anselwannab wrote:
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??...Show more →
The shutter is a slit that travels across the sensor. The slit exposes the pixels that are being exposed for 1/16,000 of a second but there are a lot of rows (or columns I am no sure what direction the slit is oriented) so the travel of the slit across the whole sensor even when it exposes each row/column for a short time takes 1/10th of a second. If the subject moves during that 1/10th of a second it can cause distortion in the image because the what was exposed as the slit travels across the sensor will not line up.
Your last question is a good one and hopefully someone will measure it, but Jono Slack said he believes it is the same amount of time as it takes with the M10 metering off the shutter, but that is just his subjective judgment.
Just raise the “charming” slider in your raw converter of choice and you’re good.
astrobuoy wrote:
The thing I'm particularly piqued by in his review is what he says about the difference in color rendering between the M10-R and M11. He mentions finding the colors from the 10-R more "charming", while the M11 feel more realistic and true-to-life. I'm really hoping to hear more about this particular aspect once we start seeing more photos from the new camera, as it echoes what a few early recipients of the M11 have mentioned in the rendering between the two cameras. I find the M10-R to be, as another review put it, "filmic", which is a look I personally adore....Show more →
airfrogusmc wrote:
Not a LR fan here but there are programs out there that are real good. Genuine Fractals has been around since the 1990s.
I'm not an LR user, either ... but, I do use PS and have tested the Super Resolution feature (posted images somewhere around here) where I was pushing things 500% (stupid test, I know) as an extreme test. Point being, whether it is Adobe's ACR or GF or GP or , computational enlargement is much better today than it was years ago.
BUT, and this is my .02 about using computational uprezzing ... it's success depends on how good the original source input is. To that point, I feel that when I've got excellent glass and a clean exposure, uprezzing is in my hip pocket. OTOH, if the glass is weak or the file has issues, then the value of the uprezz doesn't reveal itself as well for a viable solution.
Start clean (glass), Stay clean (exposure) and today's uprezz options are viable. Heck, I remember a lab in TN showing me 6MP prints that were 20x30 back in the day, when I was concerned about what I could do with 8MP. ;-)
So, yeah 24MP using the full file should go a long way on it's own, or with computational uprezz. For the croppers (me sometimes), the 40MP range will be a bit nicer for some wiggle room. 60MP is just a notch up from that, bearing in mind that going from 24 > 40 is closer to double (square root thereof), whereas 40 > 60 is only +50% (square root thereof), so imo, the jump to 40 from 24 is more meaningful than the jump from 40 to 60. That said, I think 24 has been a great sweetspot, but looking forward I think 40 will be the sweetspot of the future.
Having shot my share of APS-C files (CL and now TL2), the quality of that pixel density (and algorithm support) has just continued upward ... so, having a FF at 40, is a density that sits between FF 24MP and APS-C 24MP (both in my bag). FF 60MP is on par with APS-C 24 MP density. Yeah, I think 40MP on FF is the sweetspot of the future that lets you get density and ISO performance (with today / tomorrow sensor and algo's).
60MP is cool, but won't be the reason for / against my decision for the M11. Other factors will dictate that decision (for me) ... which might include seeing what the M11-P brings to the table ... or the M10-R.
friedrice1212 wrote:
But then again, that would defeat the purpose of shedding all the $ for the extra resolution
Different genre / style shooters will appreciate both. Landscape with great glass on sturdy legs > 60MP. Action street offhand, > one of the lower res options. Low light, higher ISO, etc.
Imo, this gives the shooter the choice between optimum quality / detail vs. something for when less optimal conditions warrant.
I don't see it as much as a waste ... as I do an option.
I know that the M gets so much lauding for its street prowess, but there is some great glass that suits well to landscape, too.
Pretty much in line with Steve's points.
But, consider this ... how many diff camera's have some form of "Hi-Res" pixel where it is taking multiple images and combining them into a larger file size (for those times when ... ).
Here, rather than going native and computing for more (when needed) with multiple shots ... we are computing for less, with a single shot. Half-empty vs. half-full kind of thing ... both in the vein of versatility for differing IQ / File size needs.
rscheffler wrote:
I think we need a lot more real world user feedback about whether or not 60MP makes this worse.
I think we already know the answer from history of increasing MP.
Since the image size is the same at capture, the only thing that will determine how "noticeable" (worse or not) is the amount of enlargement that we choose to do with it (or pixel peep).
The same question has arisen with every increase in MP along the way. I see no reason why the answer would be any different this time.
