I have been away for a couple of days, and I come back to a few pages of squable
Well, here are my thoughts on this.....
Each camera has it's own advantages and disadvantages. Clearly the 5D is the camera of choice for most working pros that need high performance (fps) and high ISO a lot during their day. This will include Wedding / Event type work, for which I don't see the M8 as the 'automatic' best weapon at night (at least in low light - with people moving a lot). I have no problem with that.
OTOH, the 5D is not always going to be the best tool for the job in other circumstances, and may be 'some' of those circumstances are those in which the M8 excels. 'Small' travel kit is just one of them.
I think a debate that highlights the pros and cons of a camera type is healthy, as long as we stick to the facts, don't get personal, and don't take things personally either.
For those of us waiting patiently on the sidelines, while our dealers figure out how to get us our M8, it's useful to see the discussion both for and against.
My own experience of th M8 is fairly limited, but the shots I have show the M8 clearly out resolving the 1Ds2 at low ISO. This was a very pleasant suprise, given that the 1Ds2 is even more expensive (body only) than the M8 + attached lens was.
So, I agree with Guy that the M8 can out resolve the 5D when used to it's (M8) advantage, but I also agree with Brainiac that in some circumstances, the 5D may out resolve the M8, such as in the Train station example. This, in my opinion, does not make either camera better than the other 'in all cases', just better than the other in 'some' cases. We need to learn (by experimenting and seeing examples) which is the best tool for a given circumstance. After all, this is why many pros have multiple tools at their disposal, and don't stick doggedly to one brand of camera, lens or anything else.
Here is a 100% crop from both cameras. I took several shots on both, and these are the two that line up the closest (in terms of pixels in the shots etc). The shots taken with the 1Ds2 were from a view point to the left of the dealer doorway, which is why the grill on the ground looks better defined (i.e. I was more lined up with the grill on the 1Ds2). This also accounts for the difference in the reflections in the window.
Now, I must stress that these were not taken under ideal conditions, were hand held, and the 1Ds2 used AF, not MF. The 'framing' is not intended to show anything either The view from a dealer window is what you get..... not much choice there
The 1Ds2 shots were taken in a hurry, and as an after thought as I left the dealer (under some time preasure from my wife to go shopping!).
Oh, and one more thing, the M8 shot was taken THROUGH the glass of the dealer door, making this even less scientific !!
BTW - much as I am looking forward to the M8, I don't see it replacing my 1Ds2 + long MACRO lens for macro shots !
Guy Mancuso wrote:
Well rightnow the M8 has some serious issues with certain things and really needs a fix , i have one right here and have been testing it . magenta cast which is lack of a strongenough IR filter is the big culprit. Temp fix is IR cut filters which i have done a lot of tesing with and they do work very well but there not a permenant solution to the issue. Some streaking that can be controlled hopefully with a firmware update . AWB which is okay but honestly the DMR is just okay also. mkes really no diff if shooting Raw but still it should be better so yes unfortunetly the M8 came out undone but it still really performs really nice besides these issues and when Leica fixes them than it will be complete. The net is full of angry folks and blaming everyone that is even remotely Leica , frankly that is a waste of energy . I would rather focus my attention on getting this up and running to put into complete service than as the fix comes in , i will send it in for that. Every manufactuer has had there issues on release some not so bad and some really bad , this one is not good to be honest and surprised it slipped through the cracks. i picked up on it immediately but anyway we need to get past those problems and get it fixed to run at 100 percent. Testing the 5d against the M8 i really have no interest in doing a Canon Vs Leica comparision, been there done that and i still get hate mail. The 5d has some nice stuff going for it and I would say a great overall camera and stands out very well at high ISO's. But it did good against the DMR which i never wrote about but did test it, It was good and is a good camera and for it's intended market , perfect . But the issue there is the Canon lenses and all of you guys that come visit here what lenses are you buying the leica and Zeiss glass, so there are some limitations there on canon. I will do a DMR vs M8 comparision when I get the time and the M8 is in better shape to do that, but a Leica , canon thing that is something for Sean Reid to be doing....Show more →
I don't know about Canon, Guy, but I can tell you one thing, having owned about every camera Leica built since 1954: Yes- there are some sensor issues Leica needs to solve and will solve, but apart from that, this is really the best camera Leica ever built, except the Leicaflex SL.
DaveEP wrote:
Here is a 100% crop from both cameras. I took several shots on both, and these are the two that line up the closest (in terms of pixels in the shots etc).
I said this many times. At 100% crop with the same number of pixels in the frame, my D30 beats 1DsII any day And the original 1D was the king of this contest.
Pondria wrote:
I said this many times. At 100% crop with the same number of pixels in the frame, my D30 beats 1DsII any day And the original 1D was the king of this contest.
Perhaps I should rephrase it, by saying the same number of pixels within the crop, rather than the whole frame ..... because this is what really matters, it's pixels on the paper at the end of the day.
In case of enlargments, I think the M8 would do better here.
But again I would like to stress that I don't see the M8 as king of all cameras!! Each camera has it's own forte.....
bathman wrote:
These crops tell me more about the photographer than about the cameras. Sorry not convinced
I am sure that was intended to be a slur..... but I will ignore it. And... I don't care if 'anyone' is convinced or not.
