p.5 #1 · 8 reasons why I love the M11 compared to the M10
Fred, I know highlight recovery with the M 10 M is a better than the original MM. I am so used to shooting with Leica digital I really don't have any issues with it. Just like with transparence film you just leran where that line is that you can't cross when it comes to highlights. Other cameras build in user error. Leica's are just not as forgiving.
p.5 #2 · 8 reasons why I love the M11 compared to the M10
Fred Miranda wrote:
I've never tried the M10-M but from what I've read it has much lower 'read noise' (perhaps 1 or 2 stops than cameras using a no color filter array).
But what about highlight recovery? How does it compare to the M10-R for example?
insanely better the noise if you do love clean pictures, I have samples at 20k iso cleaner than my m10r at 1600...
Highlight recovery? better to work with a fixed -0.7 on m10m than m10r.
with a m10m and a 1.2 lens you can do proper street photography in the deep night forgetting about any iso limit; with a real APO lens you will have a MF-level picture quality.
An apo lens finds his field on a mono camera, you can't fight the CA on mono so they are brothers by definition.
p.5 #3 · 8 reasons why I love the M11 compared to the M10
I can't find the source at the moment but I've read that the single channel M10-M has much lower highlight recovery compared to the M10-R.
So, I wonder if at the end, the difference in color noise is not as big as people think, since the tonal curve is not the same.
p.5 #4 · 8 reasons why I love the M11 compared to the M10
Sean Reid/Reid Reviews ( subscription required) has posted some numbers regarding his highlight headroom advantage tests between M10M and M10-R/M11. The article is titled: "Leica M11, M10M & M10-R: Highlight Headroom "
p.5 #6 · 8 reasons why I love the M11 compared to the M10
Ulysseita wrote:
insanely better the noise if you do love clean pictures, I have samples at 20k iso cleaner than my m10r at 1600...
Highlight recovery? better to work with a fixed -0.7 on m10m than m10r.
with a m10m and a 1.2 lens you can do proper street photography in the deep night forgetting about any iso limit; with a real APO lens you will have a MF-level picture quality.
An apo lens finds his field on a mono camera, you can't fight the CA on mono so they are brothers by definition.
I’ve recently started doing street photography at night and happily allow the ISO on the M10M rise to 50K. When I want grain I load an MP with TMax 3200. It’s now become my standard practice, regardless of the time of day, to go out with two bodies pairing the M10M with an APO lens and the M10-R with a Lux of the same FL. The 90 Lux is of course out of the question so I’m seriously thinking about adding a Zhongyi 90/1.5. Hopefully either Leica or CV will eventually release a 28mm APO lens.
p.5 #7 · 8 reasons why I love the M11 compared to the M10
The 28 CV f2ii it's APO at least like the 35.... I tried in my M9, M10R and m10m ... It's an APO on the filed sure to shot without ac from the first closed half stop .
p.5 #8 · 8 reasons why I love the M11 compared to the M10
Ulysseita wrote:
The 28 CV f2ii it's APO at least like the 35.... I tried in my M9, M10R and m10m ... It's an APO on the filed sure to shot without ac from the first closed half stop .
Sure, I still have the CV 28/2 and 35/2 v2 lenses and they’re great optically but I hate their haptics.
p.5 #9 · 8 reasons why I love the M11 compared to the M10
This has been puzzling me. Maybe I misunderstand but I don’t see how, technically highlight recovery is possible at all with a mono sensor. Highlight recovery generally works when one or two channels are burnt out at a location, and you guess what might have been there based on the the information in the other channel(s) and maybe surrounds.
With a mono sensor you’d just get higher and higher exposure until, boom, the area has no info.
Of course so long as the overall dynamic range is a bit higher, this is irrelevant. You just expose a touch less.
p.5 #10 · 8 reasons why I love the M11 compared to the M10
Like shooting transparency film. When it gets so bright that there is clear film there is no density there to recover.
The way I work is I take a reading of something about 18% gray to get an accurate meter reading on the shadow side of the street. Fill the frame with that 18% gray. I then make an exposre using the info from the meter to see where my values are falling. To make sure I am holding highlights that are important. Then do the same for the birght side of the street or scene. Adjusting exposure to also make sure the highlights that are important aren't being lost. Remember those two exposures and then make photographs and I will not change the exposure. No need to, the light hasn't changed. Kinda like if I were using an incident meter. And I wont change exposre unless the light drastically changes. If there are subtle changes experience kicks in.
p.5 #11 · 8 reasons why I love the M11 compared to the M10
DavidBM wrote:
This has been puzzling me. Maybe I misunderstand but I don’t see how, technically highlight recovery is possible at all with a mono sensor. Highlight recovery generally works when one or two channels are burnt out at a location, and you guess what might have been there based on the the information in the other channel(s) and maybe surrounds.
