Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/03/15
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Hey, I would not object to 128,000 asa with a 16 stop DR.... john -----Original Message----- Exactly, THIS (the dynmaic range) is what makes a potential B&W sensor Leica appealing, not the high ISO derailment non-sense. On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 10:09 PM, John McMaster <john at chiaroscuro.co.nz>wrote: > Yes extended DR is what is needed. In bright light with the asph > lenses on the M9 I can get burnt out highlights, will try the new LR4 recovery..... > > john > > -----Original Message----- > > > Firmware makes a difference but from all Medium Format digital back > users, the story is pretty much that any of the back has sufficient > quality for most mortals. > > The difference mainly is from ISO (most goes up to ISO 800), long > exposure (some backs stop at around 32s, some go for 1 hour+) and > dynamic range (which is much greater than 35mm and below sensors, even > a back from 2005 would have 10-11 stops of dynamic range, the latest claims 12 stop). > > Of course, whenever Leica enters the picture, then you have the lens > quality and the ergonomic factor as well. > > On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 9:52 PM, John McMaster > <john at chiaroscuro.co.nz>wrote: > > > After this came up last time I think I changed my mind and now think > > it is the same overall chip in both as the S2 is not solely for it > > unlike > the M9. > > Not heard of microlenses in the S2, it has a far larger register > > distance than M, and wonder how much difference firmware makes to a > > CCD > performance? > > > > john > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > Yes, the difference in dimensions have been noted, as I said. They > > can still be the "same" sensor. Not like it's rocket science to > > arrange pixels from > > 30x45 to 33x44 :-) The more interesting question is whether S2 has > > microlens etc. that would make it better even using the same > > generation of technology. > > > > On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 9:13 PM, Geoff Hopkinson > > <hopsternew at gmail.com>wrote: > > > > > Huh? > > > > > > The S2 sensor is 30x45mm and 37.5mp The Pentax 645D sensor is > > > 33x44mm and 40mp Same pixel pitch I think FWIW Maybe the extra 3mm > > > are sawed off and the bits glued on to make up the width ;-) > > > Cheers, Geoff http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman > > > > > > > > > > > > On 16 March 2012 07:52, Richard Man <richard at richardmanphoto.com> > wrote: > > > > > > > Someone wrote a review of the S2 and claims that it and the > > > > Pentax 645D share the same sensor. Being smarter than I was when > > > > I made similar > > > comment > > > > here, I mentioned that the sensors are different dimensions and > > > > I asked > > > are > > > > there real evidence that they are the same sensor or at least > > > > share the same technology. Here's the reply: > > > > > > > > *** > > > > Kodak removed the specs of the sensor when the S2 was released > > > > so > > > customers > > > > could not get the information, but supposedly the sensors in the > > > > two cameras are from the same generation and share the same > technology. > > > > It is definitely a Kodak sensor--KAF 37500. > > > > > > > > http://www.kodak.com/ek/US/en/Image_...hotography.htm< > > > > > > > http://www.kodak.com/ek/US/en/Image_Sensor_Solutions/KODAK_CCD_Ima > > > ge _S ensors_Power_New_Cameras_for_Professional_Photography.htm > > > > > > > > > &&&& > > > > > > > > Does anyone know if the S2 has microlens ala M9 or is that > > > > deemed not necessary? > > > > > > > > Thread here: > > > > > > > > > > > http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/medium-format-systems-digital-backs/ > > > 35 > > > 51 > > > 1-multi-part-leica-s2-review.html > > > >