MFT sensor better than Leica FF sensor?

Discussion in 'Open Discussion' started by Chrisnmn, Mar 7, 2013.

  1. Chrisnmn

    Chrisnmn Mu-43 All-Pro

    Apr 26, 2012
    Auckland, New Zealand
    Real Name:
  2. veereshai

    veereshai Mu-43 Top Veteran

    May 12, 2011
    Arlington, VA
    Yeah, they're comparing the old camera (Type 220) I guess. That was being discussed on FM too.
  3. RevBob

    RevBob Super Moderator

    Jun 4, 2011
    NorthWestern PA
    Real Name:
    Interesting numbers, but numbers rarely tell the whole story. Plus, lenses matter. Still, a bit surprising. :cool:
  4. RobWatson

    RobWatson Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Seriously, have you tried to stuff a FF sensor into and MFT body? FF is ueless for MFT bodies. MFT sensors are practically made to fit into MFT bodies so of course they are better.
  5. flash

    flash Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Apr 29, 2010
    1 hour from Sydney Australia.
    Real Name:
    I have both. No CCD sensor is going to beat a modern CMOS sensor in noise control. Not even the ones in medium format sensors. CCD's have never been noise champions at even medium ISO's. I don't know why people keep beating this dead horse. But a low ISO's the M9/ME stomps the EM5 into dust in per pixel sharpness and overall detail.

  6. JJJPhoto

    JJJPhoto Mu-43 Veteran

    Jul 8, 2011
    Cincinnati, OH
    Real Name:
    Jerry Jackson Jr
    Weird ... I was on another photography forum where almost the exact same discussion is happening ... complete with DXOmark comparisons between Leicas and another camera.

    I'll say the same thing that I said there ... you can't be analytical or scientific when talking about Leica.

    Why buy a Leica?

    Because Leica's are made by magical photographic fairies riding unicorns living on an island of clouds surrounded by an ocean of dreams.

    It's not even "the red dot effect" ... you can buy the actual M-series Leica red dot badge part for $20 or less online so "the red dot" isn't the source of the insane price:

    I blame the high prices on import taxes and levies to offset the lost wages of local camera gnomes and lens trolls. ;)

    Yes, I'm being VERY silly ... but trying to dismiss great photographic tools like Leica M-series bodies and lenses simply because of the DXOmark scores is equally silly. A quality camera is more than the sum of its parts ... regardless of the manufacturer.
    • Like Like x 2
  7. Bhupinder2002

    Bhupinder2002 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Hi Chris
    Thanks for sharing but I think we all need to move one step higher than mft vs FF argument..We live in fast changing modern world where everything becomes outdated the moment you walk out of the shop. Leica will suit some and mft ,dslr,p&s others but we all need to remember that cameras are just tools .Now regarding DXO , I would always take this all with a pinch of salt. They gave quite low number to previous mft cameras where as they performed very well in real life situations very well. I won't be shocked if Sony's 1 inch sensor in 2015 outperforms today`s mft sensor .But its all good for us.Having said that , I will never buy Leica at that price even if I have a million dollar at my disposal . The company makes cameras for themselves and photographers share the cost for quality . They also move quite slowly with modern technology . But as long as there are some happy buyers.. it will work very well.
    • Like Like x 2
  8. digitalandfilm

    digitalandfilm Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jul 18, 2011
    • Like Like x 1
  9. Kingsfan

    Kingsfan Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Nov 22, 2010
    highland park, CA
    Real Name:
    my red dot looks like gaffers tape...
  10. Chrisnmn

    Chrisnmn Mu-43 All-Pro

    Apr 26, 2012
    Auckland, New Zealand
    Real Name:
    :drinks: I agree with every single word you said.

    I didnt post this because I believe in the this vs that vs this other one thing. I did it because i know that some "gear heads" and "purists" will not let this pass without saying a word....And sometimes is "fun" to read how they rip their heads off just because "this" has 1/3 better whatever than this "other one".

    When i came to m43 a year ago, I came having owned and loved a 5DMKII, so I definitely didnt come here looking on charts or anything like that. I came because the "overall" experience of shooting m43 was "better" for me.

    I do understand that a $500 camera "should not" be better than a $1.000 or a $10.000 one. Yes there are some cases of this can "match" this other one (which is what i believe my OMD does and why i love it).

    Technology nowadays is collapsed and nonsense. Its absurd that theres 2 or 3 new camera models every year same with computers or iToys in general. People and their wallets simply cannot catch up with it. So i do understand that my OMD is already or about to be "obsolete". But still is going to take the same jawdropping images in 5 or 10 years. of course if it doesnt break first.