With a mono sensor you’d just get higher and higher exposure until, boom, the area has no info.
Of course so long as the overall dynamic range is a bit higher, this is irrelevant. You just expose a touch less.
The histogram displayed by the Leica Monochroms is based on the RAW – don't blow that and no surprises will await you in post. This often leads to in-camera previews that are very, very dark, so if you're a JPEG shooter, a monochrome sensor is tough without an extended DR feature in firmware (available on Q2M as "iDR" but not M10M).
p.5 #12 · 8 reasons why I love the M11 compared to the M10
Although never compared both cameras side by side, based on what I've read and the DNG files I've played with, the M10-M has significantly less 'highlight recovery', perhaps up to 1.5 stops. That means that its 'read noise' advantage is a bit overblown because the overall DR compromises highlights for this to happen.
So, perhaps if one compare a M10-R file overexposed by +1.5EV vs a M10-M file correctly exposed and recover the highlights for the former, we could perhaps get closer performance regarding signal to noise ratio between the two cameras.
p.5 #13 · 8 reasons why I love the M11 compared to the M10
I've found with my M10M that outdoors a combination of yellow or orange filtration (absorbing the high energy blue wavelengths) and underexposing by -0.3 of a stop is adequate to protect the highlights right out of the box. If that's not enough, usually small adjustments in Adobe Camera Raw take care of it.
I do usually favor an orange filter for my 18mm SEM, because the sky is often a more dominate part of the scene, I like the darker sky and better defined cloud look the orange provides. On my 50, 75, & 90 I like the yellow filter more for that 1 stop less light lost and higher shutter speeds. It's also nicer for my wife's skin.
Indoors I go without a filter to again get the shutter speed up. Depending on how harsh the lighting is on the subject I'll usually underexpose by -0.3 or -0.7 of a stop.
p.5 #14 · 8 reasons why I love the M11 compared to the M10
goodbokeh wrote:
I've found with my M10M that outdoors a combination of yellow or orange filtration (absorbing the high energy blue wavelengths) and underexposing by -0.3 of a stop is adequate to protect the highlights right out of the box. If that's not enough, usually small adjustments in Adobe Camera Raw take care of it.
I do usually favor an orange filter for my 18mm SEM, because the sky is often a more dominate part of the scene, I like the darker sky and better defined cloud look the orange provides. On my 50, 75, & 90 I like the yellow filter more for that 1 stop less light lost and higher shutter speeds. It's also nicer for my wife's skin.
Indoors I go without a filter to again get the shutter speed up. Depending on how harsh the lighting is on the subject I'll usually underexpose by -0.3 or -0.7 of a stop....Show more →
I chose the palest yellow filters I could find to use with the M9M, M246, and now M10M because I dislike the dark skies that result from stronger filtration but that’s just a matter of taste. Your suggestion regarding -0.3 or -0.7 of a stop exposure compensation as appropriate is most useful.
p.5 #16 · 8 reasons why I love the M11 compared to the M10
Heads-up on charging the M11 directly using a charger via USB-C cable:
The Leica M11 takes a max of 7.4 volts input, so be careful which charger you are using.
The supplied Leica charger (Leica ACA-SCL7) only outputs 5 volts so it's safe to charge your camera using the USB-C charging option. However, I would not use third party chargers like the "Anker 20 watts USB-C charger" suggested by some folks online. It could be the reason some M11 shooters are getting their camera fried after continuous usage of non-approved chargers.
The M11 battery takes 7.4 volts and a max of 8.4 volts, so be careful with third party charges for battery charge as well. Plus you don't know the real specifications of some chargers, so I would not trust their specs or that they are 'smart'. Their voltage regulator could fail.
My advice: Only use the supplied Leica charger for battery and camera charging. I believe the Macbook Pro USB-C (TB4) outputs 5 volts which should be fine but I'm not 100% sure as this depends on the model.
p.5 #17 · 8 reasons why I love the M11 compared to the M10
Fred Miranda wrote:
Although never compared both cameras side by side, based on what I've read and the DNG files I've played with, the M10-M has significantly less 'highlight recovery', perhaps up to 1.5 stops. That means that its 'read noise' advantage is a bit overblown because the overall DR compromises highlights for this to happen.
So, perhaps if one compare a M10-R file overexposed by +1.5EV vs a M10-M file correctly exposed and recover the highlights for the former, we could perhaps get closer performance regarding signal to noise ratio between the two cameras.
Read noise on monochrome just kind of blends into the "grain", though. Isn't read noise on a Bayer array color sensor that ugly color noise that becomes objectionable more quickly? On a color camera, there's an ISO at which the color noise becomes so ugly, I don't want to use the image in color; but, on the M10M, it's no problem – it's all just very fine grain until I hit super-high ISOs (25K+).
