Stefan Daniel: New M and APS-C soon?

[Mantice]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I still shoot R lenses (on Canon) and for me, any TTL (SLR) camera that share the R-bayonet I am interested to buy, regardless if the bayonet isn't intended to fit R-cam (but for auto-focus, etc).

 

But at 2x of Canon 5D price it better do R-cam or read the ROM chip..

[AlanG]

Alan, I have to strongly differ on that, based on my experience with current DSLR cameras and opinions of other DSLR users, who came to the insight of how beautiful and essential Leica cameras are, when coming from a complicated DSLR.

 

 

Do you think this is a large number of people? What is not essential to you might be very essential to me. Most photographers my age used to use much simpler cameras and have few difficulties adapting to even the most "complex" digital camera. I wouldn't mix up lack of AF, IS, live view, etc. to mean that the Leica M9 is simpler to use. Although you and others might prefer it. You still have to understand the peculiarities of 6 bit coding and camera lens selection for color shift and vignetting compensation, frame line inaccuracy, parallax, the correct SD card to use, and numerous other things that are peculiar to rangefinders or the M9. You are trading learning certain things about using one camera for learning other things about using another camera.

 

Now that digital cameras have been commonplace for a while, most photographers are pretty familiar with the controls and features that are typically found on them.

 

The M9 fills a different niche than the R and the M's niche is pretty small and without much competition... as of now. This is well and good and perhaps Leica will keep something like an M9 type of camera around for a long time. But my read on Mr. Daniel's remarks is that he sees the need for another less expensive product line that will incorporate the features that users typically expect in a camera today and will allow the company to expand. Making an R10 and a whole new system of AF lenses would not have the same profit potential in my opinion and would just undercut the S2.

 

If there was any lesson to be learned from the Leicaflex and R system it is that being several steps behind the competition in terms of features and technology is not a mistake that Leica plans to make in the future if it can help it.

[rosuna]

The R system has been a historical failure for Leica. They invested tons of resources but it never was a success.

 

In some sense, two digital systems, R and M, would have been redundant (and it occurred in the past).

 

The development of a complete AF 35mm reflex system of lenses is very costly and complex.

 

The 35mm reflex market segment has strong competition from Canon, Nikon and Sony, and Leica cannot offer anything competitive there. The medium format market is different.

 

Reflex systems will not disappear in the short term, but mirrorless systems is the new paradigm. Reflex cameras will resist, specially for professional uses, but the technological progress is really fast and we will see evil cameras designed for professional use very soon.

 

The decision to stop further development of the R system was correct. Leica will apply those resources to new initiatives like new developments to the M system, as the mirrorless basis for new solutions.

[SJP]

What I really don't get is why a DSLR system necessarily requires auto-focus (except for keeping up with the Joneses). Personally I would be more than happy to have a Leica DSLR with manual focus primes & all manual metering etc. Maybe aperture priority like in the M7-M9. This would provide the "R" system a unique niche in the DSLR world - back to basics, if the picture sucks it was your fault.

 

In my experience auto-focus is very good at focusing something that I did not want to be focused.

[mjh]

What I really don't get is why a DSLR system necessarily requires auto-focus (except for keeping up with the Joneses).

While AF is not a technical requirement, it’s a commercial requirement.

[SJP]

While AF is not a technical requirement, it’s a commercial requirement.

Which is exactly what I am doubting, if positioned properly the lack of AF would be a unique selling point.

[k_g_wolf ✝]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

This "unique" SP has failed in the past, unfortunately.

 

They won´t try it another time.

 

 

Best

GEORG

[jaapv]

Well, they tried for forty years without success. I don't think Leica can be faulted for lack of persistence.

[luigi bertolotti]

Which is exactly what I am doubting, if positioned properly the lack of AF would be a unique selling point.

 

I don't think can be a selling point for a camera targeted between X1 and M line, and, above all, with no FF, but an APS sensor... M (and R) mount is a "nice to have" for their customer base (and, marginally, a possible source of additional M primes sales), AF, for marketing reasons, is a must to try to find new customers.

