Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/09/01

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Monochrome II and III
From: mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner)
Date: Sat, 01 Sep 2012 14:05:08 -0400

How many shots per minute can you get with an M9?

Mark William Rabiner
Photography
http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/


> From: "Henning J. Wulff" <henningw at archiphoto.com>
> Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org>
> Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2012 23:17:15 -0700
> To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org>
> Subject: Re: [Leica] Monochrome II and III
> 
> 
> On 2012-08-31, at 2:54 PM, Geoff Hopkinson wrote:
> 
>> Hi Henning. I think it is well recognised that the M9 is not a fast
>> operating camera regarding processing times and frame rate. Those
>> limitations apply whether shooting uncompressed or compressed DNG or JPG 
>> or
>> a combination. If you need more than those seven frames at half second
>> intervals it is always going to stutter and hold you up. The Monochrom is
>> the same but adds a killer capability for purists of course.
>> 
>> .I've always considered my M9 as a basic but very compact full frame
>> digital vehicle for the lenses. It is the wrong or at least not ideal tool
>> for some photography types. I sold one M lens (for a bit more than I paid)
>> and got a dSLR and a dedicated lens or three  to start learning some
>> fashion/action/macro/wildlife stuff too.
>> 
>> A while back Stefan Daniel explained that the M9 design was the lowest 
>> cost
>> design that they could manage for a 'full frame' at the time and it used 
>> as
>> many M8 components as possible. At the time of the M9 genesis the S system
>> was being developed too and they admitted they they did not have the
>> capacity nor funds for two major in-house projects simultaneously, hence
>> the M9 being lowest risk design with as much M8 recycled as they could
>> manage.
>> 
>> In the case of the processor they used two instead of one but the amount 
>> of
>> data is much larger of course. At least partly due to the degree of 
>> success
>> of the M9 (and now the Blackstone partnership) their budget for 
>> development
>> has presumably improved since and they have previously said that they
>> intended to use the 'Maestro' processor (developed for the S2) in future
>> cameras. I would be surprised if the M10 does not use that and be more
>> responsive. However when that camera will materialise is not known despite
>> speculation. I suspect that will not be at this Photokina but we will see
>> another big development or two. Not long until we find out.
>> 
> The processor and implementations issues have been known and are very 
> obvious
> in use. The issue isn't needing more than 2 frames a second, it's waiting 
> over
> half a minute (at best) to clear the buffer of those seven shots. Half a
> minute, or actually 40 seconds, can be a lifetime when photographing 
> events.
> 
> As far as I know the M10 will be announced at Photokina (probably Sept. 17)
> and delivery will start approximately April. Seems reasonable. With the
> dicounts and the general timeframe and product life of the M9, anything 
> else
> would be bad.
> 
> 
>> On the battery capacity/design, I think the camera form factor is one of
>> the limitations. I don't see how anything physically larger could be used.
>> Whether that form factor will be/should be different in some future design
>> is probably several discussions on their own. You noted how you would
>> prefer that a future design get smaller again too.
>>  
> The electronics in the M9 are clunky and take up way more space than they
> should in a modern design. With a bit more LSI circuits a lot of space 
> could
> be saved as well as lower power requirements would prevail. I haven't 
> desinged
> this sort of stuff for decades, but the principles and the ongoing 
> development
> is still the same. Space for a larger battery could be found, even in a
> smaller body, and the design could be more energy efficient even if 
> liveview
> was implemented. Just depends on the resources available and the electronic
> partners they have. The S2 is out the door; the M9 has made a lot of money 
> for
> them - it's time to give the M10 the attention it deserves.
> 
> Henning
> 
> 
> 
>> For comparison I'm looking at the Li-ion batteries from the Nikon D7000
>> next to the M8/M9 one. The Nikon one is 7V 1900mAh 14Wh and the Leica 3.7V
>> 1800mAh 6.7Wh. No contest! But you physically could not fit it within the
>> M9 body. Tiny production numbers mean less options and higher costs too of
>> course.
>> 
>> I'm sure that I will be lining up for the M10 whatever it looks like and
>> whenever it appears providing it uses my lenses and the M still stands for
