Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2015/05/06
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Leica had to know it was going to have all eyes on them when it downgraded the new Monochrom model to 12 instead of 14 bit so one could assume that they'd have plenty to back it up. And that would be the quality of the final product, the image, again. I'm not believing they did it to save a buck or shave a few microseconds off the speed and or buffer size. I think its an issue they're going to explain to all the news lists going crazy over it right now like us but the have the timing down as to when exactly is the right time to do it. I'm guessing a few weeks when they have some big prints out there in view. Also magazine of web articles from some of the people using it gushing about how great it is. They've handed out a few cameras to pros and people like Erwin. On 5/6/15 1:49 PM, "Frank Filippone" <red735i at verizon.net> wrote: > You are dealing with too many variables to establish cost difference in the > 2 sensors in question. > > If you were to ask me if there was any difference in the cost of the ADC on > the chip between the 12 and 14 bit resolution, all other things equal ( > which they are not), the difference in cost is negligible. Even the larger > processing engine ( Maestro, which is probably 16 bits anyway) ) and > related > chip costs ( temporary storage of 12 vs 14 bit data, etc) , are negligible. > > The dominant by far issue in chip yield is size of the chip. The sensor > chips are huge, loaded with sensor pixels. The overhead electronics, > including the ADC, is relatively small, like a 1-10% issue, and maybe > less. > The difference between 12 and 14 bits is 2/12 or 17%, on less than 1% of > chip area... Tiny is an overstatement. > > If you want to know the difference in cost to the consumer of the complete > camera, if one were to use a 2 or 14 bit ADC, then the only costs I could > figure relevant is the size of the temporary buffer that stores the images > before they get transferred to the SD card. I don't think it is really an > issue... since memory chips are only available in certain sizes ( usually > in > 4x increments: 4MB, 16MB, 64MB, 256MB.. you get the idea) and usually the > solution is to store less images and cut back on the buffer SIZE in image > quantity.... 14 in storage with a 12 bit ADC vs 12 in storage with a 12 bit > ADC is, if not purely correct, the right concept. Ie, NADA effect on final > cost. > > What effects final consumer cost the most is .... wait for it.... you know > it is coming.... Greed. Profit. Meeting Shareholder expectations. Getting > the most bucks from Bob. > > All other things on a level playing field. > > Frank Filippone > Red735i at verizon.net > > > -----Original Message----- > From: LUG [mailto:lug-bounces+red735i=verizon.net at leica-users.org] On > Behalf > Of Steve Barbour > Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 2015 10:27 AM > To: Leica LUG > Subject: Re: [Leica] New M(246) Outputs 12 bit Files > > >> On May 6, 2015, at 10:17 AM, Frank Filippone <red735i at verizon.net> >> wrote: >> >> Mark and others.... >> >> The issue of 12 vs 14 bits is not straight forward..... Yes, the >> difference in a straight line way is 4 times the data, but really that >> means there is 4 times the GRADATION in the data. More gradation = >> more smooth transitions between different tones. >> >> Assuming the saturation point ( top value) and lowest point ( pure >> black, as in more black is just not possible) remain fixed. Then there >> could be a bit of non linear-ness to the ADC... There may be more >> values in the bright areas, and less in the dark areas.... still >> achieving the same dynamic range,. But 12 bits and 14 bits could have >> different non-linear transfer functions.... Which, in the context of >> photography, may not be at all easy to see with the eyes. >> >> Let me stop here... I spent the better part of my working career in >> understanding the intricacies of ADC products. If I go any further in the >> explanation, I will lose almost everyone. Suffice it to say that what > we >> do not know exceeds what we do know. >> >> Yes, there is a story out there... Yes it is important that we know >> what that story is, in theory. In practice, the M246 seems to produce >> better images than the MM.... 12 bits 14 bits or some other number of > bits. >> >> I agree with Mark.. HDD storage is so cheap that 12 vs 14 bits is a >> ridiculous reason to chintz on the ADC resolution. There is some >> other reason. > > > Frank ...how bout in the cost of the camera, 14 v 12 bit, is there a big > difference, so some one could think after reading the morning paper, the > images look about the same so we'll same some money in the camera cost, > both manufacture and cost to the consumer, i.e. they were just trying to > save some money so Bob could afford groceries..... > > > steve > > >> >> >> Or, someone made a bad assumption in the first place and this whole >> thread is a waste of time. >> >> Frank Filippone >> Red735i at verizon.net >> >> Peter according to some guy on the internet its not a matter of a few >> steps up from 12 to 14 bit. Its 4 times as many shades of intensity >> in a given range. >> That sounds like a big deal for me. >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information -- Mark William Rabiner Photographer http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/