Jump to content

Photokina 2016


IkarusJohn

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

While the "New M Camera in September 2016" thread drones on and on, we have Michael Hussman saying no new M at Photokina and a curious silence from Jono Slack (which usually means a new product being put through its paces).  There will be a new M at some point (2017?), it looks like there will be a new T (T2?) and at some point Leica will have to do something with the X line of cameras - the X-U was new this year.  Will we see an X3?  Presumably the much loved X-Vario will join the Digiliux-2 as a distant memory.  Not sure what is in place for the S, as the S(007) is still pretty new.

 

Meanwhile, this is what Leica has to say about Photokina:

 

On the completely redesigned stand in Hall 2.1, professional users and visitors to the show will be able to find information and comprehensive advice on the broad spectrum of professional tools and services available for all photographic applications and scenarios. In addition to the Leica S medium format system, the focus here will also be set on the mirrorless Leica SL-System, the legendary Leica M rangefinder system and Leica’s world-renowned precision lenses ‘made in Germany’. The presence at the show will be dedicated to the presentation of professional product solutions and the latest technological developments, and will also be showcasing the multiple award winning, premium Cine lenses manufactured by CW Sonderoptic and the wide range of professional photographic products from Sinar Photography.

 

Not many clues there, other than the way in which Leica sees its "professional" (read, expensive) product lines.  I don't buy into the hype over a new M camera, or at least one that is ground breaking.  The M is about the optical coupled rangefinder and manual focus lenses.  Call me a pessimist, but I think the M camera has hit a technological brick wall (glass ceiling if you prefer) where Leica has extracted as much out of that core functionality that it can - optical coupled rangefinder with a fixed, parallax focal spot.  As I see it, Leica has two choices with the M camera - (1) iterative improvement, or (2) do something revolutionary with the M system, while continuing to offer the iterative option for the purists (like the M(262), the Monochrom and the M-D).

 

What that revolutionary M would look like is anyone's guess - in order to really move on, Leica needs to lose the coupled rangefinder, while retaining the M mount.  You can see they have flirted with this with the T (with M-L adapter) and the SL (with the same adapter).  Neither quite does it, though.  The T has an APS-C sensor, and is too iPhone like for some (I really liked it, but the EVF let it down), whereas while the SL is better with M lenses than the M camera (well, my M lenses, anyway) it is too big and has too many functions linked to the AF functionality of the SL system.  There's still a gap for people wanting the best that technology has to offer in the M form factor, making the most of M lenses (PeterH).

 

So, will Leica offer an M mount camera with the SL's EVF?  Would certainly hope so.  While I love my M cameras, the optical viewfinder is an obstacle to so much  - movable focal point, single framellines, magnification for focusing and accurate focusing (rather than what can be a lottery over whether or all your M lenses are accurately calibrated to all your M cameras).  Digital requires more than the simplicity of what we had with film, and Leica needs to grasp this particular nettle by cutting the optical view finder lose - at least from one M mount camera.  Doesn't need to be AF, but it does need to embrace all that technology has to offer.  The M(240) signalled this, but in a clunkish way.  Won't be popular with the purists, but provided Leica caries over the enhancements in the next M(262) version, it should keep them quiet.

 

Why should Leica do this?  M lenses, and the M ethos of simplicity.  That can still survive, provided the EVF based M camera retains the rest of what makes the M cameras so good - the optical viewfinder holds it back (in part); that, and the baseplate (seriously?  time to move on).

 

Meanwhile, over on Leica Rumours, there's a sneak preview of the corner of a new Sinar camera - could Leica be joining the mirrorless medium format race?  We already have the Hasselblad X1D-50c and Fuji looks like they'll be releasing a similar product with a zoom and two primes.  Those two cameras use the same excellent Sony sensor that's in the H6D-50c, the Pentax 645Z and the PhaseOne digital back.  Will the Sinar be a similar product with the Leica sensor from the S(007)?

 

Then again, Leica might just be offering another Sinar mounting system with its excellent lenses and the S camera as a digital back; and, of course, advice to professionals and some lovely photos in its gallery ...

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, MF EVF-based (EFC*) cameras seem to be the trend. 

 

 

*  I agree with Sean Reid on his dislike for the term 'mirrorless' cameras, which technically would include the M.  As he wrote on the SL:

 

 Many people use the term “mirrorless” for these cameras but I don’t do that because it isn’t a very good descriptor (it’s actually a marketing term Panasonic invented many years ago for a set of press releases). We define other cameras by the ways they allow us to see and focus the subject: SLR, rangefinder, window finder, etc. We don’t try to define them by what they don’t have. There are reasons why we don’t still refer to automobiles as “horseless” carriages. There are several camera types that don’t use mirrors. The SL is one of them – an electronic finder camera, an EFC.