>> Messsucher ;-) Let's see what happens.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Geoff
>> http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 1 September 2012 04:23, Henning Wulff <henningw at archiphoto.com> 
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Frank,
>>> 
>>> There may be a bit of that, but faster processors do not necessarily use
>>> more battery power, and on top of that the electronics are hardly 
>>> packaged
>>> in a modern, efficient way in the M9. I think it might well be possible 
>>> to
>>> have more efficient (less power hungry, faster and more capable
>>> electronics) AND a larger battery in the M10. One can hope.
>>> 
>>> Henning
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 2012-08-31, at 3:27 AM, FRANK DERNIE wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Hi Henning,
>>>> I can't help feeling that all of the performance enhancements you would
>>> like will (much?) need more battery capacity since they all look like
>>> shortcomings due to trying to keep the battery as small as possible, 
>>> which
>>> would inevitably lead to the camera having to be bigger and heavier. The 
>>> M9
>>> body volume is a tiny fraction of the volume of any digital camera of
>>> anything like comparable performance...
>>>> Frank
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>> From: Henning Wulff <henningw at archiphoto.com>
>>>>> To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org>
>>>>> Sent: Friday, 31 August 2012, 0:28
>>>>> Subject: Re: [Leica] Monochrome II and III
>>>>> 
>>>>> Mainly, and desparately needed: - these are the issues that are in fact
>>> holding me off ordering an MM immediately -
>>>>> Better buffer and image writing to card; faster display with zoom on
>>> LCD; better LCD so that you can judge your image better, should you 
>>> choose
>>> to do so. Basically the electronics need to be up to the rest of the
>>> camera. If it can't do more than 2 frames per second, that's OK. What I
>>> don't like is having to wait for the camera. Ever. I don't with any other
>>> camera I now use, unless it's a P&S. I don't know if the production
>>> firmware allows for compressed DNG's, but uncompressed DNG's on the M9 
>>> are
>>> largely a waste of time and space as I have never been able to discern a
>>> difference in final output between uncompressed and compressed. If the
>>> electronics are up to dealing with the large files in a transparently
>>> speedy fashion, this becomes somewhat less of an issue. The file writing 
>>> of
>>> the M9 with compressed is slow enough as it is; it doesn't need to be
>>> slowed additionally by not allowing a compressed format. Maybe there is a
>>> difference other than
>>>> theoretical between compressed a
>>>>> nd uncompressed on the MM, if it is available there or tested initially
>>> by Leica.
>>>>> 
>>>>> In the 'Not so important but I'd like...' category:I'd also like the
>>> camera to get back to the size the pre-M8's were. I know that is 
>>> difficult
>>> with the LCD screen requirements but I could better live with a deeper
>>> mount flange than the body thickness. Better battery and battery life. 
>>> I'd
>>> prefer not having to remove the base and finding a place to put it to
>>> change batteries and cards. I also liked the minimal info display on the
>>> top panel of the M8; even a bit more would be welcome.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Henning
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 2012-08-30, at 12:36 PM, John McMaster wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> What do you think needs improved for the II and III?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> ;-)  john
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I can hardly wait until the Monochrome II and then III are released.
>>>>>> The improvements will be greatly welcome.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Maybe we'll see a Fuji Monochrome in the near future, or an Olympus
>>> OMD-B&W. Digital altnernatives busting out all over.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Cheers--Doug
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Leica Users Group.
>>>>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Henning Wulff
>>>>> henningw at archiphoto.com
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Leica Users Group.
>>>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Leica Users Group.
>>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Henning Wulff
>>> henningw at archiphoto.com
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Leica Users Group.
>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>> 
> 
> 
> Henning Wulff
> henningw at archiphoto.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information




In reply to: Message from henningw at archiphoto.com (Henning Wulff) ([Leica] Monochrome II and III)