It is up to each individual to make up their own minds...... based on actual use of the camera (or their choice not to try it), rather than internet here say.
DaveEP wrote:
Perhaps I should rephrase it, by saying the same number of pixels within the crop, rather than the whole frame ...
Yes, that's how I understood and no confusion here. And my reply was exactly to that point.
Let's say you take 600x400 crop from D30 and from 1DsII. You somehow managaged to get the same subject in both frames. D30 wins easily
and the corresponding shot from the M8 of the same subject?
We can all make nice hi-res shots in the studio.... but one taken without the other is no comparison at all..... that tells me more about attitude than the camera capabilities.
The 5D is a nice camera, no one is disputing that.....
We know what the 5D can do, so why are people getting so defensive about it, especially in a "Hands on M8" thread
Dave, you mentioned it yourself that the conditions were not up to the task. We do not know how you did this shot, some Canon lenses are soft wide open and possible missfocused and whatever. This was not really meant to judge your abilities as a photographer, just that shot was not very good to post for what you wanted to prove with it. So why post them.
I posted the crop some time ago and thats why I could post it here now as a sample that the 5D could do very well when used under good conditons and no lens problem.
I must say the M8 is unique and I do not see why it would need to be better than any other camera. People who want to shoot Leica shoot them for more reasons than Image Quality, I suppose
bathman wrote:
Dave, you mentioned it yourself that the conditions were not up to the task. We do not know how you did this shot, some Canon lenses are soft wide open and possible missfocused and whatever. This was not really meant to judge your abilities as a photographer, just that shot was not very good to post for what you wanted to prove with it. So why post them.
Thanks for the clarification Andi. Why post them? Because I was asked to.... and would have looked stupid if I hadn't. Note I did not post them earlier in the thread because I did not feel that they were an 'ideal' or 'scientific' test. Perhaps my remark about being able to out resolve the 1Ds2 was missplaced in some peoples eyes, and I have no problem with that, but given the situation, in 'this' instance, the M8 out performed the 1Ds2. As I have said, in other case I am sure that the 5D/1Ds2 will blow the M8 out of the water.
I agree with you that the M8 is unique enough that it does not have to be better, or even as good in some/most circumstances. I don't want an M8 to replace my SLRs, I want it to augment them.
Dave, I have done the same test and compared the pixels of the M8 vs. the 5D, and I came to the same conclusion you did: the M8 has great pixels. However, I only did that because I wanted to see if my pixelpeeps would be more pleasant with the M8.
If you want to say that the M8 outresolves the 1Ds2 (or 5D or any other camera), you need to frame the shots the same, with as identical or equivalent lenses as possible, scale them both to the same size, while trying to avoid giving either the advantage, ie. by not choosing an even multiple of one sensor size, and then do a crop. Under this circumstance, I am guessing that the M8 will be close to the 5D, but won't reach it, and the 1Ds2 will be ahead.
If you don't run the test like this, you are not testing the entire resolution potential of the camera, but just looking at pixels.
When I took the shots, I actually expected the 1Ds2 to come out ahead, given that the M8 was shot through the window, and the 1Ds2 was not. The results were unexpected.
Perhaps I chose my words badly........ it's been a long day today !
Ha ha ha, 100% crop pixel peep is just that - pixel peep. You wouldn't buy a camera to use only the crop of its photos, right ?
Re. 1DsII, there are two ways to compare it with other cameras. Let me take D30 as an example just for the sake of the discussion.
Method 1:
Start with 1DsII photo, take a 3.3MB center crop of it. Compare it with uncropped photo from D30. D30 wins. But what did it beat ? - Crippled 1DsII.
Method 2:
Start with D30 photo. Take the same "picture" with 1DsII. By same picture, I mean the same frame. Either you down-rez the 1DsII shot to 3.3MB or up-rez the D30 shot to 16MB. Compare the shots side by side.
I agree with Dave and Carsten, that this comparison isn't very informative. It does look like the 1DsII shot is suffering from an unsharp lens. It also has those distinctive and probably incorrect green shadows. It's interesting though that the metal grille on the ground is better resolved on the 1DsII even though everything looks less crisp. This is why I think the crispness of non-anti-aliased images is deceptive. They look crisper because contast between consecutive pixels is much higher, but they can still be delivering less information. That was, in my view, the case with the train display example, and with respect, I think that is one of the reasons Guy is so enthusiastic about his Leica captures. I think he may be overrating the actual resolution of the cameras.
This may be contentious, but all that's needed to compare resolution is to take the same photograph on each camera and then interpolate bicubically the lower pixel count one up to the same pixel dimensions as the high pixel count one. The idea that this will somehow penalise the lower pixel count image, in information terms, seems to me to be a misunderstanding. I didn't do it that way with the train display enlargements because I didn't want to invite that argument and I was trying to make sure that nobody could suggest I was favouring the 5D. I don't see how bicubic interpolation to higher pixel densities can lose resolved information. Perhaps someone with a background in wave physics and information theory can disabuse me.
And the original 1D was the king of this contest.
but one taken without the other is no comparison at all..... that tells me more about attitude than the camera capabilities.