rosuna

Yes.

I don't know if it is easy or not, but the idea is to preserve the M mount and distance to sensor. Around this common base you can build two different systems with partial interchangeability of lenses. You may have a EVIL based system with AF lenses, or a classical rangefinder system with manual focus lenses. You can also use MF lenses on the AF system, or the AF lenses on the rangefinder system (using the accessory EVF and manual focusing). On the other hand, the EVF would expand the possibilities of the rangefinder system, by allowing the use of "native" M mount macro lenses, wide angle lenses (current optical accessory viewfinders also override the viewfinder of the camera, isn't?), tele lenses, or R lenses with adapter.

A new system developed from scratch, without mirror, also requires an adapter for R lenses anyway, because the mount to sensor distance is too large in reflex systems.

The problem, as I see it, is a legacy reflex system with a too large mount to sensor distance (a mirror based system, and therefore a system with large lenses, and bodies), and a rangefinder system with a too short mount to sensor distance (and this means many technical problems, and therefore high costs), and they need a new system, based on the future possibilities, not past legacy. Therefore, they can develop a new separate system, or develop a new system connected to the M system, and exploit the synergies.

The M cameras need a revision of the electronic system anyway. CMOS sensors are very likely for the next model. Even Daniel is openly considering this possibility, and the Leica X1 has a CMOS sensor and Leica praises its low noise and high image quality.

The only problem with this strategy I can imagine is due to technical problems related to the (too) small mount to sensor distance of the M system.

The connection of the EVF and the camera isn't on the hot shoe, not for the Ricoh, the Olympus or the Panasonic. It is on a special separate port. The basic technology used by Ricoh or Olympus seems to be from Epson (Seiko). I don't say it is easy, or doable (considering japanese companies are very reluctant to "sell" sensible technology to non-japanese companies), but Leica has to solve similar technical problems, one way or another. Leica has problems even for getting high resolution LCD screens... so I am not very optimistic for the short term.

hoppyman

In a recent interview, I think it was Stefan Daniel who said 'the M is our heart'. Can't say it any better than that.

__________________
Geoff
' Because the M is our heart'
http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman

GreyCoupe

Andreas,

Thank you for sharing this information with us. Please let Leica know that we eagerly await any one of the three solutions they forecast for R lens owners.

__________________
I'm just waiting on a[n R]10...

GreyCoupe

Geoff,
They may indeed have the 'M in [their] heart', I just have my R lenses somewhere else, and there is very little light there, no sunshine at all.

__________________
I'm just waiting on a[n R]10...

leicapages

Well... I would expect a digital solution for the R series to be a true R camera, with 2010-like specifications:
- full frame 24x36 sensor
- no autofocus needed, but at least focus assist with existing manual R lenses
- no adaptor or whatever to use R lenses, but full compatibility without limitations
- focusing, viewfinder etc as in traditional R8/9 cameras - no exclusive use of an LCD display for focusing and no electronic viewfinder

If not, I will pass on.
Pascal

__________________
Pascal
http://www.leicapages.com
http://www.rolleiflexpages.com

LondonM

I have to say that focus assist on an M would be a God-send. So would some Leica quality zooms. As it stands, my M9 is for sale on ebay, as is all my Leica glass. I just returned from a 3 week vacation in Rome and the Mediterranean with just my M9 and iPad. The iPad will download DNGs, but not render them well. Only when I came home and loaded them into Aperture did I see that my ability to focus using a rangefinder is slowly diminishing. On shots where I had all the time in the world, I have perfect focus on my subject of interest. On anything even vaguely rushed, it's out of focus, especially with smaller apertures.

This likely has to do with the minor macular degeneration in my right eye, but it's preventing me from using the camera to its full potential, so what's the point ? I did much better with my D-Lux 4.

So I'll wait and see what gets released at Photokina 2010 from Leica, or go with the D700 or its successor.

russell

Any hints about a silver chrome M9? I've been holding off and this is one of the major reasons.

rosuna

The chrome finish, a much better LCD screen... I am waiting for several necessary improvements too...

I would prefer an all new M10 with a deep rethinking in the electronics heart and interface, but I don't want to wait 2 more years.

lieberdavid

Hi Everyone,

The S2 is being produced, so all the development costs for that camera are accounted for.

It seems to me that the simplest, quickest, and least expensive way forward for Leica to produce a camera for R lenses would be simply to take the S2, cut down the sensor to 24 x 36 and fit an R mount.

I confess to not being an engineer, but it seems obvious to me that will do the trick.

What am I not seeing?

Cheers!
David

gvaliquette

My ideal R solution would be a DMR-II, full frame, usable on the R8-R9, nothing more. They already have all the technology, there are enough R8-R9s around and a DMR-II would reassure their R customer base. Then, Leica can develop the R11 without any rush, add focus confirmation and other goodies, and relaunch the R lenses line.

It does make sense and should even be viable!

Guy

lieberdavid

Hi Everyone,

I thought that one of the design problems with the DMR that could not be solved was that Leica could not make it full frame.

Cheers!
David

redbaron

What exactly is a "necessary improvement"?

hoppyman

David, Leica Camera said that the R10 would have had to sell for 6000 to 7000 EURO and would not be successful in the crowded dSLR market at that price. That camera would have had its own AF R lenses and probably could have also used the older R lenses

A basic S2 body in Berlin today is listed at 18600 EURO. Even with a very unlikely scenario that the S2 with a new dedicated 24x36 sensor (the M9 sensor would not be usable) could be produced for a third of the current price it still would be no cheaper than the cancelled R10. All of that is not even addressing the large engineering issues and development costs naturally.

__________________
Geoff
' Because the M is our heart'
http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman

giordano

The size of the S2 mirror and focusing screen mean that the body is too thick for R lenses. To make a slimmer body would involve a new mirror box (hence mirror mechanism including secondary mirror(s) for AF and exposure sensors), focusing screen, and finder optics and displays. So it's not as simple as one might hope ... even if one ignores the pricing problem pointed out by hoppyman.

__________________
John
Pictures at http://jn.smugmug.com