Archived posting to the
Leica Users Group, 2013/02/07
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index]
[Home]
[Search]
Subject: [Leica] First official M(240) shots
From: roark.paul at gmail.com (Paul Roark)
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 10:50:21 -0800
References: <80F9701439F20347874CE5E4E03C22E9AD2E29FD@WhizzMAIL01.whizz.org> <80F9701439F20347874CE5E4E03C22E9AD2E3385@WhizzMAIL01.whizz.org> <80F9701439F20347874CE5E4E03C22E9AE6A8BCE@WHIZZMAIL02.whizz.org> <04b801ce04f9$f2f05e90$d8d11bb0$@verizon.net> <36950332-AACC-4F6F-8580-B98C99A917D1@sfr.fr>
philippe.amard <philippe.amard at sfr.fr> wrote:
> 6400 displays some banding - bad processing?
>
The deep shadow look is a major advantage of the M9 over my Canon 5D2.
I don't have enough experience with CMOS to know if this is just
Canon or typical of CMOS. The difference is that the Canon shows a
pattern when the deep shadows are radically expanded. The M9 just
shows more of a heavy grain look; it's much more random and acceptable
to me. My concern is that the pattern in the CMOS might be due to the
way the signal is off-loaded to the processor. If so, it might be
typical of those types of chips. I'll be doing some testing of a Sony
RX1 soon to see what it's deep shadow performance looks like.
Paul
www.PaulRoark.com
Replies:
Reply from red735i at verizon.net (Frank Filippone) ([Leica] First official M(240) shots)
Reply from philippe.amard at sfr.fr (philippe.amard) ([Leica] First official M(240) shots)
In reply to:
Message from john at mcmaster.co.nz (John McMaster) ([Leica] First official M(240) shots)
Message from john at mcmaster.co.nz (John McMaster) ([Leica] First official M(240) shots)
Message from john at mcmaster.co.nz (John McMaster) ([Leica] First official M(240) shots)
Message from red735i at verizon.net (Frank Filippone) ([Leica] First official M(240) shots)
Message from philippe.amard at sfr.fr (philippe.amard) ([Leica] First official M(240) shots)