[Leica] New M(246) Outputs 12 bit Files

[Mark Rabiner]

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.
And with a Terabyte hard disk costing $99 plus tax and license I don't car
if they take up more space. Space is close to free. But they say its not
really a vacuum.

12 bit has 4,096 Total distinct values    (TDV's)
14 bit has 16,384 Total distinct values
That's a lot more values!  12,288 of them!
I value those values! Why not I have nothing else better to do in my spare
time!?


On 5/6/15 2:54 AM, "Peter Klein" <boulanger.croissant at gmail.com> wrote:

>  This is been discussed extensively on the LUF. A  gentlemen
> dubbed "lenshacker" has discussed how he sees pattern noise in M246 files,
> but sees only random noise in the MM files.  He's someone with extensive
> experience in digital signal processing.  What he saying is that the
> stripping off two bits of real information causes the noise to get less
> random, to go from not there to there in such a way that patterns start to
> emerge.   Faint bands as opposed to random quote peppering" of noise. It
> sounds a lot like Schrodinger's cat, but you can see it if you pixel peep.
> How much it will matter  in real photographs, I don't know.
> 
>  As to why Leica made this choice, who knows? It might be a matter of
> acceptably fast processing speed, or that the imaging hardware can't handle
> the extra bits meaningfully.
> 
>  But I remember what Leica said about the M8 compressed DNG files.   They
> said that nobody could tell the difference between the compressed
> vs. uncompressed files. But now we've discovered the way to make the M8
> output uncompressed raw files, and the truth is more complicated.   The
> compression doesn't matter in well-lit scenes where you're not going to
> tweak the curves too far. But in low-light files it matters a lot.  I've
> seen the difference with my own eyes in my own photographs. So I wouldn't
> discount this argument as one of those mythical medieval discussions about
> the number of angels that can dance on the head of a pin.
> 
> -- Peter, picking a peck of peppered pixels
> 
> 
> On Tuesday, May 5, 2015, Richard Man <richard at richardmanphoto.com> wrote:
> 
>> Jim, re: write speed
>> 12 bits is a bit PITA to carry around. Usually 16 bits is used and the
>> software just ignores the 4 unused bits.
>> 
>> On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 8:10 PM, Jim Nichols <jhnichols at lighttube.net
>> <javascript:;>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Wouldn't it also affect write speeds?  What if Leica puts more value on
>>> speed than on bit depths?
>>> 
>>> Jim Nichols
>>> Tullahoma, TN USA
>>> 
>>> On 5/5/2015 10:04 PM, Doug Herr wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Sometimes the published bit depth has more to do with marketing than
>>>> anything else.
>>>> 
>>>> Doug Herr
>>>> Birdman of Sacramento
>>>> http://www.wildlightphoto.com
>>>> http://doug-herr.fineartamerica.com
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> 
>>>>> From: Richard Man <richard at richardmanphoto.com <javascript:;>>
>>>>> Sent: May 5, 2015 6:01 PM
>>>>> To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org <javascript:;>>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [Leica] New M(246) Outputs 12 bit Files
>>>>> 
>>>>> The "bit-depth" is not dependent on the format. If 12 bits is good
>> enough
>>>>> for 35mm sensor, then it would be good enough for medium format sensor,
>>>>> and
>>>>> vice versa.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Note that I have not said what I think personally on the technical
>>>>> merits.
>>>>> I am just giving out the perspective that the decision is almost
>>>>> certainly
>>>>> financial related rather than based on technical analysis.
>> 
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/