBIS at 61mp. Regardless, lots of fun stuff. Seems like a meaningful upgrade.
Red Dot said just regular binning but with some sort of Leica algorithm that may improve results compared to what we've seen other manufacturers do in the past. TBD.
At least there is a digitally-stabilized option for live view in the EVF and LCD – makes focusing easier.
naturephoto1 wrote:
To take advantage of the 60/61 MP you will need extremely good technique and a high enough shutter speed or some sort of support for the camera/lens.
Rich
Yeah, which is really annoying, at least to me. I could do 1/20 hand held with an RX1, but needed 1/60 with the RX1r2 for consistent crisp results. That was an appreciable difference for me with how I shoot. IBIS seems like common sense past the 30mp zone. Will be interesting to try the camera at a similar lower shutter speed with the 3 different pixel binned modes to see if lower res modes can get away with lower shutter speeds.
Fred Miranda wrote:
The bad news about the Visoflex 2 for M10 bodies is that it will require a future firmware update and it will be only capable of 2.4MP viewing resolution (instead of 3.7MP), so resolution will be the same as the the Visoflex 020's.
Fred,
Aside from esthetics (which could be a plus or minus depending on your view - no pun intended), what is the advantage of buying the new Visoflex 2 for M10 users vs buying the current Visoflex 020?
While I'm not Fred... It's not as tall (easier to pack in a bag, less likely to snag on something) and is an all-metal housing. You lose the GPS though. Apparently there are magnets to keep it from tilting on its own. Or maybe I misread/misunderstood and the magnets help with the 45 and 90 degree detents.
highdesertmesa wrote:
Highlights from the Red Dot conversation:
– 1 stop of additional highlight recovery and ISO performance over M10-R (Steve's testing so far)
– Highlight recovery sounds just like the SL2-S, which in practice makes the highlights seem un-blowable
– Lower res modes don't lose any IQ
– Lower res modes don't reduce noise – 60mp files viewed at the same size look very close
– Supposedly an increase in DR for lower res modes, but no confirmation from testing
Here's what Dave Farkas says in his write up with enjoyable images of NYC:
The M11 impresses when it comes to dynamic range and file malleability. Like most Leica cameras there is massive amounts of shadow detail, especially at lower ISO settings. But unlike those other cameras, the M11 can extract details from some extremely bright highlights. I took some quick snaps of a woman and her dog brunching outside in the West Village. As I walked away and reviewed the images on the LCD, her face was completely blown out by the direct sun. Flashing highlight warnings and all. I wrote these shots off, accepted the wasted opportunity and moved on. Only later in the computer when I pulled the exposure down two stops and saw how much information was in those blown highlights, did I truly appreciate the insane recovery ability of this camera. From LED signage at night in Times Square to near-specular highlights in contrasty daytime conditions, the M11 delivered.
One thing I noted about his nighttime photos with neon signage and LED billboards was that even at high ISOs, the neon retained its color instead of blowing out to white. While I think he often pulled back highlights probably to -100 in Lightroom, the fact he could do this at higher ISOs and still recover color, rather than just a gray tone, impressed me.
I have not followed the Sony a7RIV much - what is the general consensus about the sensor being ISO-less? Can you set it to one of the base ISOs and just push in post as needed with little to no consequences?
It should offer noticeable higher DR in comparison to the M10 and M10R at ISO 100, 200 and above 16000 but as Chris mentioned, there is one caveat. Since the base ISO is now 64, the first gain could come a bit earlier, so there could be changes in DR at high ISO compared to the A7R IV's sensor.
However, in regards to read-noise, both M10 and M10-R should perform slightly better.
The other camera resolutions are using pixel binning so, similar noise performance can also achieved when normalizing the 61MP file to 36 and 18MP in post. The main benefit of the lower resolutions is file size. Leica mentions higher DR at lower resolutions though. (To be tested)...Show more →
It may or may not be the same wafer (DPReview don't know despite their claims) but it isn't the same microlenses or CFA. So P2P figures for the A7R4 may or may not apply to the M11. And P2P's figures are absolute and don't really give real world available DR figures in all cases. It's a valuable resource but needs to be taken in context.
Aside from esthetics (which could be a plus or minus depending on your view - no pun intended), what is the advantage of buying the new Visoflex 2 for M10 users vs buying the current Visoflex 020?
Thanks,
Steve
---------------------------------------------
rscheffler wrote:
While I'm not Fred... It's not as tall (easier to pack in a bag, less likely to snag on something) and is an all-metal housing. You lose the GPS though. Apparently there are magnets to keep it from tilting on its own. Or maybe I misread/misunderstood and the magnets help with the 45 and 90 degree detents.
According to Leica, both versions will be capable of the same resolution (2.4m Dot) on M10 cameras.
Perhaps it's a technical hurdle but it would be disappointing if Leica goes the extra mile to reduce resolution in software just to get folks to upgrade the camera in order to get full resolution. If there is pixel binning to get from 3.7 to 2.4MP, perhaps there will be less moire. The Visoflex II downgrade for M10 bodies is that the GPS functionality was removed.
