zhangyue wrote:
Congrats! Could you tell me a little bit more about EVF? How about EVF magnification? Is it bright with accurate color? Comparable to which mirrorless camera you ever used?
If you use E shutter with EVF, will mechnical shutter still up and down during shooting? How about delay? (Roughly)
I am debating if I should get the EVF or not depend on your or anyone else’s feedback.
Just took first shot with EVF. It is bright almost like my Q2. So when I turn cam on it makes sound like LV from my M10R. Then I focus with focus peaking on and turning the focus ring it does its normal zoom in. Then taking the image with mechanical shutter I assume it makes low sound like the M10R. I do not understand all the fuss.
I will keep the EVF as it reminds me of my Q2 and works just fine. Hate having to take Thumbs Up off to use it though. Might try zoom feature with my 135 tomorrow. Trust this helps a bit.
Just an open question. I have been using UV/Haze filters for years. Now I wonder with a UV filter inside the M11 if that is even needed and perhaps I should switch to the 007 clear filter just for front element protection instead of UV/Haze front protection filters.
My main issue with 60MP is the rangefinder itself. I don’t think I can accurately focus every shot at 60MP. And getting the visoflex defeats the purpose of an M
patotts wrote:
While I am complaining on the price as it is more than I want to spend on a single camera body as a happy amateur photographer without a plan, I think you have to look at the price based on the cost of manufacturing and how many units they can make to recoup investments. The M11 market is minuscule compared to how many Sony A7R4s or Canon R5s are made and sold out there.
The price might be justified, it is just more than I'm willing to spend.
I suspect there's more to it than that. Like the fact that:
(1) Leica has an absolute monopoly in this space;
(2) Leica's brand actually benefits from charging more money for "less" tech/features.
These days Leica is as much a luxury goods company as it is a camera company. And where exclusivity and expense speak favorably of a luxury brand, Leica stands to benefit from charging a lot for its cameras. They gotta pay for that immaculate white and crystal coffee bar in the Solms manufacturing facility somehow!
That said, as eye-watering as the price of the M11 seems, it's about the same in inflation-adjusted dollars as I paid for my M240 back in 2013. So all told, not that bad I guess?
stgrove wrote:
Just an open question. I have been using UV/Haze filters for years. Now I wonder with a UV filter inside the M11 if that is even needed and perhaps I should switch to the 007 clear filter just for front element protection instead of UV/Haze front protection filters.
Just switch to the 007 Q2 edition and you won't need filters or anything else
pmeheut wrote:
I'm using Gigapixel AI. It is pure magic: it removes the Jpeg artifacts, increase the size and adds "details" somehow... Deep learning is great.
"it removes the Jpeg artifacts" ? I will give this a try!
I have a few favorite photos and continue to see some of my photos here and there that look great pixel peeped in DNG/RAW until I convert to jpeg for posting and then I see jaggies. To date I haven't found a way to eliminate even though I tried several approaches/methods already.
Jan 14, 2022 at 03:45 PM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
friedrice1212 wrote:
My main issue with 60MP is the rangefinder itself. I don’t think I can accurately focus every shot at 60MP. And getting the visoflex defeats the purpose of an M
As Ron said above, then you can just downsize to whatever size works for you (either in camera or in post) and the 60 MP file downsized will look at least as good as if you shot that resolution natively.
la-px wrote:
Anyone else irked by the uncovered usb-c port on the bottom - seems more prone to damage, moisture, dust, etc.
No more than the one on lots of phones that can be literally dunked in water for several minutes. USB-C can be quite well sealed even when it is uncovered.
Steve Spencer wrote:
As Ron said above, then you can just downsize to whatever size works for you (either in camera or in post) and the 60 MP file downsized will look at least as good as if you shot that resolution natively.
But then again, that would defeat the purpose of shedding all the $ for the extra resolution
stgrove wrote:
Just took first shot with EVF. It is bright almost like my Q2. So when I turn cam on it makes sound like LV from my M10R. Then I focus with focus peaking on and turning the focus ring it does its normal zoom in. Then taking the image with mechanical shutter I assume it makes low sound like the M10R. I do not understand all the fuss.
I will keep the EVF as it reminds me of my Q2 and works just fine. Hate having to take Thumbs Up off to use it though. Might try zoom feature with my 135 tomorrow. Trust this helps a bit.
Just an open question. I have been using UV/Haze filters for years. Now I wonder with a UV filter inside the M11 if that is even needed and perhaps I should switch to the 007 clear filter just for front element protection instead of UV/Haze front protection filters....Show more →
Thank you for the test and reply. You are in mechanical shutter mode with LV/EVF. That means mechanical shutter need close for exposure and open for LV after. I wonder if selecting Electronic shutter will be more responsive. I assume with E shutter enabled, mechanical shutter should be out of picture but not sure how leica implement it. I hope there is less leg or black screen time with m11 comparing to M10 for the case with E shutter enabled.
