New EVIL Body for R lenses?

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thank you Riley. I tried briefly the G1 but manual focussing was so slow that i gave up. Nice little cam though.

[wildlightphoto]

Has anyone else said this? Why not an M format camera with a CMOS sensor....

 

It's only been mentioned a dozen or more times. It's a fine solution if you're photographing rocks and other slow-moving subjects.

 

Ive been wondering for some time, what would have been wrong with a redesigned, redeployed DMR produced by a third party manufacturer.

 

Unless they planned to produce only as many of these hypothetical DMR II as there are R8 and R9 bodies (pricing them accordingly) they'd also need a new camera body to hang them on. The R9's electronics can no longer be produced because of new enviornmental rules.

 

A rhetorical question (but feel free to answer anyway): "Does Leica owe R-system users a digital solution even if they cannot make money producing it?"

 

Of course not. OTOH customer goodwill (a depreciable asset) and credibility with new product lines are significantly enhanced if they don't abandon R users.

[hoppyman]

Jaap which former Zeiss executive now works for Leica camera

Not so much so - in the camera division, the two are hardly competitors - Zeiss lenses compete with the Leica used market, not with the new products, although one could make a minor case for the Summarit line, the same for film camers and Zeiss is not about to build a competitor for any of Leica's digital cameras. In the sports optics division things may be different commercially, but there is a strong connection on a personal level - Often families in the Wetzlar-Solms area will have members that work for Leica and other members working for Zeiss - they meet on birthdays and in the beerhall.

[hoppyman]

Andy, Stefan Daniel said 6,000 to 7,000 EURO for an R10 body, not dollars

You could just hear him over the sound of jaws still hitting the tables after the first sentence with the no R10 part! Then the conversation with the members sort of got diverted into the Four Thirds and EVIL subjects. Carl's fingers were texting next to me and he was translating in near real time

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/customer-forum/89591-summary-q-session-stefan-daniel-during.html

.........Even if one takes Stephan Daniels' own - lower - estimate of what a digital R would have cost ($7,000, from that same June 2009 meeting where "No R10" was announced), ......................

[AlanG]

Has anyone else said this? Why not an M format camera with a CMOS sensor. That way you can use the rangefinder for the M series of lenses + you can have live-view + an R adaptor + clip on EVF that you would have to use with the non M lenses (+ maybe with 90/135 for ease of precise focus). Wouldn't that do the business for all concerned? A conventional high performance full frame RF in the M tradition + for when you needed one an EVIL to use with long R glass (or why not long anyone's glass with the right adaptor)?

 

Apologies if this duplicates someone elses contribution, but it just crossed my mind...

 

I'd be tempted...

 

Well I've been proposing this for years and each time I get shot down for wanting to make the M too complex. But it is obvious that live view and a clip on EVF in an M would be beneficial to some applications... if not a perfect solution for all.

 

At some point, Leica will surely make an AF live view system. Whether that will be full frame and also will work well with R lenses (using the auto diaphragm) is anyone's guess.

[wildlightphoto]

Well I've been proposing this for years and each time I get shot down for wanting to make the M too complex.

 

Alan needs a hug.

[AlanG]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Alan needs a hug.

 

No thanks. After a long time of many rebelling against the idea of an M with live view, do some people now think its time has come?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

04.03.2009, 20:59 #12 (permalink)

AlanG

 

Default re: The end of the Leica R9 and R lenses

Quote:

Originally Posted by carstenw View Post

"I am sure there will be more information on this topic. What Leica has indicated in the past is that the R10 will be a departure from the past, but that some thought is being given to compatibility. That makes sense. I still personally expect an R10 (may be called something else) with autofocus, and perhaps a new bayonet, but with an adapter, and a way of working with the manual focus R lenses. Leica does not abandon products with no way forward...

I think the S2 is a clear departure from the past."

 

If Leica has even distant plans for an R10, especially with any sort of legacy R lens compatibility, then they would be wise to state that clearly. In lieu of that statement, I will assume that they currently do not have a plan for what you would call an R10. Maybe it will be a micro 4/3rds with some new lenses. But not a 24x36mm DSLR that can use R lenses.

 

Assuming that the M8.2 isn't the end of the road for the M, then the next model should have live view, a clip on hi res EVF, and a 24x36mm sensor. Otherwise what will be the point - gradual minor improvements and a bit more resolution from a 1.3X sensor? And why have they seen to it that all of these new wide angle lenses cover full frame? Just for film users? A side benefit is that the R lenses could be used on it.

 

Last edited by AlanG; 04.03.2009 at 21:02.

[dkCambridgeshire]

Given the fact that Leitz previously formed a partnership with Minolta in order to manufacture the R3 based on the Minolta XE ... could Leica cooperate with another DSLR manufacturer and use an existing DSLR chassis with a Leica R mount, maybe with a new sensor, thus offering a digital R solution?