[pico]

How about a version of the V-Lux with Leica's FF35? Adding adapters for AF could be left to third parties.

[mmradman]

How about a version of the V-Lux with Leica's FF35? Adding adapters for AF could be left to third parties.

 

Scraping the barrel .

 

V-Lux is camera fitted with integral zoom lens and mini sensor, how does it translate into next generation system camera with APS-C or bigger sensor?

 

Here is refreshing summer season recipe; take one sensor of choice, fit inside the camera body of choice, add M bayonet mount and viewing & focusing system of choice, sprinkle with some electronics, garnish with red dot or optional Leica classic engraving on top plate and masterpiece is ready.

[AlanG]

What I really don't get is why a DSLR system necessarily requires auto-focus (except for keeping up with the Joneses). Personally I would be more than happy to have a Leica DSLR with manual focus primes & all manual metering etc. Maybe aperture priority like in the M7-M9. This would provide the "R" system a unique niche in the DSLR world - back to basics, if the picture sucks it was your fault.

 

In my experience auto-focus is very good at focusing something that I did not want to be focused.

 

I think Mr. Daniel's statement makes it clear that they are looking forwards not backwards. AF and other technology will continue to improve. I and many others find AF to work quite well and I do not feel it is mostly included in my camera to keep up with the Joneses. Why do you think so many pros switched from MF to AF in their Nikons starting a long time ago in the film era? I think a lot of those MF lenses are available pretty cheaply, so the market has spoken and Leica can't afford to ignore market trends as they did with the R.

 

Using AF takes some skill too and there are various setting choices with most cameras. If the subject is not moving quickly, consider using your AF in a "focus and lock" method rather than letting the camera choose the focus point for you.

 

Many pictures suck regardless of the camera used. Don't expect the inclusion or exclusion of technology to be a panacea.

[giordano]

Which is exactly what I am doubting, if positioned properly the lack of AF would be a unique selling point.

 

If manual focus were a selling point, one or both of Nikon and Canon would be introducing new MF lenses and the focusing screens to go with them. And Olympus would be making digital OMs rather than Four-Thirds DSLRs.

[jaapv]

I think Mr. Daniel's statement makes it clear that they are looking forwards not backwards. AF and other technology will continue to improve. I and many others find AF to work quite well and I do not feel it is mostly included in my camera to keep up with the Joneses. Why do you think so many pros switched from MF to AF in their Nikons starting a long time ago in the film era? I think a lot of those MF lenses are available pretty cheaply, so the market has spoken and Leica can't afford to ignore market trends as they did with the R.

 

Using AF takes some skill too and there are various setting choices with most cameras. If the subject is not moving quickly, consider using your AF in a "focus and lock" method rather than letting the camera choose the focus point for you.

 

Many pictures suck regardless of the camera used. Don't expect the inclusion or exclusion of technology to be a panacea.

 

I just did a wildlife workshop and not one AF system could catch a Saker Falcon striking at 300 kph. The M9 could as only camera:) , but the bird was totally speed-blurred....

[pico]

Originally Posted by pico:

How about a version of the V-Lux with Leica's FF35? Adding adapters for AF could be left to third parties.

Scraping the barrel .

 

V-Lux is camera fitted with integral zoom lens and mini sensor, how does it translate into next generation system camera with APS-C or bigger sensor?

 

Scraping the barrel .

 

V-Lux is camera fitted with integral zoom lens and mini sensor, how does it translate into next generation system camera with APS-C or bigger sensor?.\

 

Read my first paragraph - " V-Lux with Leica's FF35? "

 

The V-Lux is basically a Panasonic Lumix G* which takes M43 lenses, and of course with adapters, it uses Leica M, S or R lenses - and even some c-mount lenses. It suffers from having a small sensor (and inferior to Kodak's). Another camera like the G*, but a bit larger, with FF35 would mean we could mount any Leica M or S lens, and with the appropriate adapter, R lenses.