As far as sensor read out speed go, 1/10S is pretty slow but not a total showstopper. I manage to use Hasselblad X1DII e shutter (1/3s read out speed) to take image without tripod fine if subject doesnt move. (though blackout time is ridiculous with that camera) For M11, 1/10S is total sensor read out, for subject such as a face of person that take 1/8th of height of 24mm sensor, the exposure time is about 1/80S, so the face will not be distorted. (assume for non moving subject) And for anything nonmoving, I believe this is usable.
Jan 14, 2022 at 06:26 PM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
friedrice1212 wrote:
But then again, that would defeat the purpose of shedding all the $ for the extra resolution
It all depends how much you shoot under the conditions in which the higher resolution will be useful. Personally, I use a Leica M about 75 to 80 percent handheld and the 60 MP won't be all that useful for that, but the other 20 to 25 percent is landscapes on a tripod where the 60 MP will be useful. So all things considered I can see how the 60 MP would be useful to me even though it won't be for the big majority of my shots. For that majority of my shots it won't be a problem, however, I can just downsize the files and I will be at least as well off as a lower resolution camera.
Steve Spencer wrote:
No more than the one on lots of phones that can be literally dunked in water for several minutes. USB-C can be quite well sealed even when it is uncovered.
That's a fair point, I suppose my issue is with the fact that the camera can't properly stand when the port is in use, but that's hardly a significant issue.
patotts wrote:
While I am complaining on the price as it is more than I want to spend on a single camera body as a happy amateur photographer without a plan, I think you have to look at the price based on the cost of manufacturing and how many units they can make to recoup investments. The M11 market is minuscule compared to how many Sony A7R4s or Canon R5s are made and sold out there.
The price might be justified, it is just more than I'm willing to spend.
Arka wrote:
I suspect there's more to it than that. Like the fact that:
(1) Leica has an absolute monopoly in this space;
(2) Leica's brand actually benefits from charging more money for "less" tech/features.
These days Leica is as much a luxury goods company as it is a camera company. And where exclusivity and expense speak favorably of a luxury brand, Leica stands to benefit from charging a lot for its cameras. They gotta pay for that immaculate white and crystal coffee bar in the Solms manufacturing facility somehow!
That said, as eye-watering as the price of the M11 seems, it's about the same in inflation-adjusted dollars as I paid for my M240 back in 2013. So all told, not that bad I guess?...Show more →
The bad part is that apparently income has not kept up with inflation, for the average person. But as you said, I guess Leica isn't aimed at the average photographer.
Yet, I don't think it's so black & white. Some of it is a factor and yes, Leica's brand image aims towards certain niches in the photography market, but I would argue the user pool is broader. They have minimal competition in the rangefinder space, particularly in regards to cameras, less so lenses, but it's still a camera system and photographers have a lot of options other than Leica. I still don't think they can operate in a true vacuum separate from the rest of the industry but it does benefit them to completely avoid competing in the lower end of the market driven primarily by volume.
friedrice1212 wrote:
My main issue with 60MP is the rangefinder itself. I don’t think I can accurately focus every shot at 60MP. And getting the visoflex defeats the purpose of an M
Steve Spencer wrote:
As Ron said above, then you can just downsize to whatever size works for you (either in camera or in post) and the 60 MP file downsized will look at least as good as if you shot that resolution natively.
friedrice1212 wrote:
But then again, that would defeat the purpose of shedding all the $ for the extra resolution
But you're not. You're spending the same amount, adjusted for inflation, as the 18MP M9. But getting a camera with 42 more MP that you can choose to use, or not.
Seriously though, not every situation requires perfect focus unless you always shoot wide open with really fast lenses. If you're doing that with Leica M, then you're doing it because you want the challenge and like using the rangefinder. Otherwise there are many other systems available that will make this aspect of photography much easier. But each person's eyesight is different and may or may not work well enough to get consistent focus with the rangefinder patch. This aspect is not new and does come up from time to time. I think we need a lot more real world user feedback about whether or not 60MP makes this worse.
LBJ2 wrote:
"it removes the Jpeg artifacts" ? I will give this a try!
I have a few favorite photos and continue to see some of my photos here and there that look great pixel peeped in DNG/RAW until I convert to jpeg for posting and then I see jaggies. To date I haven't found a way to eliminate even though I tried several approaches/methods already.
1. Electronic shutter: I don't get how it can be a 1/16,000 shutter that takes 1/10 second to read out Is it 1/16,000 or a 1/10? How can a 1/16,000 shutter have roling artifacts if it is taking that short of an exposure
2. Metering and time: So it only has sensor reading, not even an option to read off the shutter curtain? So you are framing, focusing and get ready to take the shot. The camera has to close the shutter than re-open it to take the pic? Every time? The Dpreview guys said it takes 2 seconds to go from an off camera to a shot?
I focus, I press the shutter button and how long till the pic is taken??
Is it 1/16,000 or a 1/10? How can a 1/16,000 shutter have roling artifacts if it is taking that short of an exposure