 

Fuji have previously used Nikon chassis for their S series DSLRs.

 

Maybe Leica could utilise a Canon chassis with a new sensor ... and Canon would not lose DSLR sales if the body was for manual focus lenses only.

 

dunk

[adli]

Why on earth would any manufacturer make a new camera for a discontinued lens line? If there ever will be a solution for R-lenses, it will be an adapter for camera originally buildt for an other camera system still inn production.

[AlanG]

Why on earth would any manufacturer make a new camera for a discontinued lens line? If there ever will be a solution for R-lenses, it will be an adapter for camera originally buildt for an other camera system still inn production.

 

I don't think anyone expects a camera that is specifically made for R lenses. Merely one that can be adapted to use R lenses - and possibly retain the auto diaphragm.

[stunsworth]

Why on earth would any manufacturer make a new camera for a discontinued lens line?

 

Maybe someone new to the world of full frame SLRs who was using the R mount with new AF lenses.

[AlanG]

Maybe someone new to the world of full frame SLRs who was using the R mount with new AF lenses.

 

My guess is that there won't be other manufacturers jumping into the DLSR market at this point - full frame or otherwise. They'll all be EVIL. Thus R lenses will require an adapter when someone does make a full frame EVIL body.

[stunsworth]

My guess is that there won't be other manufacturers jumping into the DLSR market at this point - full frame or otherwise. They'll all be EVIL

 

Sorry, when I wrote SLR I was thinking of a camera with an EVF - i.e. a full frame AF camera using the R mount - with AF connections added of course.

[Nicoleica]

Sorry, when I wrote SLR I was thinking of a camera with an EVF - i.e. a full frame AF camera using the R mount - with AF connections added of course.

 

Awww! I was having a wonderful fantasy about an R-Mount D3s.

[AlanG]

Sorry, when I wrote SLR I was thinking of a camera with an EVF - i.e. a full frame AF camera using the R mount - with AF connections added of course.

 

It could be done but that would somewhat defeat the point of eliminating the mirror in order to make a much thinner body. I think you are going to need an adapter to use any legacy lens on a new thinner mirror-less body.

 

Any manufacturer of a new system would want to capitalize on the potential of selling new lenses. The ability to use some legacy lenses is just an added bonus that comes with the design. Once there is any brand of FF EVIL camera, there is nothing stopping someone from making an adapter that links a servo motor to the aperture of the R lens.

[stunsworth]

Alan, why does the body need to be thinner? There's still a need for a decent distance between mount and film plane to eliminate the problems experienced by the M8 wrt colour shifts Eliminating the mirror box would remove the need for the mechanical mirror and screen. The screen has to be in exactly the right plane for a 'normal' SLR to work. That must be a considerable cost saving.

 

As for lenses, I expect there to be new AF lenses using the R mount - in much the same way that Nikon used its mount when they went AF.

[lct]

Aside the EVF that's what we expected for the R10 as well. Too nice to be true?

[stunsworth]

LCT, what Leica have said is that 'solution for R users' will not be made by them. If will have an EVF. It will be full frame.

 

Leica already have a relationship with a company that produces removable lens cameras that use EVFs. What that company doesn't have is a full frame camera. What if they wanted to expand their range at the top end, and also introduce the world's first full frame camera that used an EVF rather than a flappy mirror and focussing screen?

 

I have to add that this is all speculation on my part.

[wildlightphoto]

Alan, why does the body need to be thinner? There's still a need for a decent distance between mount and film plane to eliminate the problems experienced by the M8 wrt colour shifts .

 

WRT color shifts, the distance from the mount and sensor is irrelevant. The distance from the lens' exit pupil to the sensor is what influences problems like the M8 color shifts.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[adan]

The big advantage of the EVIL approach is that it eliminates a lot of SLR construction headaches, especially for electronics companies without much experience building SLRs.

 

Such as:

>Mirrors and the clockwork to drive them to and from precise locations

>Secondary mirrors for metering and/or AF detection, and yet more linakges to move and position THEM

>Ground-glass viewscreens that must be carefully positioned to match the focus point of the imaging surface (film or silicon) - and these days, require fiddly wiring to display even a limited amount of things like AF points or grid overlays

> Large and heavy prisms (or dim pentamirrors) to rectify the image and complete the viewing chain.

 

We can note that the prime movers of EVIL cameras are Panasonic, Samsung, and Sony, who have never actually built SLRs themselves (they sell or have sold rebadged traditional mirror/groundglass SLRs actually built by, respectively, Olympus, Pentax, and Konica/Minolta). Olympus had to be dragged kicking and sceaming into micro-4/3rds when they saw Panasonic's G series stealing their rice bowl.

 

The size benefit of a shorter lens-to-sensor distance, and the lack of mirror shake, are nice side-effects. But they aren't the driving force behind EVILS.