If I cut a 16" pizza into 8 triangular slices, does it taste any different or feed any more / less people than when we slice it into 24 squares? It's still a 16" pizza.
airfrogusmc wrote:
IIRC Genuine Fractals (On One) claims 800%.
I am a PS user also.
Haven't tried a recent version of GF, but they were kinda innovating in the industry of uprezzing back in the early going. I would expect they've improved over time. So, if I ran 500% (to a degree of acceptability) with ACR, I wouldn't be surprised if GF hits 800% (to a degree of acceptability).
I know I had to do some uprezzing from a 5MP file (cropped to client request) and hung it as 30x40. It was a push for me, but the client liked it. That was coming out of my 14MP Kodak several years back. So, yeah I'm sure things are MUCH better now.
Steve Spencer wrote:
The shutter is a slit that travels across the sensor. The slit exposes the pixels that are being exposed for 1/16,000 of a second but there are a lot of rows (or columns I am no sure what direction the slit is oriented) so the travel of the slit across the whole sensor even when it exposes each row/column for a short time takes 1/10th of a second. If the subject moves during that 1/10th of a second it can cause distortion in the image because the what was exposed as the slit travels across the sensor will not line up. ...Show more →
I still don't get it.
First off there isn't a shutter running across? The mechnical shutter is out of the way. It's sensor based 'shutter', but how can it take 1/10 of a second for a 1/16000 exposure? That's an oxymoron. Seems a bit useless, because I assume that if you move the camera during this time, you can blur, or at least get artifacts. Need less light, use a ND?
I see some people are getting theirs soon. Is there an idea on what the longer supply situation will be? IT's 2022, you never know/
Steve Spencer wrote:
The shutter is a slit that travels across the sensor. The slit exposes the pixels that are being exposed for 1/16,000 of a second but there are a lot of rows (or columns I am no sure what direction the slit is oriented) so the travel of the slit across the whole sensor even when it exposes each row/column for a short time takes 1/10th of a second. If the subject moves during that 1/10th of a second it can cause distortion in the image because the what was exposed as the slit travels across the sensor will not line up....Show more →
anselwannab wrote:
I still don't get it.
First off there isn't a shutter running across? The mechnical shutter is out of the way. It's sensor based 'shutter', but how can it take 1/10 of a second for a 1/16000 exposure? That's an oxymoron. Seems a bit useless, because I assume that if you move the camera during this time, you can blur, or at least get artifacts. Need less light, use a ND?
I see some people are getting theirs soon. Is there an idea on what the longer supply situation will be? IT's 2022, you never know/
There are two exposures happening with electronic shutter. When set to 1/16000, that is the duration for which the pixels capture light. But when you press the shutter release, they don't all turn on and off at the same time (that would be case with a global shutter sensor - probably still some years down the road). Instead, the sensor 'scans' across the rows of pixels, turning them on and off and reading out the info to the processor. The speed at which this 'sweeps' across the sensor from one end to the other, takes 1/10 second. So, each pixel at 1/16000 'freezes' the action, but because it takes so long from one end to the other, if the subject moves, it will result in distortion. Not necessarily blur because of the exposure time of the pixels.
As Michael alluded to, there are times when even a sensor with a slow scan/readout like in the M11, can still result in acceptable images even with some subject movement, because the full scan time is for the full image. If the subject fills the frame and is moving, then distortion will be more noticeable because it takes the M11 sensor 1/10 for the full image. If the moving part of the subject fills a fraction of the frame - Michael used the example of 1/8 of the image - then the 'scan speed' across that moving portion of the subject will be 1/80, which is better. It will depend a lot on these factors how much you'll notice rolling shutter effects.
First off there isn't a shutter running across? The mechnical shutter is out of the way. It's sensor based 'shutter', but how can it take 1/10 of a second for a 1/16000 exposure? That's an oxymoron. Seems a bit useless, because I assume that if you move the camera during this time, you can blur, or at least get artifacts. Need less light, use a ND?
I see some people are getting theirs soon. Is there an idea on what the longer supply situation will be? IT's 2022, you never know/
The electronic shutter works similarly, reading out the sensor one line/row at a time. Each line is only exposed for the time set by the shutter speed, but it takes much longer to read all the lines. Hence, a single line will not be subject to motion blur at fast shutter speeds, but if the subject moves between readout of lines, the image will come out skewed.
rscheffler wrote:
...Here's what Dave Farkas says... 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...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...
I had no interest in the greater resolution of the M10-R over the M10; nor am I interested in the still greater resolution of the M11. Similar to what others have stated, I like the 100g lighter weight of the black M11 and its multi-field metering when shooting in rangefinder mode; but that is not enough to make me want to buy it to replace my M10.
