The size of the future

[giordano]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

unless photogs don't care about DoF of course.

 

Not all of us care about it as passionately as you do. Offhand I can only recall ever making two or three shots where ultra-shallow DoF (e.g. the difference between 90mm at f/2.8 or 90mm at f/2) has been really important. Almost always when I use a lens wide open it's because of insufficient light to give the shutter speed I need, and there isn't as much depth of field as I would like.

 

When this subject came up a few weeks ago I looked at every one of the images in each of the two T&H concise histories of photography (Gernsheim 1965 and Jeffrey 1981). Between them they contain about 400 photographs with surprisingly few duplicates. I found just two where "razor thin" depth of field is both deliberate and important to the picture - both, as it happens, close-up portraits by Julia Margaret Cameron. I've just repeated the exercise with the 2007 book The Genius of Photography and found about three out of about 250 - one of them one of the Julia Margaret Cameron portraits in the T&H books.

 

And anyone who shoots with a small-sensor camera or point-and-shoot ipso facto doesn't care about DoF.

 

I'm not suggesting there's anything wrong with wanting to have extra-shallow DoF in your "toolkit", just that you're very much in the minority in placing that much emphasis on it.

[Advertisement]

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

[lct]

...The lenses can be smaller if you prefer greater depth of field and that is what many users simply want - overall sharp photos...

Sure but do we need Leicas for that?

[leicanut2]

I do like small and light as well but i like optical blur too. 4/3 cams need one more f-stop than APS-C's from this standpoint. This pretty well ruins the size and weight argument IMHO, unless photogs don't care about DoF of course.

 

The panny 20mm has the great Bokeh as does the panny leica 25mm f1.4 and well Voigtlander 17.5 and 25mm nokton .095

Can't forget Oly 12mm f2 or even the oly 48mm f1.8

Lot of options even can use leica glass with a adapter.

[lct]

Not all of us care about it as passionately as you do. Offhand I can only recall ever making two or three shots where ultra-shallow DoF...

I'm not that passionate about DoF, just an ordinary photog having no f/1 lens and shooting more often at f/2 than f/1.4 actually. But to get the same result as from a 50/2 on APS-C i would need a 35/1.4 on 4/3 and this lens would be bulkier and more expensive as far as Leica lenses are concerned. Leica has not the least reason to sell 4/3 cameras where APS-H or even APS-C can do the job with not too much compromise already. IMHO of course.

[leicanut2]

I'm not that passionate about DoF, just an ordinary photog having no f/1 lens and shooting more often at f/2 than f/1.4 actually. But to get the same result as from a 50/2 on APS-C i would need a 35/1.4 on 4/3 and this lens would be bulkier and more expensive as far as Leica lenses are concerned. Leica has not the least reason to sell 4/3 cameras where APS-H or even APS-C can do the job with not too much compromise already. IMHO of course.

 

Yep the Leica Panasonic 25mm is just a panny lens that was okayed by leica , I guess leica specs. not really sure.

I guess as long as ones happy and can still snap away and can afford high end gear go for it. Life is short.

 

Jan

[lct]

Another example of a bulkier 4/3 (25/1.4) compared to its APS-C equivalent (35/2).

[rosuna]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I remember when Pentax made an interchangeable-lens SLR camera for 110 film. It created quite a stir, but it proved to be a novelty and it had no successors. And Leica had a production-ready high quality 110 camera, but fortunately they squelched it in the last moment.

 

Fads always come and go. The digital revolution has removed many old barriers, and the result has been some wild experimentation. It's all part of the evolution game, and has its organic counterparts. During the time 3.5–2 million years ago the hominids saw some explosive branching out, for reasons that we only dimly understand. Probably one main factor was the glacial age drying out and spontaneous deforestation of East Africa. But the fact is that it has only been during the last 20.000 years, a mere instant of geological history, that we have been the only human species on Earth.

 

The fact is that while formerly, technology was a limiting factor, and most things that could be done were worthwhile, today technology enables us to do lots of things of which only a few are worthwhile. Remember the digital wristwatch? Today even my mobile phone has an analog time display with virtual hands, if I should prefer that. So we are passing through a time of exuberant experimentation, but time will show what's viable and what is not.

 

Photography will remain with us and with it, tools for those that want or have to use it seriously.

 

The old man from the Kodachrome Age

 

Leica cannot assume wild experimentation.

 

They have to be careful in the path they chose to follow, because that choice is binding. There are huge sunk costs in the development of any new system, and any failure might be the death for Leica.

[janki]

Finally it is here. The Super Telephoto lens 5oo mm, f4, from the company that starts with an S and ends with a Y. Extremely fast AF.