 

Jeff

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 ............ 

Meanwhile, over on Leica Rumours, there's a sneak preview of the corner of a new Sinar camera - could Leica be joining the mirrorless medium format race?  We already have the Hasselblad X1D-50c and Fuji looks like they'll be releasing a similar product with a zoom and two primes.  Those two cameras use the same excellent Sony sensor that's in the H6D-50c, the Pentax 645Z and the PhaseOne digital back.  Will the Sinar be a similar product with the Leica sensor from the S(007)?

 

Then again, Leica might just be offering another Sinar mounting system with its excellent lenses and the S camera as a digital back; and, of course, advice to professionals and some lovely photos in its gallery ...

My thoughts exactly..... See my post mid July

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/262630-lets-dream-large-lets-talk-8854/

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, MF EVF-based (EFC*) cameras seem to be the trend. 

 

 

*  I agree with Sean Reid on his dislike for the term 'mirrorless' cameras, which technically would include the M.  As he wrote on the SL:

 

 Many people use the term “mirrorless” for these cameras but I don’t do that because it isn’t a very good descriptor (it’s actually a marketing term Panasonic invented many years ago for a set of press releases). We define other cameras by the ways they allow us to see and focus the subject: SLR, rangefinder, window finder, etc. We don’t try to define them by what they don’t have. There are reasons why we don’t still refer to automobiles as “horseless” carriages. There are several camera types that don’t use mirrors. The SL is one of them – an electronic finder camera, an EFC.

 

Jeff

 

One of my problems with Sean (and I admit, I have more than a few) is his desire to invent his own language.

 

I prefer generally accepted usage (however inaccurate it may seem) - rangefinder (big bellows thing I had as a kid), coupled-rangefinder (M camera), digital coupled-rangefinder (M9 et al), SLR & dSLR, medium format SLR, and mirrorless - APS-c, full frame and medium format.  I don't think anyone is confused over what these tags mean.  Electronic finder camera?  Nah, that will never catch on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But EVF-based camera is what I say, and I think that's already fairly common usage.  I haven't subscribed to Sean in years, but I agree conceptually with his annoyance with the term mirrorless.  So be it.

 

Jeff

 

I don't think there is any confusion over "EVF based".  I can't get excited one way or the other.  I just don't like inventing things for a non-point, or torturing the language for no particular benefit.  All my cameras are "mirrorless" (SWC, M cameras and SL), so it is not a particularly good term of art.  EVF based?  That could cover a multitude of other options too.

 

The point being made is a camera which is roughly in the SLR field in terms of quality and functionality (whether 35mm or medium format) but which doesn't have a mirror box and prismatic view finder.  The term "single lens reflex" arose when cameras were either rangefinders or twin lens reflex (with the exception of the early 500 series Hasselblads).  Being single lens reflex defined their difference in the mass market.  The definitive point about the SL and the X1D is that they offer everything the top dSLRs offer, without the bulk and issues which go with the reflex mirror box system - hence "mirrorless".

 

It is a fair point, though - is EVF definitive?  What about EVIL?  I guess common usage will take over, in the way in which Panasonic apparently came up with "mirrorless".  Who came up with SLR?

Edited by IkarusJohn
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Everybody,

 

Don't forget that part of the problem might be that the current range/viewfinder is still very good.

 

And hard to improve on without substantial investment & commitment.

 

And it is tied to a middle 20th Century technology. Which is disappearing.

 

How does a Company justify investing a significant amount of both money & people in the last Century's technology when the rest of their camera body technological development is firmly planted in the future?

Best Regards,

 

Michael

Link to post
Share on other sites

When Leica declined to name the M240 as the M10, I got the impression it was because they anticipated having more frequent and more incremental model changes. That does not seem to have been the case: the M240 was quite a big step up from the M9, and now we're speculating what big changes they could bring to the next model. I would welcome a more incremental approach to bring in many of the desirable items on a year by year basis: new (but not necessarily more MP) sensor, new external EVF, bigger buffer, new processor. Why should they have to do them in one go every 3-4 years?

Edited by LocalHero1953
Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps a way of squaring the circle would be for Leica to release a full frame T as the T2, thereby meeting the persistent speculation that a T2 is on its way, and meeting the persistent demands for an EVIL "M". I believe there is no technical reason why the T body cannot accept a full frame sensor. It should have relatively cheap R&D costs, given the past investment in user interface software, body manufacture and the TL/SL mount.