My own view is essentially that the 60 MP resolution, which has increasingly been referred to as "medium-format territory", is not what I am after having been been interested, since film days, in the "35 mm aesthetic" for my photography; and considering that the look I want is easier to achieve from a lower resolution image, as in the image below.
On the other hand, some of the reviews suggest that highlight rendition of the M11 can achieve a gentler (more film-like) highlight roll-off; but I'm not yet sure how that plays out in the three DNG resolutions (60, 36, 18 MP) of the M11. And I am interested in seeing more on how the color rendition, supposedly like the SLS-2 differs among the three resolutions.
These above are the main things that interest me in the M11; and, since we're now going into another Covid peak, there is no rush for me to decide, since I'm not likely to be shooting much in any case, as I won't be getting back to Paris and Bangkok for some time — I'm in he Washington, DC area now. Also, I have the new Ricoh GR IIIx, in addition to my Ricoh GR III, and, of course, my M10. In the meantime, I'll be watching what others find and conclude.
Below is an image that I like a lot, and which I doubt would be improved, or made more easy to make with the M11. Taken at noon, the light in the street was so bright that you had to squint if you didn't wear sunglasses.
M10 | Summaron-M 1:5.6/28 | ISO 200 | f/5.6 | 1/60 | Chiang Mai
____________________ Frog Leaping photobook: https://www.frogleaping.org
Desmolicious wrote:
What is up w that cravat and granny eyeglass chain? It was like they filmed the rehearsal and then decided to go w it.
Camera is nice.
I guess they're trying to walk in the footsteps of Steve Jobs in his new product introductions. Seems to me that, while the technical setup is slick, all the presentations are so stilted that the viewer is conscious they're all reading from a teleprompter. I think Leica should find another way to make the next product introduction.
____________________ Frog Leaping photobook: https://www.frogleaping.org
zhangyue wrote:
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.
I used the "hybrid" setting where the camera switches E shutter when needed. It did not need it yesterday. BUT if you want E shutter only you have 3 shutter settings-mechanical only, E shutter only and hybrid. In combination with this you can of course set ISO AND maximum shutter speed which if set low might induce E shutter.
The lag or anything was barely noticeable to me. That said since 10 years on the M240 we have had EVF possible on the M. I used that when wanted on the M240, but never got an EVF for my M10R.
Repeat-when I turn camera on it clicks. Then when taking an image it clicks about like the M10R to me. I concentrate about the image not the sound. By the time I want to take a second shot it is ready. Not sure what all the fake fuss before the announcement was. Just get out and take photographs. I consider it just another tool.
No profiles other than "generic dng" was an exercise in PP for me. No ICC yet. Have one image to post later. I had misfocused the EVF and it was off. Will shoot today the RF which is what I prefer anyway.
Mitch Alland wrote:
I guess they're trying to walk in the footsteps of Steve Jobs in his new product introductions. Seems to me that, while the technical setup is slick, all the presentations are so stilted that the viewer is conscious they're all reading from a teleprompter. I think Leica should find another way to make the next product introduction.
____________________ Frog Leaping photobook: https://www.frogleaping.org
Yeah I got the exact same vibe. The Apple keynotes are so typical of them it just feels completely normal for us and also the presenters. Here there is a massive uncanny valley, and the Leica presenters feel how awkward it is.
Jan 15, 2022 at 08:44 AM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
Makten wrote:
The electronic shutter works similarly, reading out the sensor one line/row at a time. Each line is only exposed for the time set by the shutter speed, but it takes much longer to read all the lines. Hence, a single line will not be subject to motion blur at fast shutter speeds, but if the subject moves between readout of lines, the image will come out skewed.
Thank you Ron and Martin for stating it much more clearly than I did.
zhangyue wrote:
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.
This is great. Thanks for your thoughts.
It makes sense that if your main subject is located towards the top, there is lower risk of skew distortion with the e-shutter engaged. In the case of environment portraits, that means the model's head should have less chance of skew distortion compared to the rest of the body.
For M10-P/R shooters, I think there is a way to simulate the M11's new shutter behavior + metering.
Just turn the camera "on" and press the "LV" button and then turn the camera "off".
When you turn it back "on", there will be an audible clunk from the opening of the shutter which is similar to how the M11 always sounds.
Now, take a picture using the rangefinder. It's similar to how the M11 sounds and feels and it's different than how the M10-R sounds without LV.
Metering works the same way since the M10 in LV mode will use multi (matrix) metering as well.
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