IMO, the more the M body moves away from the rangefinder and becomes more EVF-centric, the more I don't see the need for one. If I were going to be using EVF most of the time, I'd prefer shooting with my stabilized Sony A7R IV with its glorious 5.7m-Dot finder.
Aesthetically, the new Visoflex II seems to be better built (aluminum vs plastic) but perhaps it's heavier. Does anyone know the weight comparison? It looks wider and shorter compared to the 020 and it's OLED instead of LCD.
_______
From Leica:
"The Visoflex 2 is also backwards-compatible with Leica’s M10 models (M10, M10 Monochrom, M10R, M10-P and M10-D) once they have been updated with the new firmware released in March 2022."
Camera Compatibility
M11, M10 (with future firmware update; only 2.4MP viewing resolution available)
flash wrote:
It may or may not be the same wafer (DPReview don't know despite their claims) but it isn't the same microlenses or CFA. So P2P figures for the A7R4 may or may not apply to the M11. And P2P's figures are absolute and don't really give real world available DR figures in all cases. It's a valuable resource but needs to be taken in context.
Gordon
Whenever photonstophotos tests the M11, we will know for sure. I beat they will be similar.
BTW, my A7R IV's sensor has higher DR compared to my M10-R, especially at base ISO.
I think it become difficult to resist now given it is below $9k, offer real ISO64, E shutter, real sRAW (I am very impressed with file size to pixel ratio) and USB charging, new added program button, the same SL2 layout and control ...
none of above are revolutionary but all make M a more refined machine (with better user experience) to use.
Both Leica and Hasselblad X get UX nail down that none of Japanese company get it right. The difference is Leica also nail the usability on this one.
I like the e-shutter, the new sensor and the new touch screen on the back. I get a little tired of futzing around with ND's all the time. The metering seems to be upgraded as well. Although I've owned and used both, I never found the upgrade from my m240 to the m10 or even the m10r "worth" it.
Fred Miranda wrote:
---------------------------------------------
According to Leica, both versions will be capable of the same resolution (2.4m Dot) on M10 cameras. (It's not clear if all M10 models will be supported.
Perhaps it's a technical hurdle but it would be disappointing if Leica goes the extra mile to reduce resolution in software just to get folks to upgrade the camera in order to get full resolution. If there is pixel binning to get from 3.7 to 2.4MP, perhaps there will be less moire. The biggest downgrade from the Visoflex 020 is that there is no longer GPS functionality.
IMO, the more the M body moves away from the rangefinder and becomes more EVF-centric, the more I don't see the need for one. If I were going to be using EVF most of the time, I'd prefer shooting with my stabilized Sony A7R IV with its glorious 5.7m-Dot finder.
Aesthetically, the new Visoflex II seems to be better built (aluminum vs plastic) but perhaps it's heavier. Does anyone know the weight comparison? It's wider and shorter compared to the 020. It's OLED instead of LCD. ...Show more →
zhangyue wrote:
I think it become difficult to resist now given it is below $9k, offer real ISO64, E shutter, real sRAW (I am very impressed with file size to pixel ratio) and USB charging, new added program button, the same SL2 layout and control ...
none of above are revolutionary but all make M a more refined machine (with better user experience) to use.
Both Leica and Hasselblad X get UX nail down that none of Japanese company get it right. The difference is Leica also nail the usability on this one.
The approach of this camera, and Leica generally is really attractive to me—improve the tech inside, but keep the innerface and shooting experience extraordinarily fluid and minimal. I really wish other makers had this type of mentality
nehemiahphoto wrote:
The approach of this camera, and Leica generally is really attractive to me—improve the tech inside, but keep the innerface and shooting experience extraordinarily fluid and minimal. I really wish other makers had this type of mentality
Yes, it is addictive for me in that perspective. (cross Leica family and after brief experience with HSS X ) I am yawning to see those YT video people fast running around to squeeze the last bit of AFC very Interesting but that is not what I do or care.
zhangyue wrote:
Yes, it is addictive for me in that perspective. (cross Leica family and after brief experience with HSS X ) I am yawning to see those YT video people fast running around to squeeze the last bit of AFC very Interesting but that is not what I do or care.
My problem is AF doesn’t work with 85% of my favorite lenses, because they are all manual. And I prefer MF I find even though I have far more accurate hits, the experience of shooting manual focus with running dogs (or kids) is still more enjoyable. And I tend to get results I like even better even if it is not near as many and a different type of photo.
My AF is for running dogs though, otherwise even my very snappy AF bodies are nearly always shot an Av mode with manual focus. 90% of the feature and menus (clutter) I prefer without.
Can’t stand people whining about what it doesn’t do or how much it costs. Plethora of other options for those people. Like literally every other manufacturer making cameras just for these people and they still need to complain about the leica they’ll never have or understand for that matter.
No one wants to hear it, and I especially hope Leica doesn’t listen to all these haters.
Leica makes the only digital camera for me right now, and unless fujifilm releases a medium format with an optical finder, it’s Leica 100%.
