Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

but when it becomes technically possible to put video inside M without intruding the process of taken stills

 

Let's resume this discussion when or if it becomes technically possible.

 

As soon there are real options, it is at least possible to discuss pros and cons in a kind of meaningful way.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's resume this discussion when or if it becomes technically possible.

 

As soon there are real options, it is at least possible to discuss pros and cons in a kind of meaningful way.

 

It is technically possible. If Leica was thinking about it the next stage would be announcing it, all the technology is available. But by which time talking about it may seem like shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted. I'd hope they don't do it, or at least carry on with a simple 'M' without video, but I'm sure for a lot of pro newshounds (for instance) the availability of video would greatly enhance their news gathering potential.

 

Steve

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is technically possible.

 

Steve

 

If so, I presume you can answer the following:

 

Using which sensor? For still photography a Leica M requires a special sensor with offset microlenses - proprietary to Leica and Kodak. The full-frame CCD made by Kodak for the M9 is not a video-capable sensor (requires a mechanical shutter between "frames" to avoid image smear, so it can't handle 24/30/60 frames per second).

 

Video CCDs need to use interline-transfer technology, which cuts the resolution by half (half the pixels are blocked from incoming light to serve as storage pixels) - or CMOS. Kodak no longer makes CMOS sensors.

 

In an M-sized body? Since the sensor, viewing screen, and the digital circuitry in-between are "on" full-time for video, they draw more power and produce more heat. And thus require a larger battery and heat sink.

 

Micro-4/3rds cameras can shoot video with M-mount lenses in an M-sized body - by using a CMOS sensor 1/4 the area of the M9's (2x crop), which draws less power and crops away the parts of the image where the microlenses are needed. The hit to image quality is huge, though, compared to the M9. Taking everything into consideration (color clarity, noise, resolution, etc.) - I'd rate the M4/3rds cameras' still-photo quality at about 25-30% that of the M9.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see what you are doing Andy, assuming that everything stays the same and current technologies that Leica are using are continued with. Of course when one says that technology is available one doesn't always have to think in terms of what is, but what can be if outsourced. You have a box say, and instead of looking in it, you look outside it. A video capable M camera doesn't even have to look like an M camera, so you could start imagining the direction it could take there.

 

Steve

 

 

Steve

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see what you are doing Andy, assuming that everything stays the same and current technologies that Leica are using are continued with. Of course when one says that technology is available one doesn't always have to think in terms of what is, but what can be if outsourced. You have a box say, and instead of looking in it, you look outside it. A video capable M camera doesn't even have to look like an M camera, so you could start imagining the direction it could take there.

 

Steve

 

 

Steve

 

What you are proposing would no longer be an M, and since most dual purpose cameras usually suck. Why not just put M lenses on a Canon GL2.... as an example?

Link to post
Share on other sites

, but I'm sure for a lot of pro newshounds (for instance) the availability of video would greatly enhance their news gathering potential.

 

Steve

This is exactly why they are shooting 5DIIs, cameras which Leica will never build and which are eminently suited to their needs - Are you suggesting Leica attempts to compete with that? They would last two months...

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is exactly why they are shooting 5DIIs, cameras which Leica will never build and which are eminently suited to their needs - Are you suggesting Leica attempts to compete with that? They would last two months...

 

Am I suggesting Leica compete with Canon? No, whatever gave you that idea? If you can point it out I'll apologise for the typo, otherwise I'll just put it down to you being you jaapv.

 

swamji, I'm not "proposing" a camera that isn't an 'M', nor even an M camera with video in it. Just because I don't like the idea of a video M it doesn't give me blinkers to stop me from imagining how one could be done. Technology is what we have, things that don't need inventing from scratch, unlike warp drive, or a pill to stop the world going hungry. As such all things that go into a full frame camera with video we have one way or another, even the possibility of a battery pack to clip on to run the damned thing. They just need adapting.

 

Steve

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

swamji, I'm not "proposing" a camera that isn't an 'M', nor even an M camera with video in it. Just because I don't like the idea of a video M it doesn't give me blinkers to stop me from imagining how one could be done. Technology is what we have, things that don't need inventing from scratch, unlike warp drive, or a pill to stop the world going hungry. As such all things that go into a full frame camera with video we have one way or another, even the possibility of a battery pack to clip on to run the damned thing. They just need adapting.

 

Steve

 

The main question for me is, Why? I don't see a need. A rangefinder video camera? What is the point? If you want to experience what that would be like, try taking a picture of a toddler in full active mode using a Nocti. It really builds skill. In order to support Video, you would have to add so many features, the simple rangefinder concept would be lost. In the past there were some movie camera's that used Leica Lenses, but I don't think anyone today would be happy with that limited functionality

 

On top of that, I am certain that Leica will not go that way, because even the X1 (a CMOS based camera) does not have that feature (though my D-lux 4 does).

 

Dreaming of the what can is fine, but somebody dreamed of the Edsil and the M5 as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I suggesting Leica compete with Canon? No, whatever gave you that idea? If you can point it out I'll apologise for the typo, otherwise I'll just put it down to you being you jaapv.