Have a look at this owl. Not any distracting elements in the background here.:)

I would really wish that this were a Leica product. But Leica seems to have left the telephoto segment.

i got the 500mm f4 and my first picture`s with it - Dyxum forums - Page 1

[jaapv]

Yep From the company that starts with an L and ends with an a.. 105-280 Vario Elmar with 1.4x converter... Has been around for ages.

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/nature-wildlife/192825-siberian-uhu-captive.html#post1779563

 

 

Great shot btw

[AlanG]

Sure but do we need Leicas for that?

 

Leica will probably continue to make at least a few cameras that are the exception to some if not most trends in photography because Leica is targeting smaller specialized markets with some models. (Some other smaller companies also do this.) However, as time has shown, they seem to eventually have to either update models or introduce additional lines of cameras in order to keep or expand market share.

 

Last night, I was at the art gallery I belong to and had a discussion with another photographer about how bad the images are that many people post to Facebook, etc. despite the available technology. (He got a Leica and darkroom back in the 50s when he was 14.) We are of the opinion that quality in images and writing does not matter to a lot of people and it shows. Even very off color terrible self portraits are posted as Linked-In profile photos. The traditional view that many of us have about cameras and photography is rapidly changing, but of course will never be complete with enthusiasts, pros, and artists.

[janki]

Yep From the company that starts with an L and ends with an a.. 105-280 Vario Elmar wit i.4x converter... Has been around for ages.

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/nature-wildlife/192825-siberian-uhu-captive.html#post1779563

 

 

Great shot btw

 

Thanks Jaap!

This is a really sparkling great picture of the same owl species (?).

However, we have this problem with the lack of a suitable digital camera body.

As rumors get stronger and stronger, it does not seem to be

presented any EVIL APS-C model from Leica on 10 May, either.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

I do like small and light as well but i like optical blur too. 4/3 cams need one more f-stop than APS-C's from this standpoint. This pretty well ruins the size and weight argument IMHO, unless photogs don't care about DoF of course.

 

I do too, but I think you will find that we are in the minority. For the average consumer convenience and price will trump absolute quality every time. That leads to more market share and more profitability. Profitability leads to R&D dollars. And the cycle repeats.

 

70 years ago 35mm was regarded as an inferior format by "serious" photographers and the same DOF arguments were made against this miniature format. 40 years ago AF was never going to take off in the professional market because a professional would never let a camera make that sort of decision for them. Ditto for the "automatic" modes and matrix metering, TTL flash. And here we are where 90% of professionals ans 99% of all photographers rely on exactly those conveniences. Even in the studio where the convenience factor is smaller 35mm dominates and AF rules because it's easier and cheaper.

 

Now in 2012, it would be going against the historical trend in photography to say that a larger format will lead to the demise of a smaller one as this has simply never happened before. In 2012 the smaller sensor in the camera phone is all but wiping out the market one step further up the sensor size ladder. Mirrorless sales are 60% of the Asian interchangeable market and growing. Europe is following.

 

Apart from being incredibly difficult to read (200 lines of dense white text on black?) the writer has simply ignored the history of photography when coming to his conclusions.

 

Micro 4/3 is not under threat from 35mm or APSC. If anything leads to the demise of 4/3 it will be a smaller sensor like the Nikon 1 series. Convenience will always dominate the market.

 

But that doesn't mean that the other forms will die out completely either. Film is still here. large format is still here. CDs didn't wipe out vinyl. In fact this drive to convenience can be beneficial for boutique brands like Leica. It allows them to differentiate themselves more from the mainstream. It allows them to sell less for more. As Japanese and korean cars become cheaper and more convenient Porsche and Ferrari become more profitable. Leica is at its most profitable in decades based on a camera that costs more than it's peers with all the "good stuff" taken out. As a niche product it can thrive but it will never become mainstream. Because even though the M9 has access to the finest lenses in the world, the convenience of AF and matrix metering is more attractive than absolute image quality (high ISO aside).

 

So, you will always be able to get your thin depth of field. It's just that the other 98% don't care and will always buy the smallest and easiest to use.

 

Gordon

[jaapv]

Yes but you wouldn't zone focus with a long telephoto would you. Or would you?

 

Steve

Actually I don't zone-focus at all..

[lars_bergquist]

Leica cannot assume wild experimentation.

 

They have to be careful in the path they chose to follow, because that choice is binding. There are huge sunk costs in the development of any new system, and any failure might be the death for Leica.

 

Ay, there's the rub. They cannot afford to climb out on a branch that proves to be a dead end. But neither can they ignore that the technology (and the market) is in a phase of wild 'adaptive radiation' where, as in natural evolution, most branching-outs will ultimately fail. NOT climbing out on the viable branch will be equally disastrous.

 

Good luck to you, Herr Kaufmann.

