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

[40mm f/2]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The EVIL concept is starting to replace a significant part of the SLR market. Leica abandoned its R-line and S. Daniels hinted at an interest in live view. Viso III will be as modern as it gets.

[Advertisement]

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

[bill]

Frank, why do you not accept what has been explained patiently so many times before.

 

- It cannot be done for your suggested price

- It cannot be done without invasive "surgery" on the MX which, even if - physically possible, would push up the price

- It is only of interest to a minority

 

The world has moved on. The Viso concept had it's day.

 

If you think otherwise, then stop boring us to tears and go off and get VC capital to back you.

 

Or, to put it another way, put up or shut up. Either way stop wasting server space with your nonsense. Your pseudo-childish cry of why, why, why, is beyond the pale and not worthy of a grown man.

[Guest BigSplash]

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?"

 

Andy I answered this in detail on #32 ...

 

Also I already noticed in a recent thread that you are after a C Hasselblad, presumably to go with your DSLR Nikon and M film cameras.

 

Why would Leica to quote the Hasselbald dealer have issues. They have a successful M9, great lenses for the M, a fabulous S2 and now the X1, Leica shops..... is he jealous?

[Guest BigSplash]

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.

 

Jaapv why do you not answer the question I posed.......WHAT PRECISELY IS IT THAT A NEXT GEN VISO CANNOT DO COMAPRED TO A DMR OR DSLR?

 

I know a DSLR from Nikon or Canon can do telephoto or macro but at a high cost for a quality body such as the 5DII....and it is not Leica.

[bill]

...I suspect he was referring to the vocal lunatic fringe who want to bring the company to it's knees by demanding it invest in cock-a-mamie nonsense.

[giordano]

When people point out that the 68.8mm lens register (flange to sensor) of the Viso II/III means that R lenses (47mm register) cannot reach infinity focus, Frank's usual response is that he only envisages using long focus lenses (except for macro work), and that adapting them is simply a matter of altering or replacing the "rear tube" of the Telyt lens, as in this thread:

 

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

 

But as far as I can tell this is only true of old lenses of 400mm or longer. Am I right in thinking that all Leicaflex and R lenses from 135 to 350mm have had auto diaphragms and coupling cams, and that none of them was made in a Visoflex mount?

 

Even at 400mm and longer, it seems that every R lens introduced since 1990 has had auto diaphragm.

 

One has to spell it out as simply as possible: converting an auto-aperture lens from R to V involves a great deal more than "a rear tube which has a different length". It would mean shortening the rear of the mount and providing a new aperture ring and linkage as well as an M bayonet.

 

The M-bayonet is so small that it would be very difficult, maybe impossible in practice, to connect the long-travel R aperture linkage to an actuator in the reflex housing. Some of the Telyts have a rear element or filter holder so close to the rear end that they could not be converted at all.

 

In other words a new Visoflex could only be used at infinity with (a) old Visoflex lenses, ( old R lenses of 400 and 560mm, after replacing the rear part of the mount, or © some other R lenses after very expensive and probably irreversible surgery - plus of course (d) specially manufactured lenses that don't exist.

 

This really does not seem like a good idea compared with using a Canon DSLR or Nikon body - which with suitable adaptor(s) or Leitax mounts will accept all V-lenses and almost all R-lenses.

[Guest BigSplash]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Please see below my comments in blue

Frank, why do you not accept what has been explained patiently so many times before.

 

- It cannot be done for your suggested price I do not know or accept this. A £1000 to £1200 for a mirror housing and some existing electronics does NOT seem to as expensive as a complete DSLR to build.

- It cannot be done without invasive "surgery" on the MX which, even if - physically possible, would push up the price How do you come to that conclusion? The M9 does much more than a M8 but it has often been said that it is probably cheaper to build. DoNOT mix up COST and Price

- It is only of interest to a minority Who says that? That is what Sony Chairman was told about his Walkman that he wanted when he played golf! From what I have seen there are many people who use the vintage Viso.....I have given reasons why many more would like to see a way of entering Macro and telephoto with their digital M. There have been many threads about EVIL, and you have yourself said that you are interested in a G1 if I remember correctly.

