Making a M10 Macro & Telphoto friendly - a modern Viso or whatever

[stunsworth]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

That would be what the optics would be for, I think...

 

You would need one heck of a powerful lens to push the forus forward enough to make the image on the EVF sensor in focus. Personally I wouldn't waste a penny on the idea, but then I don't have a villa in Grasse to mortgage.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[redbaron]

Have you ever had the feeling, Frank, that maybe you invested in the wrong brand?

[hoppyman]

Frank you meant to say that your M8 has a CCD sensor, not a CMOS sensor.

 

I don't follow why you think that an M mount camera is 'quicker' to change lenses with than a dSLR. The complexity of the interface has no bearing on that in that you press a lens release and rotate the bayonet in the mount in every case.

Actually the common belief that a Rangefinder camera is quieter does not necessarily hold true always either. I shot a consumer grade Canon dSLR recently and the noise of shutter and mirror action is perceptibly less than that of my M9. More discreet (not discrete) to use is more to do with size and manner of operation.

 

 

You seem to be asking for separate things, A new Leica camera suitable for macro and telephoto and a new Visoflex design (with a new lens range to use with it).

 

Very likely a new quieter more modern mechanism could be included if a new Visoflex was designed but market viability is another issue entirely.

 

If you look dispassionately at the features/functions that you are asking for you have described a dSLR.

 

I do not see any practical /feasible methods of integrating what you are looking for with an M camera body without changing the mount, sensor, electronics, metering and focus system. It then follows that it would not be compatible with everything else up to that point. That simply makes no sense in an M context, notwithstanding the design and market issues.

If there was a future Leica dSLR it may be possible to use M lenses on it (via adapter?) with restricted functionality, certainly. That seems much more logical than trying to add all of those dSLR functions to the front of an M camera surely.

[giordano]

You would need one heck of a powerful lens to push the forus forward enough to make the image on the EVF sensor in focus.

 

There simply isn't space. If you put a R lens in front of an M body and want infinity focus, the adapter is approx 21mm thick. Of that, a minimum of about 2mm is needed for the structural material around the M bayonet, and about 6mm for the thickness of the R mount even before allowing for R lenses that protrude into the body.

 

That leaves a clear space of less than 15mm into which the EVF sensor and its bulky optical system would have to be retracted in the course of, say, 25 milliseconds between pressing the button and opening the shutter.

 

It's not possible to use a little mirror that would fit into the 15mm space, because with the longest lenses the exit pupil is so far away that the mirror has to cover almost the entire sensor area in order to capture the entire field of view.

 

It would be possible to make a sort of teleconverter affair that would allow R lenses to get infinity focus on a Visoflex. The Hasselblad tilt-shift adapter does something similar. But it would either be very expensive or spoil the performance of the R lenses. In fact the Hasselblad adapter is only suitable for a few lenses; it might be necessary to have several adapters tailored for different R lenses in the 100mm (macro) to 560mm range. And they would make the whole system even more bulky, unbalanced and costly.

 

Frank, I'm the first to admit that an important part of being a chief executive is the ability to ignore reality when you don't like what it tells you. But an equally important part is knowing when reality has you beat.

[jaapv]

You would need one heck of a powerful lens to push the forus forward enough to make the image on the EVF sensor in focus. Personally I wouldn't waste a penny on the idea, but then I don't have a villa in Grasse to mortgage.

Just trying to be constructive, I guess..... I was thinking of a kind of endoscope system, but is was quite fanciful. I wouldn't put any money on it either... Nor will Leica, I'm sure.

[andybarton]

Frank could, if he believes it's commercially viable. There's no reason why this accessory needs to be made by Leica themselves.

[Guest BigSplash]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Frank, you referred to using R lenses on an M camera in your original post - please read again what you wrote. It doesn't matter if the R lens is 19mm or 560mm THERE ISN'T SUFFICIENT SPACE FOR A MIRROR BOX BETWEEN THE REAR OF AN R LENS MOUNT AND AN M's BODY.

