The size of the future

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

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....

Why so? The Leica X1 is an APS-C camera as well as the Ricoh A12 and Sony Nex 5 & 7 which are significantly smaller than the Fuji actually.

[Advertisement]

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

[marknorton]

I now the camera is likely to be APS-C based on comments from Leica but I had hoped it would be FF; once you have got used to an M9, the thought of a return to cropping factors is not first prize. In any event, if it doesn't take M lenses, my interest will be zero.

[AlanG]

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.

 

 

At one time many serious photographers used cameras that had tilts and shifts too. If APS or m4/3rds cameras require large lenses for shallow depth of field, that will still be an option if they are available. Which they will be if there is demand for them. But more likely the users of smaller format cameras will choose the option of using longer lenses to isolate subjects using shallow depth of field. Photographers who use 4x5 can choose a 150mm f 2.8 Xenotar lens and get similar DOF as now is being done with a Noctilux but few do this.

 

Full frame 35mm cameras are obviously now the format under pressure but holding on well for now. There are not that many FF digital models but at one time FF 35mm film cameras were the norm. MF is in the same boat. MF and 35mm FF are targeted at a more limited market.

 

As for camera size, small FF 35mm cameras were once common - Olympus XA, Rollei 35, Minox, several others. This might be possible to do with digital sensors but I doubt there is demand for it. (Maybe if this technology becomes much less expensive.) However APS , 4/3rds and smaller seem the way companies will go and I don't see how one can say at this time that a given format is a winner and the others will be losers. A lot drives the purchase besides the size of the sensor.

 

I am sure that cell phone cameras will steadily improve too. Maybe an interesting solution will be a "camera attachment" that snaps over a cell phone in order to use the screen and communication capability of the cell phone. I am kind of surprised there aren't already more wired and wireless attachments for the iPhone besides amplifiers and speakers. I guess the closed iPhone system could be a hindrance but it should be possible with Android.

[pico]

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.

 

Cameron was rather bold. Good for her.

 

Even CB did some of the same: See A. Camus here and here.

 

I've no idea what lens he used. Don't care, either. But it doesn't render like m f/1.5 Summarit. Still, could be.

[rosuna]

There is a rumor regarding a Nikon D600, a cheaper FF camera. And Sony will show the new FF camera with translucid mirror. The 24x36 format at lower prices is the response of several manufacturers to the rising of mirrorless APS-C system.

[giordano]

Even CB did some of the same: See A. Camus here and here.

 

I've no idea what lens he used. Don't care, either. But it doesn't render like m f/1.5 Summarit. Still, could be.

 

Thanks for pointing us to these. IMHO they're at best second-rate by HC-B standards, and examples of what I've elsewhere descibed as laziness: relying entirely on the very wide aperture to calm an intolerable background.

[Paul J]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

relying entirely on the very wide aperture to calm an intolerable background.

 

different people see different things.

 

I see very human portraits of a vulnerable man. Why does the background need to speak anything about the man in this particular photograph?

[AlanG]

There is a rumor regarding a Nikon D600, a cheaper FF camera. And Sony will show the new FF camera with translucid mirror. The 24x36 format at lower prices is the response of several manufacturers to the rising of mirrorless APS-C system.

 

It seems Sony is going mirrorless in most models so a FF 36MP one seems likely to me. And at this point APS DSLR cameras are so inexpensive and offer high enough quality that lower prices on FF may be needed to attract more buyers to larger sensors.

 

It does surprise me that the 5DIII is so much more expensive than the current price of the 5DII. (And more than the D800.) There sure are a lot of APS and M4/3rds cameras out there now. But I think Leica would really have a winner if they made a camera similar to the Nex 7 but with a range of really compact lenses. (Unfortunately the thin body alone probably necessitates the lenses being a bit longer than M lenses... before you even get into corner color shift and vignetting issues.)

 

I expect to see prices on most mirrorless cameras coming down as they must cost less to make than APS DSLRs.

[NZDavid]

The original story by Richard Sexton is worth a read. Like many discussions on design, it covers a whole lot of topics -- including not just size but precision and the puzzle of why "outmoded" products still appeal. He does meander around a bit.

 

The puzzle with the Leica M is why such a camera that is patently way behind the latest in cutting-edge technology, still appeals. The reasons -- as with mechanical wristwatches -- are many, but basically boil own to the camera still meeting the requirements of its owners.

 

For Sexton, the Leica M no longer meets his requirements. "I’ve gleaned my way through the mirrorless segment looking for a new and modern way to pursue rangefinder photography. The obvious answer—Just buy an M9, doesn’t work for me. Too much technology has intervened since the 1970s. Autofocus is now faster and more accurate than manual rangefinder focusing. The M9, with its CCD sensor, has relatively poor high ISO performance and no live view..."

 

You may disagree. What, then, is an alternative? I don't think Sexton defines his criteria clearly enough: What does he really want in a camera? Size, picture quality, low-light performance, simple controls, blazing fast AF, aesthetics? Yes, all of those things and more, it seems. Sexton then discusses the pros and cons of various mirrorless cameras.