 

The world has moved on. The Viso concept had it's day. I agree that the 40 year old item did have its day, and yes the world has moved on and that is exactly my point. Today there are different ways of doing things, new technologies etc etc.

 

If you think otherwise, then stop boring us to tears and go off and get VC capital to back you. Realistically as I noted to Andy (#32) only Leica can make this thing.

 

Or, to put it another way, put up or shut up. Either way stop wasting server space with your nonsense. Your pseudo-childish cry of why, why, why, is beyond the pale and not worthy of a grown man. Bill I find this offensive but I doubt that you will change.

 

[Guest BigSplash]

When people point out that the 68.8mm lens register (flange to sensor) of the Viso II/III means that R lenses (47mm register) cannot reach infinity focus, Frank's usual response is that he only envisages using long focus lenses (except for macro work), and that adapting them is simply a matter of altering or replacing the "rear tube" of the Telyt lens, as in this thread:

 

 

 

But as far as I can tell this is only true of old lenses of 400mm or longer. Am I right in thinking that all Leicaflex and R lenses from 135 to 350mm have had auto diaphragms and coupling cams, and that none of them was made in a Visoflex mount?

 

Even at 400mm and longer, it seems that every R lens introduced since 1990 has had auto diaphragm.

 

One has to spell it out as simply as possible: converting an auto-aperture lens from R to V involves a great deal more than "a rear tube which has a different length". It would mean shortening the rear of the mount and providing a new aperture ring and linkage as well as an M bayonet.

 

The M-bayonet is so small that it would be very difficult, maybe impossible in practice, to connect the long-travel R aperture linkage to an actuator in the reflex housing. Some of the Telyts have a rear element or filter holder so close to the rear end that they could not be converted at all.

 

In other words a new Visoflex could only be used at infinity with (a) old Visoflex lenses, ( old R lenses of 400 and 560mm, after replacing the rear part of the mount, or © some other R lenses after very expensive and probably irreversible surgery - plus of course (d) specially manufactured lenses that don't exist.

 

This really does not seem like a good idea compared with using a Canon DSLR or Nikon body - which with suitable adaptor(s) or Leitax mounts will accept all V-lenses and almost all R-lenses.

 

John you are correct about my assumption. I am interested to know about modern long focus R lenses and how the linkage works.

My understanding is that the diaphragm is not a linkage but electrical contacts that send control signals to the lens that is intelligent. If that is correct (and I maybe wrong) then I presume that the tube length would need changing to fit the next gen Viso but other things would not need to be altered. The Viso would obviously have to have the contacts to the lens and to a M10.

 

Thanks for constructive feedback and not just being blocked in your thought process. Much appreciated.

[SJP]

Aaaaaaaaaaaaargh!

 

Please mr. Daniel build a M mount EVIL thing with a CMOS quickly so that we can be saved (from one of our members). 5000 euro should be acceptable if it also does movies and HD video and has smile recognition.

 

Also we need a M-extender ring for all our macro desires - maybe 500 euro would be OK for that if it comes with a red dot. Or include it with the previously mentioned EVIL thing.

 

I propose the "Leica EMD" although WMD sounds better in this case but I could't think of a good reason for that acronym:D

[pgk]

WHAT PRECISELY IS IT THAT A NEXT GEN VISO CANNOT DO COMAPRED TO A DMR OR DSLR?

In the case of dSLR, IS perhaps;). Frank, you have become obsessive and clearly cannot see where reality ends and fantasy begins. The last Visoflex went out of production in 1984 (I asked in the forum and was of course speedily answered). That is 26 years ago. By 1984 the 'Visoflex on the M Series' had to compete with models such as the Nikon F3 and couldn't. Why can you not see that the concept is now (still) DEAD as an economic proposition. This is because there are BETTER alternatives which are also SIMPLER because they are integrated into an idea known as a dSLR. Jaapv summed it up very succinctly:

This horse you are flogging is quite dead, I would say it is decomposing by now.

