To this day there are individuals that prefer CCD sensors, like the one in the Leica M9, thinking they are superior to the now widely used CMOS sensors like in the Leica M240. Whenever a discussion comes up, evaluating the Leica M9 compared to the Leica M240, there will inevitably be comments that claim that the image quality of the Leica M 240 is inferior to the M9, that the CCD sensor in the M9 is superior to the CMOS sensor in the Leica M 240. Some even go so far as to ask for the return to CCD sensor in future Leicas.
I personally have never subscribed to that way of thinking at all, as a matter of fact, I have always thought that fundamentally there is no great difference in the way the two different sensors perform.
Unfortunately, I have never had a chance to make any direct comparisons, and I am happy to report that this is no longer necessary. That task has been very eloquently performed by David Farkas of the Leica Store Miami. He took this very subject to task in a three part series in the Red Dot Forum (www.reddotforum.com), titled
“The Great Debate: CCD vs. CMOS”.
In the first part, David showed a relatively large number of photos taken of the same subject with both cameras. He then posted the pictures with no identification, but asked the readers to try to identify which picture had been taken with which camera.
The results were inconclusive with an almost even split of wrong and right answers.
image 1 image 2
Which image is from the M9
In the second part, David again showed photographs, also without identification. But this time only one example was shown in each instance, and the readers were asked to identify if the picture was taken with an M9 or Leica M 240 camera. Again, the answers showed no identifiable ability to tell the two cameras apart.
Finally, in the third and last part, David evaluated the results he obtained. In his final thoughts he writes:
“For me, and I imagine for many others who couldn’t tell a definitive difference between either the head-to-head match-ups in Part 1 or the individual shots in Part 2, the results of the experiment are fairly clear. To restate: the hypothesis being tested was to see if the CCD look is real, unmistakable and couldn’t be emulated in post processing. To this end, I think I have at least demonstrated that with just a small amount of global adjustments in Lightroom, M240 files could make for some convincing M9 shots. And while I will give credit to the M9 for the great images it is capable of capturing, the M240 is still a better overall system. I would advise against forsaking the usability and image quality benefits of the newer generation CMOS-based camera based on the conviction that the CCD-based M9 offers superior color rendering. As I already mentioned above, the M9 can turn out gorgeous images. This was never up for debate. In fact, for those that absolutely, positively, just adore the look of CCD, and hold the results of this test as even greater evidence of its superiority, then there is good news. Used M9s can be had for around $3,000 and Leica still offers a CCD-based camera brand new, the Leica M-E for $4,995.
But, I do believe that much of the public perceived shortcomings of the M240 look come from its inherent higher dynamic range, the resulting flatter default files, and some users not taking full advantage of both the malleability of the M240 DNG files and the flexibility afforded them in Lightroom. We live in a wonderful time for photography. Our tools in the field and in the digital darkroom are better and more elastic than they’ve ever been. As photographers, our vision is only limited by our own creativity. Perhaps it’s time to put the CCD vs. CMOS debate to rest and just go out and shoot.”
Leica M9 or M 240?
It is nice to see someone verifying what I have thought all along. In the final analysis, the Leica M 240 is the better of the two cameras. Not only does it render at least equal results. With its higher resolution, the final image quality has to be superior. The Leica M 240 is also a more capable camera in other respects, like featuring live view and the electronic Visoflex as an accessory, making close-up photography and photography with long lenses possible. Also, with the Leica R adapter, the M240 is perfectly capable to utilize the Leica R lenses just, as with other adapters, it can be equipped with lenses from a large number of other manufacturers. While not for everyone, the motion picture capabilities need to be mentioned as well. In addition, there are several other features not found in the Leica M9.
This doesn’t mean that the M9 suddenly is a bad camera. To the contrary, as David Farkas mentions on several occasions, the M9 is a very capable camera. The M240 is simply more capable, part of which is the result of Leica having switched to the CMOS sensor.
For other articles on this blog scroll down in the column to the right to BLOG ARCHIVE
To comment or to read comments please scroll past the ads below.
All ads present items of interest to Leica owners.
___________________________________________________________________________
To comment or to read comments please scroll past the ads below.
All ads present items of interest to Leica owners.
