The M10 or a new camera line? [Merged]

[mjh]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

And whats with the issues of enormous retrofocus-designs?

Everyone’s hating retrofocus lenses but given the choice between a higher percentage of retrofocus lenses and the issues with red vignetting (also vignetting in general) and IR contamination I would choose the first option. Some lenses would need to be retrofocus designs anyway.

 

I'll stick with my opinion: A standard sensor bought from Sony would be extremely risky, the only reason why Nikon and the others survived this game till now is the stupidity of Sony - but for how long?

That’s not stupid on Sony’s part; that’s the way to do business. There’s a huge market for sensors of all kinds and sizes and Sony is catering for that market. Quite sucessfully I might add.

 

Canon was much more long-sighted and dominates the market with it's sensors.

Dominates the market? Canon isn’t in the sensor market at all; all the sensors they manufacture go into their own cameras. Which means that Canon are missing out on the economy of scale.

 

On the other hand Canon is relying on Sony (and maybe other vendors) as suppliers of sensors for their compact cameras.

[AlanG]

This technology is fairly mature and may be more readily available than any of us would know. I think Leica knows how to buy or contract electronics at this point. With their relationships with Panasonic and Kaoru Mokunaka working for them, they hopefully can produce a live view AF system that will work at least as well as the one in Pansonic's current cameras.

 

And if Sony will sell them full frame sensors (why wouldn't they?,) all the technology and parts they need will be in place. Leica has already established it can integrate the components, build or contract out AF lenses,etc. There already are a lot of "Leica" 4/3rd and micro 4/3rd lenses made by Panasonic or someone. How hard would it be to use the same contractor to make several lenses for full frame?

 

If Leica somehow can't buy or develop the AF technology or buy an appropriate sensor, then they won't be able to make it. But my bet is Leica can do it.

 

Of course there's also the possibility that the sensor will be APS size. That wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing in a system for the future, but would undermine the attractiveness of using legacy lenses on it.

[Jerry_R]

In APS segment there will be already many cheaper players. This is not best niche.

 

1) Cropped sensors require dedicated ultra wide lenses, you can't connect 35mm ultra wide via adapter - because you have to multiply focal (so it is no more ultra wide)

 

2) Cropped sensors give you wider DOF... Eg. full frame lens - 24mm f/2.8 -> acts as:

- 35mm f/3.3 on APS-C sensor

- 48mm f/4.0 on 43 sensor

 

(in terms of focal and DOF, light which affects exposure is still f/2.8)

[mjh]

With their relationships with Panasonic and Kaoru Mokunaka working for them, they hopefully can produce a live view AF system that will work at least as well as the one in Pansonic's current cameras.

That’s a tough one. Generally the speed of a contrast-based AF will be inversely proportional to the sensor size and indeed all the existing contrast-based AF systems for live-view DSLRs are quite slow. And it is not like, for example, Canon didn’t know how to implement a contrast-based AF; they have been doing this for years – only for the much smaller sensors in their compact cameras. Given the extended DOF of those cameras, only a small number of focus positions needs to be considered and auto-focusing is correspondingly fast. Determining optimum focus for a larger sensor requires many more contrast measurements when the focus is changed in much smaller increments, resulting in much reduced AF speeds.

[Jerry_R]

all the existing contrast-based AF systems for live-view DSLRs are quite slow

Don't look on existing dSLRs. Don't. They are poor and ages behing best in class.

They were never a priorioty for their producers. Yet.

 

Just look how Panasonic Lumix G1, GF1, GH1 work in terms of contrast AF. In many aspects it is BETTER than many entry level dSLRs - no front or back focus, the same speed, success ratio better, forget about few focus points localised around center of frame. You can select AF point on almost whole area of sensor.

It is also great for manual focusing with legacy lenses.

[AlanG]

I certainly know the laws of physics as applied to DOF and APS sensors. I think full frame is the way to go, but if Leica's goal is to make a more compact system, they might choose APS.

 

As for focus speed from contrast detect methods, Panasonic got it working well, and perhaps there have been recent improvements. It seems to me that the speed of this technology would increase as processors get faster and algorithms improve.

 

That being said it could be that at first such a system will not be as fast as what is available in the top DSLRs, and this will be a trade-off for the other benefits you get from an EVIL system. But it can be improved over time. Don't forget that there is the potential for more upside in such as system as it could use the entire sensor to recognize and focus track a subject. There also is the huge benefit gained by magnified manual focus.