I do have to commend you on your stamina in trying to convince others that your ideas merit consideration - its impressive:D.

[stunsworth]

John you are correct about my assumption. I am interested to know about modern long focus R lenses and how the linkage works.

My understanding is that the diaphragm is not a linkage but electrical contacts that send control signals to the lens that is intelligent. If that is correct (and I maybe wrong)

 

You are wrong.

 

If the link were electronic, how would modern R lenses work on older R cameras that only have mechanical linkages - such as the R4 etc? Do you actually think anything through, or do any research before posting your "suggestions"? If you are going to suggest devices for Leica to manufacture, you ought to at least take the time to think about how they'd need to work.

[giordano]

John you are correct about my assumption. I am interested to know about modern long focus R lenses and how the linkage works.

My understanding is that the diaphragm is not a linkage but electrical contacts that send control signals to the lens that is intelligent.

 

That is not the case with any Leica R lens. All the auto-aperture lenses have a mechanical linkage to drive the diaphragm mechanism from the lever inside the body. (Remember that the R8 and R9 are the only ones that have any electrical connection with the lens, so a lens with an electrically driven diaphragm couldn't be used on any earlier bodies.)

 

If there's a R user reading , please can you confirm this?

[stunsworth]

John, Frank's probably confusing the aperture control and the ROM contacts. The latter have nothing to do with controlling the opening and the closing of the aperture.

[bill]

That is not the case with any Leica R lens. All the auto-aperture lenses have a mechanical linkage to drive the diaphragm mechanism from the lever inside the body. (Remember that the R8 and R9 are the only ones that have any electrical connection with the lens, so a lens with an electrically driven diaphragm couldn't be used on any earlier bodies.)

 

If there's a R user reading , please can you confirm this?

 

Correct, John.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[bill]

Speaking of fantasist windmill-tilting, I note that this thread has been abandoned once logic prevailed. So, like goldfish around a bowl, we are dragged back into this nonsense again.

 

Put up or shut up, Frank. Get a VC to back you or stop peddling your time-wasting, ill-informed, ill-considered half-baked clap-trap. You have been told time and time again why your flying pigs will never get off the runway and still you persist in this obsessive behaviour.

 

Give it up. Back away from the keyboard. Get a loved one to read what you are writing and listen to them. You are not making sense.

[andybarton]

Andy I answered this in detail on #32 ...

 

Also I already noticed in a recent thread that you are after a C Hasselblad, presumably to go with your DSLR Nikon and M film cameras.

 

Why would Leica to quote the Hasselbald dealer have issues. They have a successful M9, great lenses for the M, a fabulous S2 and now the X1, Leica shops..... is he jealous?

 

Of course he's not jealous. He's a Leica dealer too. He's highly respected and ONLY deals with top grade stuff. And he also knows Leica's business a lot better than you obviously do. The H back I bought today had never been used.

 

Don't start with the "you're not qualified to comment because you use a Nikon and a Hasseblad" stuff, please. I have a shelf full of Leica cameras and lenses and, given a choice, I will always pick up a Leica first.

[andybarton]

Tell me, Frank, what's your motivation?

 

Are you someone who picks up a camera of whatever type to suit what you want to photograph in the best way possible, or are you someone who thinks that one camera can do everything?

 

I pick up my Leicas when I want to travel light and use the 35 ASPH OR 50 'cron. If I want to shoot macro or telephoto, I pick up the D700 and my Leica glass. If I want something very different, challenging and with quality that will blow your M8 into the middle of next week, I will from now on pick up the 'blad. I can't wait to take the D700/28 Elmarit and the 'blad to Skye in the autumn.

 

Just because you own a Leica doesn't mean that you can't use other, more suitable, equipment. No one will think any the worse of you.