 

The only way you could use R lenses would be either to have a mirror box - this would mean you could only use the vast majority of R lenses for macro work. The alternative is that you could use lenses intended for the original Visioflex. Do you _really_ think that there are enough of those out there - with owners prepared to buy an M9 and 'improved Visioflex' to make the project viable for Leica?

 

Steve please note:

Telephoto Lenses

1. the only difference between a Telyt 560mm intended for a Viso and one for a "R" is the rear tube which has a different length......both tubes of varying length used to be available as a spare parts from Leica and would not be difficult to reintroduce so that people can use existing Telyt old optics.
   
2. If a next generation Viso and M10 was built as per my suggested spec. I would imagine that Leica would want to bring out a range of new Telyts (possibly using R lens designs) that had the ability to stop down the aperture when the shutter was pressed. The new generation Telyts would be a new revenue stream and could also include a zoom. Again such new lenses could accommodate the distance issue you refer to as the optical elements are well away from the mount.
   
3. The above would be the same cumbersome kit as a DSLR with a telphoto (see the tennis photo above) and used only when needed. When not needed the joy and ease of using a RF Leica is immediately available which is a unique selling point is it not that only Leica can offer?
   

Macro Usage

1. In the case of Macro the lenses are 65mm upwards for infinity focus and the Telyt heads work quite well also on a bellows. There is no issue about the distance from the back of the lens head to the sensor.
   
2. You can use a 50mm but the field of view is very small (postage stamp area) however people seem to use that occassionally.
   

[Guest BigSplash]

Frank you meant to say that your M8 has a CCD sensor, not a CMOS sensor. Sorry I meant CCD....

I don't follow why you think that an M mount camera is 'quicker' to change lenses with than a dSLR. The complexity of the interface has no bearing on that in that you press a lens release and rotate the bayonet in the mount in every case. When I have done this with EOS lenses I do NOT find them as easy to change as a M mount...must be me!

Actually the common belief that a Rangefinder camera is quieter does not necessarily hold true always either. I shot a consumer grade Canon dSLR recently and the noise of shutter and mirror action is perceptibly less than that of my M9. More discreet (not discrete) to use is more to do with size and manner of operation. Very surprising and clearly if competitors can deaden the noise of a shutter AND A MIRROR HOUSING to below that of a M9 then Leica have something to learn . I thought that the M8 shutter was ditched in favour of M8.2 and M9 shutter due to a desire for a lower shutter noise. This meant that the 1/8000th speed was lost. Leica even posted the sound of both on their web site they were so proud of their achievement!

 

 

You seem to be asking for separate things, A new Leica camera suitable for macro and telephoto and a new Visoflex design (with a new lens range to use with it). I am asking for the following:

1. A M10 that has various bugs of M9 fixed and as a new feature contacts that can go to the new generation Viso, but accepts existing M lenses of course. People have suggested in the past that that the 6 bit coding lugs could double as contacts, but that is for leica to figure out.
   
2. A new Viso design
   
3. A range of telephoto lenses, that could fit the new Viso and provide a new revenue stream that Leica no longer enjoys. They could use old R lens designs as the basis to start from and reduce their R&D costs.
   
4. A new Macro lens and/or an ability to use M lens heads as was done with the old Viso.
   

Very likely a new quieter more modern mechanism could be included if a new Visoflex was designed but market viability is another issue entirely.

 

If you look dispassionately at the features/functions that you are asking for you have described a dSLR. Absolutely correct I agree. However as mentioned in my OP I am achieveing this by adding very little overhead to the existing M camera. the shutter, the sensor, firmware, SD card, etc remain the same.

 

I do not see any practical /feasible methods of integrating what you are looking for with an M camera body without changing the mount, sensor, electronics, metering and focus system.

• Why change the mount....simply add some contacts?
  