    I should resume this, as I love taking pictures with whatever camera suits me at the time. film, digital, 10megapixels or 100 Im still going to take photos of my cat and the sunset in the afternoon. right?.

    It would be fun to see this chart posted over at the DPreview war-camp!.

    cheers everyone! :drinks:
    • Like Like x 1
  11. ptolemyx

    ptolemyx Mu-43 Veteran

    Jun 19, 2012
    Vancouver, BC
    Real Name:
    DxO scores are the very embodiment of reductio ad absurdum, the distillation of the entire photographic experience into a single number whose meaning is nil outside a sea of caveats and fine print.

    But ...

    I always knew Leicas were overrated, and now we have proof! As Nelson would say, HAW-HAW!
  12. Lawrence A.

    Lawrence A. Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 14, 2012
    New Mexico
    Real Name:
    I'd buy the Leica if I could afford it for the simple reason that no one else makes a real digital rangefinder. There are the Fuji rangefinder "style" cameras, and they are wonderful; I love my X100. But I also love shooting real rangefinders, and right now Leica is the only show in town.
  13. RobWatson

    RobWatson Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    What does this have to do with CCD vs CMOS as opposed to pixel pitch and possibly microlens array properties compared to the primary optic one uses?

    How come all the most noise critical scientific imaging is done using CCD and never CMOS?
  14. Ned

    Ned Mu-43 Legend

    Jul 18, 2010
    Alberta, Canada
    Yeah, the new Micro Four-Thirds sensor probably is better than the Leica sensor. That doesn't just make the system better, as 4/3 users have been trying to teach APS-C and Full Frame DSLR users for so many years. Leica glass is still amazing. "The lens is mightier than the sensor" has always been the 4/3 mantra. Now somebody can finally use that mantra on us.

    Besides which, I take Dx0Mark with a grain of salt anyways. :)
    • Like Like x 1
  15. usayit

    usayit Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    ugh.... more seeking assurance that the camera of choosing isn't utter crap. No camera in the market today is crap.... they all provide enough quality that most wouldn't even push the equipment to the limits. I don't quite understand why people insist on comparison to this or that... look at me... my turbo'd civic is faster than that Ferrari syndrome.

    BTW... our beloved OMD E-M5 is bested by the "entry level" Nikon D5100 at less than 1/2 the price. So I think we should dump everything and go Nikon!

    PS> There is no such thing as Leica Fairy dust...
    • Like Like x 1
  16. Bhupinder2002

    Bhupinder2002 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Hi Chris ..
    Good luck man , guns are out in Leica camp:biggrin::biggrin:
    By the way I read Nikon D5100 is better than OMD:) but not for me at least .
  17. drd1135

    drd1135 Zen Snapshooter

    Mar 17, 2011
    Southwest Virginia
    Real Name:
    I went to look up the Leica, not being familiar with this model. I found this comment in the reviews:

    "The CCD sensor in the M9 and M-E bucks the CMOS trend and certainly affords this camera a unique image signature."

    It made me laugh because it says nothing about whether the sensor is any good. :biggrin: I'm sure it's a wonderful camera that I would greatly enjoy; I'm just making fun of the comment.
  18. usayit

    usayit Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Leica M9 CCD was sourced from Kodak (we all know what's happening to them)... the move the CMOS could have potentially upset some of the very conservative M shooters that resist any change impact the "formula". The design differences in the new M240 was enough to cause some grumbling among their ranks... much less a core change in the sensor.

    fill in the blanks.... marketing marketing marketing.
  19. flash

    flash Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Apr 29, 2010
    1 hour from Sydney Australia.
    Real Name:
    Nothing. You've cherry picked a couple of words from a sentence that made no mention of CCD vs CMOS. That sentence made a comparison of the sensor in the EM5 vs one in the M9, regardless of type.

    Almost all scientific CCDs are super cooled to reduce noise. There are also some fairly significant differences on the analogue to digital converter pipeline that are possible if you have more physical space. Under these conditions CCD sensors can record lower noise levels than a CMOS sensor in the same conditions. This simply isn't possible in a portable camera at this time. In our normal world, outside a lab or a Observatory, CCDs are far more heat sensitive than CMOS sensors and heat up much faster. In normal temperatures CMOS sensors have lower noise within the limitations of current development, and also heat up less rapidly. This is also why the M9 and ME cameras are time limited to 4 minutes even in bulb mode.

    • Like Like x 1
  20. RT_Panther

    RT_Panther Mu-43 Legend

    May 4, 2011
    I'll still take a Foveon in the studio & at ISO 200 and lower :tongue::biggrin: