RustyBug
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
|
 p.1 #14 · Leica M12 without a Sony sensor? | |
rscheffler wrote:
What is so special about CCD?
Color information is derived from the CFA. Why not put a CFA on the M12 that prioritizes color response closer to that of the M9? But assuming that CFA is quite strong, it might compromise high ISO performance. So one group might be happy (low ISO shooters), but others might not (low light shooters).
Personally I would not be interested in going back to CCD if it significantly impacted shots per battery charge plus other performance factors
-------
I might be in the minority opinion that the M11's sensor was the wrong one for it.
But I guess it depends what you prioritize in a sensor. Best DR? Personally, as you may already know, it wouldn't be a top priority for me. It just needs to be reasonably competitive in that area. What I really want is speed. Even from an M camera. Especially from an M camera! Fast readout to make e-shutter usable and totally bypass EFCS that Leica doesn't seem to want to put in their cameras anyway.
Considering how slow the 60MP sensor is, here's hoping that Leica's in-house design can at least beat it in this metric. And significantly beat it.
60MP is also overkill for much of what I shoot with M, so I'd be good with a bit of a step back if it allowed other capabilities to be improved. At least Leica included lower resolution FF RAW options for their 60MP cameras. I wish other brands would do similar.
...Show more →
Yes, the 1/9s e-readout is slow. Sony (et al) have a variety of different models and offer readouts from similarly slow to very fast. Nikon has a plethora of model options on where they land the IQ vs. Speed paradigm. Leica M ... they essentially have only ONE model (not the variants) and have chosen for it to be "Max IQ" ... at all costs to the e-shutter for the DR, etc.
+1 regarding the CFA (and algorithms) having more influence than the CCD vs. CMOS, as it pertains to the IQ. I see little reason to revert to CCD from an engineering perspective. It could be interesting to apply the CFA of choice from the era of CCD to a CMOS.
I used to (pre-Leica in my kit) study the RGB spectral responses of different cameras on DXO's website. It was interesting to see how some used a "heavy handed" CFA vs. a "lighter" one. Even back then, the difference between say a (flatter) Canon 1D MK II vs. a (richer) Sony A900 (yes, before mirrorless) in CFA color density was notable. But, to Ron's point ... I think the matter of difference(s) resides more in the CFA / Algorithm's than it does the CCD vs. CMOS.
When I first switched from the Nikon D70s to the Canon 1D MK II ... I was taken aback by the difference. I spoke with Chuck Westfall (iirc) about this and he explained how the professional community preferred something different from the consumer community. I've since data dumped tons of detail about the topic. But, where I used to think it was the CCD, I'm prone to think it is more about the CFA ... which then explains impact on ISO performance, etc.
I held on to my Kodak DCS SLR/C (still have actually) until the Canon 80D afforded an ISO performance boost and reasonable color DR performance. Similarly, my 6D II had a different spectral response from my 80D. Even though the Kodak, and the Canon's were all CMOS (I was "certain", but wrong, about the Kodak being CCD), the very "CCD-like" Kodak (read, borrowed from Leica's supplier), was still CMOS. Likely with the CFA being the differentiator, moreover than the CCD vs. CMOS.
So, a long way of saying +1 with Ron.
As to the M12 getting a faster readout ... hmmm. The prospect of reducing the sensor to 40MP (M10M / M10R) - 47MP (Q2 / SL2) and in combination with a BFA adjustment, it could be a prospect that does harken back a bit to the "moment" ethos of an M's origins. Maybe the "Triple Resolution" gives us a clue to a future iteration. I say that in the point that the middle resolution of 38 MP sits well between the 24MP and 60MP models, and the DR of the 38MP "TR" has been noted to be a bit better than the native 60 (through algorithms). A native 38MP (essentially the same as the M10M / M10R) sensor that is a single pane (not the stitched panes of the M10R) and a CCD-like CFA (for those inclined) could allow the readout to be improved.
"Improved" ... imo, that would mean going from 1/9s to something more like 1/20s or 1/30s (big difference in hand-holding use). I'd not expect them to take it into the 1/256s territory of a speed demon model. I think the CFA would be "too thin" for the ILK of Leica to be that fast.
Beyond that, things like Global Shutter, etc. might be in play ... or, they have something more like a revised / updated Sigma Foveon (L Alliance  ) that moves away from the CFA, or some other approach up their sleeve. Who knows ... but, we'll find out eventually.
Whatever it is, I'd be curious to think it'll be a paradigm shift ... more so than just the same thing, but different mfr.
Time will tell. 
|