• Why change the sensor? Why?
  
• Why does the electronics need changing?
  
• Metering and focus is obviously doen in the Viso and this data shared with the M10....surely that is manageable?
  

It then follows that it would not be compatible with everything else up to that point. That simply makes no sense in an M context, notwithstanding the design and market issues.If you unclip the Viso the camera reverts to a pure M ...and that is a major differentiator from anything else out there.

If there was a future Leica dSLR it may be possible to use M lenses on it (via adapter?) with restricted functionality, certainly. That seems much more logical than trying to add all of those dSLR functions to the front of an M camera surely. Here I can agree with you and we are told that Leica is looking at such a product but at a price between that of an M9 and a S2 which seems a long way from a new gen Viso.that targets macro and telephoto, while retaining the strengths of a Leica M unchanged[/quote]

[Guest BigSplash]

Have you ever had the feeling, Frank, that maybe you invested in the wrong brand?

 

Red Baron ..absolutely NO. In my view Leica have achieved a masterpiece with the M8 and M9, plus the new generation lenses that they have released. Its a wow product offering that as I said in my OP satisfies 80 to 90% of my photographic needs (ie 21mm to 90mm. lens range). Just look again at my OP where I identify the M attributes.

 

I use my old Viso in the macro range and occasionally telephoto and that is what I am asking that Leica should address with a next generation product that opens this niche to Leica M users.

 

Jaapv has 3 Visoflexes and he apparently uses them. Wilson Laidlaw has noted on this forum that his M8 these days is invariably connected to his Viso. Many other people are like myself using a Viso with M8 and M9. We surely cannot all be wrong?

 

The idea of moving from Leica M to any DSLR and using this for 80% of my photography is simply not appealing. Surely the way forward is to figure out how to address the 20%

[bill]

Will you never learn?

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m8-forum/88939-m8-9-true-system-camera-offering.html

[bill]

Surely the way forward is to figure out how to address the 20%

 

No. Learn from Mr Pareto and Mr Ansoff.

[Guest BigSplash]

Frank could, if he believes it's commercially viable. There's no reason why this accessory needs to be made by Leica themselves.

 

Andy maybe you are continuing to think in terms of a simple old generation mirror box without any electronics otherwise I guess that you would not have suggested this.

 

I agree Leica could subcontract to Asia like they do for filter production, but I think they would need to market and sell a product like a next gen Viso and any next generation lenses that fit it.

 

My belief is that they would need to be heavily involved in the design for the following reasons:

1. The design effort would be much cheaper if they used existing Leica designs for the mirror housing and electronics / software.
   
2. Since the design would have impact on an eventual M10 (input / outputs to the Viso) I would believe they would need to ensure close synergy of the devt. teams.
   
3. Next generation lenses would need to be considered early on within the devt. cycle and again they would probably wish to use as far as possible existing lens designs (perhaps from R range)
   

Finally my view is that from a P&L impact viewpoint one can clearly look at the profit contribution for a next gen Viso, and next gen Telephoto lenses . If that was zero but pulled in new clients to M10 family then surely that is good news.

[hoppyman]

Never mind Frank, I should have resisted getting involved in this theoretical discussion. Come up with a design concept (at least) that does what you want and can sell at your estimated £1000 to £1500, then you can approach Leica Camera and prove us wrong.

[Guest BigSplash]

No. Learn from Mr Pareto and Mr Ansoff.

 

Bill that is exactly my point....Perhaps may I suggest that you should learn how to apply Pareto as part of your continuous improvement. Think about it:

• If 80% of my needs are FULLY satisfied with a M8 then I cannot improve in that area.
  
• I need to look at the next 20% and address that.
  
  • I would estimate that in my case 15% is a need for macro
    
  • 5% is for Telephoto.
    

It is this 20% I am hoping to address with a Leica based system.

 

Clearly destroying my full satisfaction with the 80% and buying a DSLR for this is not smart .