 

The old man from the Kodachrome Age

[250swb]

Leica has not the least reason to sell 4/3 cameras where APS-H or even APS-C can do the job with not too much compromise already. IMHO of course.

 

So the new EVIL camera will be designed to go head to head with the M series will it? I say that based on the fact that the theoretically comparable Fuji X-Pro 1 with its 'small' sensor is as big as an M9. I would have thought Leica would want to make a smaller compact system, not something that simply duplicates the size of the M system in the body but with bigger lenses to accommodate motors. You see that is the conundrum, an APS-C sized system would be physically bigger than the components of an M system, a weird turnaround in camera evolution if it happens.

 

Steve

[SJP]

People that enjoy photography at some point will discover the joys of controlling DOF & where the focus exactly lies, this presumably will be a minority, but still should provide a solid market for Leica.

 

You cannot get the same degree of isolation on a smaller sensor camera, unless you use lenses that are similar in size to their 35mm equivalents. Phrased differently, the camera will be the same size or bigger/heavier. Here Leica has an advantage being the smallest camera in its league.

 

I think it is a reasonably solid twig they have chosen to sit on.

[rosuna]

So the new EVIL camera will be designed to go head to head with the M series will it? I say that based on the fact that the theoretically comparable Fuji X-Pro 1 with its 'small' sensor is as big as an M9. I would have thought Leica would want to make a smaller compact system, not something that simply duplicates the size of the M system in the body but with bigger lenses to accommodate motors. You see that is the conundrum, an APS-C sized system would be physically bigger than the components of an M system, a weird turnaround in camera evolution if it happens.

 

Steve

 

Fuji has closed that path for Leica. Either if you like the resulting product or not, that branch is in Fuji's hands. This is: a mirrorless camera with optical viewfinder on APS-C format. It is done already.

 

The variant based on electronic viewfinders is done as well, by Sony.

 

Leica cannot be competitive there. You cannot offer something substantially better or cheaper. So they will (should) offer something different.

[jaapv]

So the new EVIL camera will be designed to go head to head with the M series will it? I say that based on the fact that the theoretically comparable Fuji X-Pro 1 with its 'small' sensor is as big as an M9. I would have thought Leica would want to make a smaller compact system, not something that simply duplicates the size of the M system in the body but with bigger lenses to accommodate motors. You see that is the conundrum, an APS-C sized system would be physically bigger than the components of an M system, a weird turnaround in camera evolution if it happens.

 

Steve

if Leica intends to aim the new EVIL camera at serious photographers it cannot be too small or light.

As pointed out the lenses cannot be extremely small, nor, if one uses optical glass and decent materials, can they be extremely light, especially longer lenses and zooms. Olympus OM lenses have indicated the limits, I think.. That means that the camera has a minimum size and weight to balance properly. The ergonomics of extremely miniaturized systems (think Pentax 110) are so bad as to make them virtually unusable for serious photography.

The X1 which is meant as a carry-everywhere camera is not particularly small either.

 

As for the argument: there are other offerings in the niche, I don't know if that is valid. To gain their growth target they will have to expand into areas where other camera makers are active. There is not much unoccupied space left in the market. They will just have to build better mousetraps.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[rosuna]

Fuji's lenses for their new system are very light... they have to be, if the target is a fast contrast-based AF operation. This kind of AF imposes serious constraints on the lens design, on the materials and the number of lens elements to be moved during focus tracking.

 

The market is maturing quickly, and a consequence is an increasing differentiation of products. When the digital reflex cameras were the trending products of the day all companies were competing in that segment of fast growth. But in the end that leads to price wars and there are losers (Contax, Minolta, Olympus, Sony). Now the strategic approach is different, and based on differentiation. Companies are thinking on long term stability, because short term recovering of any investment is not possible in any branch. They need more time for making a profit, and the product update pace is slower. Maybe the growth of the global market is slowing down, the characteristics of the public are changing and the catalogue of digital products is different than 6 years ago.

[250swb]

if Leica intends to aim the new EVIL camera at serious photographers it cannot be too small or light.

 

But versatility comes in many ways, and unlike some other manufacturers who have gone for niche and small, Olympus went straight to the heart of making a photographers camera in the E-M5 by making it optionally small and big. They gave the customer the option of a tiny camera, but released a two part grip alongside it that makes it bigger, and then bigger again. By putting the viewfinder on the lens axis and allowing for a good balance they have said 'we intend to make it easily usable with all lenses'. Unlike Fuji or Sony who's designs basically say to the photographer 'hold on to your DSLR if you want to use a telephoto comfortably'.

 

But Leica's camera is designed now, whatever it is I hope it isn't just small and niche, but a photographers camera with a wide range of uses like the Olympus, not just for 'street shooting' and other Fuji-like obsessions.

 

Steve