mjh Posted January 21, 2011 Share #21 Posted January 21, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) ... or just the same flange distance than M cameras... In that case it would have to use the M mount or at least something compatible. That would introduce too many limitations for a potentially extremely flexible and versatile camera. It would be better to use a shorter flange distance and an adapter to provide for M compatibility. The problem of a flange distance shorter than that is the implied necessity of a smaller format (smaller than 24x36). Not at all. A short flange distance doesn’t imply a short distance between lens and sensor or between exit pupil and sensor. A short flange distance isn’t limiting at all, only a long flange distance is. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 21, 2011 Posted January 21, 2011 Hi mjh, Take a look here The R solution - more details. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Wolfgang Esslinger Posted January 21, 2011 Share #22 Posted January 21, 2011 It has been said before but an R solution has been around for some years: the DMR. The last brand new DMRs did not sell like hot cake and the prices for used ones are low. If people were desperate they would go for used DMRs because handling and picture quality (at low ISO) are still excellent. Yes, the DMR has its limitations. But who would honestly expect a Leica R solution to be superior or even parity with similarily priced C/N bodies? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mauribix Posted January 21, 2011 Share #23 Posted January 21, 2011 The last brand new DMRs did not sell like hot cake and the prices for used ones are low. If people were desperate... Exactly. I think we may already have an idea whether a Leica Digital R solution, in the state of the art, would definitely be a bestseller o not. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted January 21, 2011 Share #24 Posted January 21, 2011 DMRs did not sell like hot cake and the prices for used ones are low. That must be an application of a rarely used meaning of the term "low price". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mauribix Posted January 21, 2011 Share #25 Posted January 21, 2011 That must be an application of a rarely used meaning of the term "low price". I guess sold as "hot cake" means "sold with ease". DMRs was not a "bestseller" in the Leica world such as the M9 is. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 21, 2011 Share #26 Posted January 21, 2011 It has been said before but an R solution has been around for some years: the DMR. The last brand new DMRs did not sell like hot cake and the prices for used ones are low. If people were desperate they would go for used DMRs because handling and picture quality (at low ISO) are still excellent. Yes, the DMR has its limitations. But who would honestly expect a Leica R solution to be superior or even parity with similarily priced C/N bodies? Depends on your definition of low I guess,between 2700 and 3500 Euro (with camera) is peanuts for some people I guess... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted January 21, 2011 Share #27 Posted January 21, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) But who would honestly expect a Leica R solution to be superior or even parity with similarily priced C/N bodies? That’s why the R10 was cancelled. The R solution will be something completely different. Not a DSLR, for example. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildlightphoto Posted January 21, 2011 Share #28 Posted January 21, 2011 Well, I'm sorry to say it, but the Leica-R solution exists for some years now, only not from Leica : you can use those lenses easily on a Canon EOS system or, a little more complicated, on the Sony Alpha cameras. Plus you will have the benefit of using AF lenses.. That's a crippled solution. Crappy viewfinders, lower bit depth and no auto-diaphragm for the R lenses, and the benefit of using AF lenses is only due to the poor state of DSLR viewfinders. Go back to the drawing board. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 21, 2011 Share #29 Posted January 21, 2011 Although -apart from the viewfinder-,the Canon 1D4 looks promising. But it is still a CMos sensor.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rolo Posted January 21, 2011 Share #30 Posted January 21, 2011 That's a crippled solution. Crappy viewfinders, lower bit depth and no auto-diaphragm for the R lenses, and the benefit of using AF lenses is only due to the poor state of DSLR viewfinders. Go back to the drawing board. Have you tried a 1D4 with R lenses, Doug ? I'd be interested to hear your considered views past the "crappy" bit from you on this. I own both. The R lenses perform superbly on the 1D4 and have the option and benefit of focus confirmation whilst using an R lens. Can't see why you'd not be happy with the results in the short term, whilst you patiently, patiently, patiently ...... await Leica's non-promised delivery. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
slungu Posted January 21, 2011 Share #31 Posted January 21, 2011 That's a crippled solution. Crappy viewfinders, lower bit depth and no auto-diaphragm for the R lenses, and the benefit of using AF lenses is only due to the poor state of DSLR viewfinders. Go back to the drawing board. Well, I can only count the loss of auto-diaphragm, I did not have the impression the 1Ds viewfinder was anywhere crappy, and the AF on those cameras is also fast and accurate. And, you can use them, as opposed to the Leica-R system. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zlatkob Posted January 21, 2011 Share #32 Posted January 21, 2011 Although -apart from the viewfinder-,the Canon 1D4 looks promising. But it is still a CMos sensor.. Yes, CMOS sensors really suck. It's not like any real photographers would ever use them ... Salgado, Nachtwey, Tenneson, Gorman, Kirkland, Wolfe, Maisel, etc. ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mooky Posted January 21, 2011 Share #33 Posted January 21, 2011 I'm not convinced it will ever happen. If Leica is going into the design process including making a new camera R lens compatible, then to me, they are shooting themselves in the foot. Two or three years down the line, what's left of R system users will be quite possibly be a fading memory. As much as I like my R glass, by then, glass from everyone, including Leica, will have improved. Yes, it's a nice gesture from Leica to be thinking about we R users six years after they started promising a solution - assuming that would be the time line. Why are they even caring for R lens compatibility that far out into the future? How many of us using R glass then will even give a 'hooey'? Even then, it won't be any reason to keep me waiting or give me any reason to buy whatever it is. To my eyes, aside from the M system, Leica is a non-player, by their own choosing, at least now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted January 21, 2011 Share #34 Posted January 21, 2011 I understand Alpa is planning an R adapter for the next-gen iPhone. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildlightphoto Posted January 21, 2011 Share #35 Posted January 21, 2011 Well, I can only count the loss of auto-diaphragm, I did not have the impression the 1Ds viewfinder was anywhere crappy, and the AF on those cameras is also fast and accurate. And, you can use them, as opposed to the Leica-R system. What other viewfinders have you compared the 1Ds with? I wasn't impressed. And AF is limited to focus "points". Canon recommends against focus-lock-recompose when working with shallow DOF. They recommend instead changing composition to suit the AF point(s) or focussing manually. I'm not interested in having a product planner in a megacorporation tell me how to compose my photos. And if AF is accurate why is AF micro-adjust being hailed as a must-have feature? Can't see why you'd not be happy with the results in the short term, whilst you patiently, patiently, patiently ...... await Leica's non-promised delivery. I have no need for a short-term solution because I have 2 R8/DMR bodies. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted January 21, 2011 Share #36 Posted January 21, 2011 I'm not convinced it will ever happen. If Leica is going into the design process including making a new camera R lens compatible, then to me, they are shooting themselves in the foot. Two or three years down the line, what's left of R system users will be quite possibly be a fading memory. It’s Groundhog Day! (Actually it’s still 12 days off.) Anyway: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/digital-forum/161537-r-solution-more-details.html#post1584594. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rolo Posted January 21, 2011 Share #37 Posted January 21, 2011 And AF is limited to focus "points". Canon recommends against focus-lock-recompose when working with shallow DOF. They recommend instead changing composition to suit the AF point(s) or focussing manually. I'm not interested in having a product planner in a megacorporation tell me how to compose my photos. And if AF is accurate why is AF micro-adjust being hailed as a must-have feature? I have no need for a short-term solution because I have 2 R8/DMR bodies. The 1D Mk IV is limited to 49 focus points, or various combinations thereof. I don't recommend focus-lock recompose as well, as you'll loose critical focus and won't be able to track motion as easily. If you try it, you'll risk liking it and where would that take us ? As for the product planner comment, that's just BS .... you're better than that. You seem to misunderstand AF micro-adjust. It's dialled in on a lens by lens basis so that you can maintain critical focus for each lens if for any reason it drifts, which might be more common with zoom lenses. Adjusting focus like that would be a useful feature for the digital M's ! Get rid of back focus on a lens by lens case and save Leica a fortune in service costs. I think you'll have those two wonderful R8/DMR bodies for a long time. As for the guy with the 'clap' ... wtf does he know ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
james.liam Posted January 21, 2011 Share #38 Posted January 21, 2011 I'm not convinced it will ever happen...Two or three years down the line, what's left of R system users will be quite possibly be a fading memory....Why are they even caring for R lens compatibility that far out into the future? How many of us using R glass then will even give a 'hooey'? Even then, it won't be any reason to keep me waiting or give me any reason to buy whatever it is. To my eyes, aside from the M system, Leica is a non-player, by their own choosing, at least now. The very finest of the R's have all by now found happy second homes or are being traded on eBay as high-priced collectibles and unless Leica manages to conjur up a killer body/sensor combo that is so above and beyond what's out there at the time (a red dot and a snappy design on a Panasonic doesn't cut it), the Leitax F-mounts on mine will remain snugly in place. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
raizans Posted January 22, 2011 Share #39 Posted January 22, 2011 i have the feeling that a dedicated r solution is out of the cards. when the technology is good enough, i think we'll see a full frame m-mount camera with a built-in evf, state of the art video, autofocus m-mount zooms, maybe autofocus versions of m-mount primes, and an adaptor for r-mount lenses. basically a panasonic gh2 on steroids. something like that would be a canon 5d killer, which means leica could become a direct competitor to canikon in the professional full frame market. it looks like nikon will be going aps-c on this route, so leica will hypothetically have a leg up on the competition when it comes to unique, desireable products. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted January 22, 2011 Share #40 Posted January 22, 2011 Good thought IMHO. That's what a lot of us were predicting before photokina. The thing that brought me up short on the concept is the idea of going up against the big guns. That's something Leica can't do; that's why they had to make the tough decision and kill the R. I think Wolfgang is right; the only true "R solution" is the DMR. And the R system is dead. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.