 

but I'm sure for a lot of pro newshounds (for instance) the availability of video would greatly enhance their news gathering potential.

 

Steve

Well, considering that the Canon 5Dii is the camera your pro newshounds are using in general, amongst other things for its video capability, I find it very hard to visualize what other competition for your proposed camera you would imagine.
Link to post
Share on other sites

swamji, you may as well say what is the point of a digital rangefinder camera, film is still made, so there must be something driving Leica designwise? But it seems convenient for some to forget all those perfectly functional film Leica's when it comes to berating video is an un-necessary step to far. I'm happy enough to acknowledge I can be open to new ideas like a digital rangefinder when it suits me, and equally not like the idea of video installed in one. So that makes me a hypocrite, but I know it.

 

Steve

 

Steve

Link to post
Share on other sites

swamji, you may as well say what is the point of a digital rangefinder camera, film is still made, so there must be something driving Leica designwise? But it seems convenient for some to forget all those perfectly functional film Leica's when it comes to berating video is an un-necessary step to far. I'm happy enough to acknowledge I can be open to new ideas like a digital rangefinder when it suits me, and equally not like the idea of video installed in one. So that makes me a hypocrite, but I know it.

 

Steve

 

Steve

 

I think we are comparing apples and oranges. Digital range finders make sense. Rangefinder based motion picture cameras died along time ago, and a digital version IMHO makes no sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, considering that the Canon 5Dii is the camera your pro newshounds are using in general, amongst other things for its video capability, I find it very hard to visualize what other competition for your proposed camera you would imagine.

 

Well, I have made no allusion to overall numbers, but I've seen Leica M9's being used when watching the news on TV, so it doesn't seem to far fetched that those would be the journalists I would be thinking of, amongst others I've not seen on TV and working in other areas of the world where the discreet nature of the M is an advantage?

 

Or perhaps you deny professionals are using M9's? Thats the difficulty in your weird logic, the M9 is already in 'competition' with the Canon 5Dii. What would you do, tell them they are wrong to use a Leica because it shouldn't be part of the competition for the 5dii? In that sense why would it make any difference if their M10 had video and played a selection of tunes from 'South Pacific', its still going to be used in smaller numbers than the Canon. So no, the Leica is never going to be in competition directly with Canon or Nikon, but its absurdly proscriptive to imagine it can't be part of the mix, but perhaps you already know that, and you are just arguing for the sake of it?

 

Steve

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we are comparing apples and oranges. Digital range finders make sense. Rangefinder based motion picture cameras died along time ago, and a digital version IMHO makes no sense.

 

If you consider that one can only view on the LCD when shooting videos with DSLRs, then perhaps having an optical viewfinder makes some sense for filming. And of course you'd be able to use the LCD also. (With or without a magnifier/hood.) So the rangefinder wouldn't handicap the M for video work in any way.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you consider that one can only view on the LCD when shooting videos with DSLRs, then perhaps having an optical viewfinder makes some sense for filming. And of course you'd be able to use the LCD also. (With or without a magnifier/hood.) So the rangefinder wouldn't handicap the M for video work in any way.

 

Ok... I'll get Steve Jobs to work on a FF iPhone M right a way.... we can just ignore it's only reason for existence....:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I have made no allusion to overall numbers, but I've seen Leica M9's being used when watching the news on TV, so it doesn't seem to far fetched that those would be the journalists I would be thinking of, amongst others I've not seen on TV and working in other areas of the world where the discreet nature of the M is an advantage?

 

Or perhaps you deny professionals are using M9's? Thats the difficulty in your weird logic, the M9 is already in 'competition' with the Canon 5Dii. What would you do, tell them they are wrong to use a Leica because it shouldn't be part of the competition for the 5dii? In that sense why would it make any difference if their M10 had video and played a selection of tunes from 'South Pacific', its still going to be used in smaller numbers than the Canon. So no, the Leica is never going to be in competition directly with Canon or Nikon, but its absurdly proscriptive to imagine it can't be part of the mix, but perhaps you already know that, and you are just arguing for the sake of it?

 

Steve

Arguing in absurdem is a well-known trick. It still doesn't justify advocating adding features that are alien to the concept of this specific camera, just because others, competition or not, have it.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Arguing in absurdem is a well-known trick. It still doesn't justify advocating adding features that are alien to the concept of this specific camera, just because others, competition or not, have it.

 

Jaap

 

Tisk, Tisk, Tisk... Coming straight to the point again... anyway, well said.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Arguing in absurdem is a well-known trick. It still doesn't justify advocating adding features that are alien to the concept of this specific camera, just because others, competition or not, have it.

 

So the "concept" is defined somewhere and is immutable??

 

Every feature is alien to each "specific camera" until the camera gets that feature. At one time, a film advance lever was alien to a Leica. At one time, electronics were alien to all cameras. High quality video capability was alien to DSLRs until that feature was added. Now it is looking like video is a standard feature to be expected in a camera.

 

Time marches on. Technology advances. Needs change.

 

I guess if someone someday shoots a video with a Leica M, their hands will develop warts.

Edited by AlanG
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.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...