[eleskin]

Ronan,

 

I just read your comment. I too made statements similar to yours regarding a moving sensor to achieve autofocus with M mount lenses. This type of system, in full frame, would be an elegant solution to the R lens users as well as offer the M user a whole new world in terms of how many ways they can use their lenses which are not a cheap investment. I regard my Leica lenses a lifelong investment and any technology that makes them more useful is very welcome. To use a Noctilux with autofocus would be a great help in many situations, as well as many other lenses. It doesnt mean I would not use a rangefinder. The autofocus option gives me more reasons not to buy a DSLR and have redundant lens collections.

 

Besides, Leica would make photo history. They would make the worlds first truly universal camera full frame that could use any lens ever created and achieve autofocus. Demand would be very great, and they may have to consider Panasonic to handle some of the intense production. One thing is certain: Lens values new and used would go up, especially Leica M lenses!

 

Imagine Leica increasing the value of what we own, and being committed to the customor with new and revolutionary products! It would be a very wise business decision indeed! I hope Leica is reading this!!!

[mjh]

The V-Lux is basically a Panasonic Lumix G* which takes M43 lenses.

It isn’t. Neither the V-Lux 1, V-Lux 2, V-Lux 20, nor V-Lux 30 take any lenses other than the non-interchangeable lens they already have.

[mmradman]

I think this thread has run its course, fat has been chewed over and over again.

 

After so many opinions I wish there is coherent view which way this new camera should go, so maybe Leica takes note even, sadly it is mostly drivel.

 

Number of participants here are better qualified to write Odes to Leica than to take part in constructive technical debate.

[mmradman]

I just did a wildlife workshop and not one AF system could catch a Saker Falcon striking at 300 kph. The M9 could as only camera:) , but the bird was totally speed-blurred....

 

Art & craft of decisive moment.

 

On the side note there is pretty good camera rig owned by NASA used to track Space Shuttle during launch, i think it cost something like $39M

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[AlanG]

Ronan,

 

I just read your comment. I too made statements similar to yours regarding a moving sensor to achieve autofocus with M mount lenses. This type of system, in full frame, would be an elegant solution to the R lens users as well as offer the M user a whole new world in terms of how many ways they can use their lenses which are not a cheap investment. I regard my Leica lenses a lifelong investment and any technology that makes them more useful is very welcome. To use a Noctilux with autofocus would be a great help in many situations, as well as many other lenses. It doesnt mean I would not use a rangefinder. The autofocus option gives me more reasons not to buy a DSLR and have redundant lens collections.

 

Besides, Leica would make photo history. They would make the worlds first truly universal camera full frame that could use any lens ever created and achieve autofocus. Demand would be very great, and they may have to consider Panasonic to handle some of the intense production. One thing is certain: Lens values new and used would go up, especially Leica M lenses!

 

Imagine Leica increasing the value of what we own, and being committed to the customor with new and revolutionary products! It would be a very wise business decision indeed! I hope Leica is reading this!!!

 

Some lenses need to be focused via their focusing ring because some lens elements or groups need to be moved independently. Thus this concept is dead in the water today.

 

And then try to design one. Some problems -

 

The Contax AX was basically a complete moving camera within a larger body. And it only had 10 mm of focus travel, so some lenses needed to be manually "rough" focused. (Including those with floating elements.) But consider what would need to be changed for the M to have this feature. Would you make a motorized focusing mount that lenses go into, or would you move the sensor and shutter back and forth? And with no through the lens viewing, how would you know if the camera is focused on what you want?

 

If you move the sensor and shutter, how would this affect metering? Wouldn't the metering components have to move also? Where are the AF sensors going to be located and will they use a semi silvered mirror or will this require live view or some other technology? How much larger and thicker would the camera have to be to accommodate the movement required?

 

So one could simply have a built in motorized focusing mount, like in the old Contax and Nikon rangefinders. (Longer lenses had their own focusing mounts.) But how quickly could this mechanism spin and how far can it move? How are you going to like having the lens spin around? Maybe it can just slide. And this also has the same issues for how the AF sensors can be used vs. live view as the idea above. I think this could only work with pretty small and light lenses.

 

In either case, isn't this a ridiculous amount of mass to move compared to what is required to move inside of AF lenses?

 

Additionally, isn't it more to Leica's benefit to sell new lenses?