Regarding your R to M comparison – I thought if I expose to keep all the channels from blowing on a color sensor, the exposure would be the same for a monochrome sensor. If we ETTR the same scene with both cameras, why would the monochrome need a lower exposure to save the highlights?
---------------------------------------------
Fred Miranda wrote: Heads-up on charging the M11 directly using a charger via USB-C cable:
The Leica M11 takes a max of 7.4 volts input, so be careful which charger you are using.
The supplied Leica charger (Leica ACA-SCL7) only outputs 5 volts so it's safe to charge your camera using the USB-C charging option. However, I would not use third party chargers like the "Anker 20 watts USB-C charger" suggested by some folks online. It could be the reason some M11 shooters are getting their camera fried after continuous usage of non-approved chargers.
The M11 battery takes 7.4 volts and a max of 8.4 volts, so be careful with third party charges for battery charge as well. Plus you don't know the real specifications of some chargers, so I would not trust their specs or that they are 'smart'. Their voltage regulator could fail.
My advice: Only use the supplied Leica charger for battery and camera charging. I believe the Macbook Pro USB-C (TB4) outputs 5 volts which should be fine but I'm not 100% sure as this depends on the model....Show more →
I have a feeling Leica may have left out a step-down transformer in-camera and is depending on the provided wall plug – Or the in-camera step-down isn't completely reliable. The camera *should* be able to take any USB-C power source, even the brick from my MacBook Pro, otherwise the M11 USB-C charging in-camera is not designed-to/working-to the expected norm.
I use the higher-power Anker with the Leica charger base, but I won't charge in-camera even with the Leica wall plug – just takes once for that battery to bloat up like a dead possum in the camera, and there goes the rig back to Leica.
p.5 #18 · 8 reasons why I love the M11 compared to the M10
Fred Miranda wrote: Heads-up on charging the M11 directly using a charger via USB-C cable:
The Leica M11 takes a max of 7.4 volts input, so be careful which charger you are using.
The supplied Leica charger (Leica ACA-SCL7) only outputs 5 volts so it's safe to charge your camera using the USB-C charging option. However, I would not use third party chargers like the "Anker 20 watts USB-C charger" suggested by some folks online. It could be the reason some M11 shooters are getting their camera fried after continuous usage of non-approved chargers.
The M11 battery takes 7.4 volts and a max of 8.4 volts, so be careful with third party charges for battery charge as well. Plus you don't know the real specifications of some chargers, so I would not trust their specs or that they are 'smart'. Their voltage regulator could fail.
My advice: Only use the supplied Leica charger for battery and camera charging. I believe the Macbook Pro USB-C (TB4) outputs 5 volts which should be fine but I'm not 100% sure as this depends on the model....Show more →
The Anker 20W and most other chargers support several voltages, typically 5V, 9V, and 12V. The device being charged (e.g., M11) communicates to the charger which voltage to use. One can buy a small USB-C gadget that displays voltage and amperes. My M11 is being charged correctly with 5V.
p.5 #19 · 8 reasons why I love the M11 compared to the M10
airfrogusmc wrote:
Fred, I know highlight recovery with the M 10 M is a better than the original MM. I am so used to shooting with Leica digital I really don't have any issues with it. Just like with transparence film you just leran where that line is that you can't cross when it comes to highlights. Other cameras build in user error. Leica's are just not as forgiving.
+1 ... others build in a safety net.
My Kodak SLR/C was also one that did not have the safety net like many camera (similar sensor to Leica). Personally, I prefer to know where the range is for "what ya shot, is what ya got", rather than having to calculate for the extra wiggle room / fudge factor.
As Allen mentions, not that much different from shooting chromes ... which was very much more "what ya shot, was what ya got", since you didn't have the wiggle room of negatives.
To me, adding in the "headroom" only complicates things. I mean, imagine having a speedometer on your car that didn't tell you how fast you were actually going, but it intentionally showed you a wrong value, to trick you into driving at a different actual speed.
The great tightrope artists never use a net. Working "netless" has a way of honing one's attention.
p.5 #20 · 8 reasons why I love the M11 compared to the M10
SrMi wrote:
The Anker 20W and most other chargers support several voltages, typically 5V, 9V, and 12V. The device being charged (e.g., M11) communicates to the charger which voltage to use. One can buy a small USB-C gadget that displays voltage and amperes. My M11 is being charged correctly with 5V.
In theory, the M11 USB-C should support "USBC PowerDelivery technology" but it would be great to confirm this with Leica before using third party chargers directly on the camera.
I have tried the USB charging feature when the M11 when connected to my Macbook Pro 16" to download images and it works fine.
