[Leica] More management blabla

[henningw at archiphoto.com (Henning Wulff)]

At 10:48 AM -0400 3/10/08, Don Dory wrote:
>Michiel,I bet they haven't actually built an R lens in over two years.  When
>LHSA was at the factory in 2006/10 they only had M lenses in production.  It
>makes no sense to have an oversize sensor when you can get over 22MP out of
>24x36 and ISO's over 3200 that look very good by any standard.  What does
>make sense is to increase bit depth as the new processors(see Brian's quad
>processor MAC) can handle 64bit files.



There is a confusion here between bit depth and bit width, and 
neither has anything to with dynamic range per se. Sensor and capture 
file depth beyond 16 bits is a little pointless at this stage of 
digital photography, while 64 bit data path width is very definitely 
a useful processing parameter. Dynamic range depends largely on the 
(mostly analog) efficiency of the sensor bit buckets, and any 
increase there is hugely beneficial, but that benefit can already be 
seen and exploited in 8 bit jpegs processed on 16bit wide processors.

Since dynamic range, noise floor and low noise - high ISO performance 
are all intimately related, maybe Nikon's new sensor advances will 
also lead to significant benefits in dynamic range, should they make 
that their focus in their hi-res camera.


That could increase dynamic range in
>the file and improve color performance.  Last, finer pixel pitch works in
>Leica's favor as it showcases the lenses.
>
>But, just a WAG, could Leica be talking to Canon as a sensor provider?  With
>Erwin doing puff pieces on Canon glass can an arrangement  be far behind.
>  Panasonic can't seem to build enough of the desirable small cameras to 
> meet
>demand; that opens the door for possible new arrangements.
>

-- 
    *            Henning J. Wulff
   /|\      Wulff Photography & Design
  /###\   mailto:henningw@archiphoto.com
  |[ ]|     http://www.archiphoto.com