___________________________________________________________________________
Buy vintage Leica cameras from
America's premier Leica specialist
http://www.tamarkinauctions.com/ http://www.tamarkin.com/leicagallery/upcoming-show
PLEASE NOTE: THE NEXT TAMARKIN RARE CAMERA AUCTION IS ON NOVEMBER 11, 2017
Buy vintage Leica cameras from
America's premier Leica specialist
http://www.tamarkinauctions.com/ http://www.tamarkin.com/leicagallery/upcoming-show
PLEASE NOTE: THE NEXT TAMARKIN RARE CAMERA AUCTION IS ON NOVEMBER 11, 2017
Click on image to enlarge
Order: info@gmpphoto.com
Please make payment via PayPal to GMP Photography
Click on image to enlarge
Order: info@gmpphoto.com
Click on image to enlarge
Order: info@gmpphoto.com
Click on image to enlarge
Order: info@gmpphoto.com
Please make payment via PayPal to GMP Photography
Click on image to enlarge
Order: info@gmpphoto.com
Please make payment via PayPal to GMP Photography
Click on image to enlarge
Order: info@gmpphoto.com
Please make payment via PayPal to GMP Photography
This appears to be outdated since it does not include the Leica M10
ReplyDeleteYou are correct, the Leica M240 has been replaced by the Leica M10 which in many comparisons has shown to be an even better performer. However, this comparison was not a test of individual cameras as much as a comparison between sensors.
ReplyDeleteBut the results were tweaked in Lightroom. Shouldn't the comparison have been made with the results as they straight out of the camera?
ReplyDeleteNo. Using results straight out of the camera without ever optimizing them is pretty much giving the assurance that the potential of any camera is not met. People always lament that digital requires modification in Lightroom, Photoshop or similar programs while analog photography did not require that. This is a common fallacy, because analog photography always required considerable modification, the only thing being that most individuals never needed to do this themselves because they sent their films to a lab which did the work for them. anyone who has ever done their own developing and printing, especially in color, will know that good results never happened without considerable additional input.
ReplyDeleteCCD or CMOS. Nonsense Every Leica owner likes the one that is his. :-)
ReplyDeleteThere is a lot of truth to that, however, the article clearly shows that the differences are rather small and certainly not at a level that warrants claim of superiority of one sensor over another.
DeleteTerry Clark wrote:
ReplyDeleteParaphrasing Ansel Adams, the most important part of the camera is 12" behind the sensor.
Wilson Laidlaw commented:
ReplyDeleteLeica were not going to look at their M9's Kodak designed sensor and say to themselves: "Ok guys now lets make something worse for our next camera". The SL sensor is another small step on from the M240 and the M10 better again. Technology rarely makes a backwards step. I have the M8, M9, M240 and SL but not the M10, as I am waiting for the M240 replacement.
To that you can add the fact that CMOS sensors have a slew of other, technical advantages and it would have been rather shortsighted for Leica not to take advantage of that.
Delete鄭堯文 wrote:
ReplyDeleteLFI 2017/March has made some quite short but official test on the color performance of M9, 240, and M10. The conclusion is M9~=M10 != M240
I used S007 (CMOS) and S2-P (CCD) which one did I keep? Both! It's purely a personal choice. I like the Summicron-S 100 on S2-P and Super Elmar S 24mm on S007!.
ReplyDeleteGuillermo Ceniceros wrote:
ReplyDeleteAnalysis that shows no clear superiority either way. However the conclusion is that the M240 is superior! Of course this conclusion by a staffer of a Leica store ;-) I have an M9 and have tried an M240. I like the look of the M9 files better, it is subjective but that is how it feels to me. The files of the M240 feel more generic, like those of a Sony or Canon. Splitting hairs too, the way technology has gone today there aren't any bad cameras.
Andrew Fishkin answered:
ReplyDeleteI think that the M240 sensor is superior in every technical way to the M9 sensor (as the M10 sensor is to the M240 sensor), but, and its a VERY big but, the DNG files, which are already "processed" a certain way by the camera firmware (think different filmstocks) give a different starting point for post-processing.
I'm sure that what most people like about the M9 is that the files came out of the camera pretty close to where fans wanted the final image to be, where M240 files came out flatter, which have a lot more potential in them, but are underwhelming right out of the camera and can take more work to get right for someone accustomed to the M9.
I upgraded from the M-E (M9) to the M-D (M240) and now that I am used to processing M-D files get better results than I did with the M-E. I am certain I would have a similar experience if and when I move to the M10.
I have long thought along the same lines. Most modern cameras have a lot more potential beyond what comes straight out of the camera. If you want to stay away from post processing, if you want to use the images as they come straight out of the camera, a cell phone might be a better choice.
Delete