[SJP]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

What would be against a EVIL FF thing with manual focus only? If it takes M and R mount then it would be a seriously interesting device for a whole reange of photographers (esp. for the R lens owners). You could even include focus confirmation using a contrast measurement at a user selectable location (or locations) in the frame, or in the centre spot. Keep it as simple as possble.

 

Of course if Leica would launch something like this with the option of (new) auto-focus lenses that could be more attractive for new users.

[nugat]

What would be against a EVIL FF thing with manual focus only? If it takes M and R mount then it would be a seriously interesting device for a whole reange of photographers (esp. for the R lens owners). You could even include focus confirmation using a contrast measurement at a user selectable location (or locations) in the frame, or in the centre spot. Keep it as simple as possble.

 

Of course if Leica would launch something like this with the option of (new) auto-focus lenses that could be more attractive for new users.

 

If Leica ever hopes to get out of the "manual works" ghetto it must propose a AF 36x24 camera.

EVIL Leica will finally be able to serve action, sports, telephoto etc...or perish.

Manual job lovers will have their Ms (M for manual).

[georg]

@mjh

Yes, Sony's current strategy is common but not necessarily clever, it's based on short-sighted shareholder-thinking, they rather sell more sensors with a smaller margin and weaken their camera department to make "fast money" than creating unique features based on vertical integration - Sony is not even capable anymore to make LCD-panels on their own, they don't even manufacture most of their products themselves.

Canon was just a serious player within the big five (?) camera manufacturers when the digital revolution started and everyone was simply buying sensors from "true specialists" instead of adapting their very own semiconductor experience - everyone but Canon. They not only invested much money into their own sensor-development/manufacturing but they also closed their sensor-business for others - stupid isn't it? Well, it took Nikon (despite experience in semiconductor equipment and processor design - just like Canon) nearly 5 years to find a supplier for full-frame sensors! Olympus has to stick with consumer-stuff and Minolta/ Contax don't even exist anymore - but Canon is the worldwide leader for DSLRs now! Nikon has done some nice work to catch up, but have you ever wondered how much they pay for the D3X-sensor (yes, I know, the ADC and OLPF is different - the sensor is not) which is build into a 2k$-Sony? Where's the 2k$-24MP-Nikon? And we're talking about a client from Sony which is multiple times more powerful than Leica!

Maybe Sony is really too short-sighted to see that they can make much more money when they sell one A900 instead of selling two or three sensors for Nikons D700...

 

But anyway, that's not an viable option for Leica anyway, not with today's size. But they have enormous know-how within a few hundred km from various specialists capable to design/manufacture "semiconductor & optomechanical masterpieces" which can truly stand out besides a finished Sony solution. Is Sony really a good partner for Leica? They're not interested in adapting their designs for Leica, they're propably not even interested to offer good prices like for their large-scale-customer Nikon and even if they don't start to make exclusive business with their own camera department, they might prevent Leica from getting the newest technology they just incorporate into their much cheaper APS-C-EVIL.

 

Leica needs a supplier who needs Leica as well to create a product that stands out. Sorry, the X1 is nice, but it doesn't stand out. It's lens is better but all other components are mediocre at best, just squetching some mass-market-technology into a Leica doesn't make it a Leica.

[nugat]

The lack of autofocus on the M will not be a factor on video where you generally need to focus manually. And videos are shot stopped down, so an auto diaphram has no value either.

 

 

For news acqusition/action (sports) type of videos auto diaphragm and autofocus are a norm. Imagine following a politician from a darker interior into a wide open sunny square gathering.

For scripted, rehearsed and well lit sets and work they are not neccessary.

[AlanG]

For news acqusition/action (sports) type of videos auto diaphragm and autofocus are a norm. Imagine following a politician from a darker interior into a wide open sunny square gathering.

For scripted, rehearsed and well lit sets and work they are not neccessary.

 

It seems that originally, the thought behind adding video to DSLR cameras was to give photojoounalists a simple method to capture short video clips to supplement their still work. In that sense, AF and AE could be useful.

 

I understand where you are coming from but today most people use DSLRs for video in order to get very shallow depth of field. So they have to focus manually - often with a "focus-puller" and shoot wide open. Having AF and AE will be useful for making the camera more versatile of course, but isn't the reason these cameras appeal for video for the higher end work that people are now getting excited about.