 

Except that you seem to think the less of anyone who uses anything other than a Leica.

[Guest BigSplash]

In the case of dSLR, IS perhaps;). Frank, you have become obsessive and clearly cannot see where reality ends and fantasy begins. The last Visoflex went out of production in 1984 (I asked in the forum and was of course speedily answered). That is 26 years ago. By 1984 the 'Visoflex on the M Series' had to compete with models such as the Nikon F3 and couldn't. Why can you not see that the concept is now (still) DEAD as an economic proposition. This is because there are BETTER alternatives which are also SIMPLER because they are integrated into an idea known as a dSLR. Jaapv summed it up very succinctly:

 

I do have to commend you on your stamina in trying to convince others that your ideas merit consideration - its impressive:D.

Thanks for the compliment ...I think!

 

How do I explain that I am not obsessive about a 1984 Viso. I am saying that their is clearly a need for something to allow M users to enter the Macro and Telephoto world!

 

Let me reiterate I DO NOT WANT THE RESURRECTION OF THE OLD VISOFLEX. to deliver a functionality in the macro and telephoto space.

 

I have read that EVIL is no good, CMOS sensors as used by LiveView are no good, mirrors are good and they remain the backbone of DSLR photography. A 1984 Viso is no good as it has no electronics in it for driving a modern telephoto lens or helping AE etc.

 

Does that mean that there is an opportunity to combine a modern mirror housing accessory with appropriate electronics that fits a M10 input / outputs ...I think very much yes!

 

I also think that this would convert the M camera from a device that works brilliantly in the 21 to 90mm range to be very acceptable for telephoto and macro...ie a full system camera.

 

Now let me attack those that say that I should use Leica M for 21 to 90mm range and buy a new camera system DSLR for macro and Telephoto.......WHY!!?

 

It really is upsetting that those that wish to attack my hyposesis have Nikon or Canon high end DSLR, or even Hasselblad. Mostly these same people shoot film not digital. They critique my ideas on the basis of the 1984 Viso and ignore that today it is possible to use technologies that were not available then!

 

I am not obsessive . I think that those that attack my ideas are obsessive and blinkered to what is possible 30 years later on!

 

Can we please address the issues without bias and openly attack any technical issues for sure but constructively suggest ways forward to meet the macro / telephoto objective that was possible in 1984 with a Leica M. and today is not

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[stunsworth]

Now let me attack those that say that I should use Leica M for 21 to 90mm range and buy a new camera system DSLR for macro and Telephoto.......WHY!!?

 

Because if you want to bang in nails you buy a hammer, if you're using screws you buy a screwdriver. Yes, you can use a hammer to bang in screws, but a screwdriver is a more appropriate tool, and it does the job far better with a lot less mess.

 

You are falling into the trap of thinking that whatever you want as an individual must be good for Leica. That's not necessarily the case, Leica have to look at a much bigger picture. A Visioflex - even new and improved - would sell in such small numbers that Leica would either have to take a huge loss on each one, or price it so highly that they'd sell even fewer.

 

Frank, you _are_ obsessive. Sorry to have to say that, but I'm sure I'm not the only one who thinks that. I also think that many obsessive people don't see themselves as such, rather they think they are being totally rational and cruelly misunderstood.

 

I find your almost total lack of attention to detail - the 'electronic' control of aperture on R lenses is just the latest example - astonishing given the role you tell us you played in the business world. Maybe you were a 'concepts' man leaving others to do the actual graft, I've no idea.

[andybarton]

I am saying that their is clearly a need for something to allow M users to enter the Macro and Telephoto world!

 

No. There isn't.

 

If there was, Leica would already be making it.

 

Leica understand that there are far better cameras on the market for macro and telephoto than an M. You don't.

 

Live with it.

 

Buy a suitable camera and stop asking Leica to make something that would lose them money on every unit sold.

 

Leica don't need another S2, thanks very much.