Bill if you are good maybe next week we can do Ishikawa Diagrams or if you are very good I shall introduce you to the delights of Motorola's Six Sigma!

[jaapv]

I would only look to address those 20% out of hobby/nostalgia. As soon as I get serious about macro/tele, out comes the DSLR, and the Visoflex stuff remains on the display shelf. I would never buy a "new" Visoflex let alone lenses for it. far too limiting. I might buy some kind of EVIL or whatever solution for my existing R lenses, but it would have to be able to beat the quality of my DMR by a reasonable margin - not an easy thing to do, even after all these years. From where I am standing all this attempted theorizing is just blowing soap bubbles.

[Guest BigSplash]

I would only look to address those 20% out of hobby/nostalgia. As soon as I get serious about macro/tele, out comes the DSLR, and the Visoflex stuff remains on the display shelf. I would never buy a "new" Visoflex let alone lenses for it. far too limiting. I might buy some kind of EVIL or whatever solution for my existing R lenses, but it would have to be able to beat the quality of my DMR by a reasonable margin - not an easy thing to do, even after all these years. From where I am standing all this attempted theorizing is just blowing soap bubbles.

 

Jaapv I can understand why you use the 40 year old Visoflex for nostalgic reasons. What I do not understand is why you would not use a next generation Viso with built in electronics that fitted a M10 (which I guess given past buying habits you will buy).

 

What missing feature in such a next gen Viso do you feel would not be available to you compared to:

• A heavy cumbersome R9 with DMR?
  
• Any other modern DSLR
  

If you tell me that you like DSLR compared to an M for 21mm to 90mm photography due to better framing or whatever fine. My understanding is that you like the M9 for what it is good at. However on Safaris you take lenses up to 800mm on the R9 with DMR....why not do this with a next generation Viso? What is the negative?

[hoppyman]

OK well I have a basic prototype, now I just need to integrate the EVF, new intra Viso metering and autofocus into the forward module, come up with a new lens range including a zoom and persuade Leica Camera to provide an interface integration on the M10. That and shifting the decimal point a couple of places on the first price estimates.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[andybarton]

Frank, why wouldn't you invest your money in an electronic Viso, if you think that this is such a brilliant idea? That was my suggestion. If it's such a good idea,, and you can build it, people will buy it. If it isn't such a good idea, people won't, and you will go bust. Money where your mouth is time

 

I am sure you have contacts in the industry who would take this on - the M mount is out of copyright, so you have no worries there.

 

I was talking to the best used Hasselblad dealer in the UK this morning. I mentioned that I know someone who is trying to persuade Leica to build a new Visoflex. His answer was "Haven't they got enough problems?"

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[andybarton]

That's a handy looking bit of kit, Geoff... Can you mount that quicker than you can mount a Canon macro? Just wondering...

[jaapv]

Jaapv I can understand why you use the 40 year old Visoflex for nostalgic reasons. What I do not understand is why you would not use a next generation Viso with built in electronics that fitted a M10 (which I guess given past buying habits you will buy).

 

 

 

 

What missing feature in such a next gen Viso do you feel would not be available to you compared to:

• A heavy cumbersome R9 with DMR?
  
• Any other modern DSLR
  

If you tell me that you like DSLR compared to an M for 21mm to 90mm photography due to better framing or whatever fine. My understanding is that you like the M9 for what it is good at. However on Safaris you take lenses up to 800mm on the R9 with DMR....why not do this with a next generation Viso? What is the negative?

Why should I pay money for a limited system like a Visoflex? A DSLR will serve as a backup for the M9 (or 10 or whatever) as well, a Visoflex cannot do that. And re the hypothetical M10 - the way I feel about the M9, it would need to be an immensely spectacular upgrade to tempt me. The M9 is simply too good. The step from film M to M8 was needed for me - the M9 is the M8 come of age and a huge step forward - however, I have no need for more.