 

Against this is the fact that Leica insisted that the T was not going to be a FF camera, and such a T2 is in no way consistent with Leica's marketing puff about Photokina being orientated to professionals this year.

 

I guess a FF EVIL might detract from sales of the M, but it's a gap in Leica's armoury that will have to be filled sometime.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You know what I mean!

The question what a full-frame Leica camera with a T mount (i.e. L mount) should look like has already been answered by Leica. In a few years there might be a new SL with a different design and feature set but for now, that’s what we’ve got.

Edited by mjh
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The question what a full-frame Leica camera with a T mount (i.e. L mount) should look like has already been answered by Leica. In a few years there might be a new SL with a different design and feature set but for now, that’s what we’ve got.

Sure, that's what Leica has decided so far.

It's not the same as what a full frame version of the T could look like.

In any case, I have the SL and I have no wish for a FF T2 myself.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice opening post John. I think you sum it up very well.

 

I can't begin to predict what Leica will do, only what I'd like them to do.

 

I doubt that Photokina will answer many of our questions though. It feels like it's going to be a longer process.

Edited by Peter H
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps a way of squaring the circle would be for Leica to release a full frame T as the T2, thereby meeting the persistent speculation that a T2 is on its way, and meeting the persistent demands for an EVIL "M". I believe there is no technical reason why the T body cannot accept a full frame sensor. It should have relatively cheap R&D costs, given the past investment in user interface software, body manufacture and the TL/SL mount.

 

Against this is the fact that Leica insisted that the T was not going to be a FF camera, and such a T2 is in no way consistent with Leica's marketing puff about Photokina being orientated to professionals this year.

 

I guess a FF EVIL might detract from sales of the M, but it's a gap in Leica's armoury that will have to be filled sometime.

 

Clearly any new T model with be APS-C sensor sized. As the APS-C lenses can be smaller than FF lenses so can the body.

 

The SL is the FF option. You can put the SL lenses on the T body - do you think that's a good match in terms of camera size to lens size? I don't.

 

As for the marketing puff you mention, we know we can't take anything that the Leica marketing dept. say too seriously, so yes it's just puff!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Clearly any new T model with be APS-C sensor sized. As the APS-C lenses can be smaller than FF lenses so can the body.

 

The SL is the FF option. You can put the SL lenses on the T body - do you think that's a good match in terms of camera size to lens size? I don't.

 

As for the marketing puff you mention, we know we can't take anything that the Leica marketing dept. say too seriously, so yes it's just puff!

I'm not sure why a new T has to be APS-C sized, unless a definition of a T is APS-C. 

Whatever letter it's called, there looks like enough room in the T body for a FF sensor.

It would accept M, T and SL lenses, with all the limitations they imply, as well as, presumably, a new range of lenses to match (if you scale up a T lens to FF does it have to be as big as a SL lens?)

 

Look, this is all speculation, so don't take it seriously - I'm not.

But I think that Leica, as a company that has survived near death and is expanding its range to meet both specialist demand and to broaden its market, does have a gap in its portfolio: an EVIL FF camera that is compact and digitally modern - and new buyers don't necessarily see the attractions of a rangefinder. Suggesting that the SL fills this gap is laughable. OTOH, Leica may conclude it is just not worth taking on Sony in the small FF market; so be it - but it remains a gap in their portfolio that might look even more uncomfortable in a few years time.

Edited by LocalHero1953
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure why a new T has to be APS-C sized, unless a definition of a T is APS-C. 

 

That's it, I think the T is/will always be an APS-C model.

 

I guess instead you could argue that Leica could make a 'budget' SL in a smaller body, but I don't see that as being very likely, not for the next few years at least.

 

OTOH a FF M mount EVF body....possible?

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's it, I think the T is/will always be an APS-C model.

 

I guess instead you could argue that Leica could make a 'budget' SL in a smaller body, but I don't see that as being very likely, not for the next few years at least.

 

OTOH a FF M mount EVF body....possible?

Perhaps a Q2?

I'd be surprised if Leica saw the M mount as the basis for any camera except the M. I think the L mount was developed for Leica's digital future across multiple digital bodies - two so far. One characteristic of their new technology in recent years has been their application across more than one platform: CNC machined aluminium bodies (T, SL), 4-button interfaces (S, SL), and the L mount (T, SL). It makes me wonder what the Q brought them: perhaps it was experience in how small you could make a FF EVF/AF camera (I know there are design benefits to a fixed lens, but despite what Leica and mjh have said, I don't see that the only EVIL version of the Q has to be the size of the SL).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...