[AlanG]

Leica is either going to find a suitable sensor for this camera or they won't. I have no idea how many options there are for securing a live view full frame chip. (If they can't get one, maybe they'll have to make an APS system.) If they do find one and later the sensor manufacturer starts to squeeze them in some way, hopefully there will be an alternative source that will be acceptable. Other than designing and contracting their own sensor, I don't see what their alternative is. Why is this our problem?

 

If you don't like what Sony is doing, I guess you could complain to Howard Stringer. For all I know, the only way that Sony can justify designing and manufacturing these chips is by selling them in quantity to others. It seems to me that some of the Japanese companies have a tradition of sharing or licensing technology with their "competitors." This may or may not apply to Leica.

[stunsworth]

I have no idea how many options there are for securing a live view full frame chip. (If they can't get one, maybe they'll have to make an APS system.)

 

If that's the case we can be pretty certain it won't be called an M10.

[mjh]

Minolta/ Contax don't even exist anymore

Minolta still exists, they just don’t make cameras anymore. Minolta’s former DSLR branch is very much alive and under Sony Minolta’s system is more successful than it ever was.

 

but Canon is the worldwide leader for DSLRs now!

With Nikon close behind. And the main reason Canon is still #1 is that they are more successful with their entry-level and midrange DSLRs; in the professional segment Nikon is already ahead. Or at least they were last year; I think they still are.

[Jerry_R]

It has been already announced, that Leica will release fast (f/1.4) cinema lenses, for professional videographers, with Micro43 mount:

Leica cinema lenses set of eight: $178,000 | Leica News & Rumors

 

The reason - current dSLRs are used in manual mode is very trivial - this is the only mode that works...

Only Panasonic presented stepless aperture, noiseless, with tracking AF - lens, that can be used in both: automatic and manual modes. All the rest is here again - BEHIND.

 

This is best - to give choice to users. Once they will want to record advanced movies, everything manually set - great.

On other occasion - there will be a birthday and no-one will have time to change settings (unless you are responsible for nothing else on the party).

[AlanG]

Well, if the camera can support AF in video mode, users will have a choice of using AF lenses or not. And with those AF lenses they can shoot in AF or not.

 

But don't forget this is video not still photography. Sometimes AF can be used such as tracking a moving subject. But in a lot of scenes, the subject may be moving within a fixed frame and you won't want the focus switching from the subject to the background and back all the time.

[AlanG]

With Nikon close behind. And the main reason Canon is still #1 is that they are more successful with their entry-level and midrange DSLRs; in the professional segment Nikon is already ahead. Or at least they were last year; I think they still are.

 

But when Sony stops selling sensors to Nikon where will they be? Leica will be eating their lunch soon.

 

And what does it matter what this camera is called? The CL was not called an M and it was pretty similar to one. And some M cameras had no rangefinders. I'd expect the M10 will be an "improved" version of an M9, not an AF EVIL camera. But should Leica make a full frame EVIL camera, it would figure that the same electronics and sensor from it would eventually be shared between the M and the EVIL cameras. This would make it cost effective to keep a rangefinder M model in the lineup for a long time.

[giordano]

It has been already announced, that Leica will release fast (f/1.4) cinema lenses, for professional videographers, with Micro43 mount:

Leica cinema lenses set of eight: $178,000 | Leica News & Rumors

 

The lenses announced so far are in PL mounts. What's the source suggesting they'll also come out in uFT mount? After fitting four-thirds compatible autofocus and diaphragm motors each lens will be five times the weight and ten times the cost of any micro FT body - and without AF and AE you'd be better off using a PL adapter.

[Jerry_R]

The lenses announced so far are in PL mounts. What's the source suggesting they'll also come out in uFT mount?

EOSHD.com - Leica Summilux C cinema primes for the Panasonic AF100?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[mjh]

I'd expect the M10 will be an "improved" version of an M9, not an AF EVIL camera.

Agreed.

 

But should Leica make a full frame EVIL camera, it would figure that the same electronics and sensor from it would eventually be shared between the M and the EVIL cameras.

Also between those cameras and the S2 (or its successor). There is a reason why Canon is using the same DIGIC CPU in high-end DSLRs and compact digicams.