 

Sensor size and performance are just part of the mix. I think his article could have been more focused (excuse the pun) if he had more clearly outlined what he believes a modern rangefinder or rangefinder-equivalent should do -- for what kind of photography is it best suited? -- and what qualities and characteristics it needs to deliver the goods.

 

Small size, big camera performance was Leica's original claim to fame. (That, of course, was another age, the age of.... ) Well, small sensor camera performance has come along in leaps and bounds. Though larger formats will always have the edge for size and definition and at high ISOs, smaller sensors sizes are remarkably good. Many photographers don't need to print any larger than A3, and a slightly noisy ISO 800 picture is acceptable. And quality is constantly improving.

 

For travel and unobtrusive street photography, quick and easy operation, and good results, compact cameras like the Leica D-Lux 5 and its Panasonic cousin are in many ways the heirs to Oscar Barnack's original Leica.

 

For precision and simplicity and a minimum of fiddly controls, it is hard to go past the Leica X1, as Sexton says. But that camera is limited.

 

For me, one of the few drawbacks of the smaller sensor cameras is the huge DOF. That can be a boon in many cases where you want everything to be in focus, but a big plus with Leica M is the ability to use those marvelous lenses to define the subject and throw the background out of focus. Perhaps an EVIL camera with an ultra fast prime is the answer here? But I still find RF is more precise.

 

I think there will always be a place for a dedicated high-performance compact camera. It may not do everything, but it does most things well. I think it highly unlikely we will see only a choice of massive pro-level DSLRs at one end of the size scale and diminutive smartphone cameras at the another end of the scale, with nothing in between. The reason is a simple thing called market demand.

 

I do think it will be very interesting to see whether Leica comes up with a new version of the X1, perhaps with interchangeable lenses, or something else entirely. We shall find out very soon.

[250swb]

Why so? The Leica X1 is an APS-C camera as well as the Ricoh A12 and Sony Nex 5 & 7 which are significantly smaller than the Fuji actually.

 

I will begin to believe you when I see the announcement of the 600mm equivalent lens for the X1 (lol), or even the NEX7. And no, not some fudged compromise with an adapter. That is how small a system is, the ratio between the widest range of available lenses in the smallest size overall package, not showboating around a couple of lenses made for 'street' photography.

 

 

Steve

[FlashGordonPhotography]

I will begin to believe you when I see the announcement of the 600mm equivalent lens for the X1 (lol), or even the NEX7. And no, not some fudged compromise with an adapter. That is how small a system is, the ratio between the widest range of available lenses in the smallest size overall package, not showboating around a couple of lenses made for 'street' photography.

 

 

Steve

 

M4/3 has native lenses from fisheye to 600mm equivalent with no adaptors and all are available in AF and full electronic coupling. A full kit from 14mm to 600 mm with no gaps can be put together at under 1.8 kilos. And while I agree the lenses are simply ridiculous on it, the NEX7 with the LEA2 functions quite brilliantly. It's kind of like a 21st century Novoflex, just done better.

 

Actually, come to think of it, where's the 600 for the M9? If I'd known that there wasn't one I never would have bought into this incomplete system.

 

Gordon

[AlanG]

That is how small a system is, the ratio between the widest range of available lenses in the smallest size overall package, ...

 

Steve

 

Can you clarify this methodology because I can't see how to apply it. Wouldn't a small camera with only two lenses win? Or would the ratio from 8mm to 2000mm in a much larger package consisting of 100+ lenses win? Or would only a Leica M win in all circumstances? Every way I look at it the S2 system would do poorly.

[pico]

There is a rumor regarding a Nikon D600, a cheaper FF camera. And Sony will show the new FF camera with translucid mirror.

 

Translucid? Semi-comprehensible mirror! I love it already! Will it be called the Alice? I want one!

.

[rosuna]

Translucid? Semi-comprehensible mirror! I love it already! Will it be called the Alice? I want one!

.

 

Translucent...

[Rick]

Translucent...

 

Pellicle

[leicanut2]

M4/3 has native lenses from fisheye to 600mm equivalent with no adaptors and all are available in AF and full electronic coupling. A full kit from 14mm to 600 mm with no gaps can be put together at under 1.8 kilos. And while I agree the lenses are simply ridiculous on it, the NEX7 with the LEA2 functions quite brilliantly. It's kind of like a 21st century Novoflex, just done better.

 

Actually, come to think of it, where's the 600 for the M9? If I'd known that there wasn't one I never would have bought into this incomplete system.

 

Gordon

 

Leica 800mm and leica 560mm both will work on a M9 or any other M using the Visoflex 111

 

 

Jan

[250swb]

 

Can you clarify this methodology because I can't see how to apply it. Wouldn't a small camera with only two lenses win? Or would the ratio from 8mm to 2000mm in a much larger package consisting of 100+ lenses win? Or would only a Leica M win in all circumstances? Every way I look at it the S2 system would do poorly.

 

Compare a Canon 5dMkIII and a Canon 600mm zoom lens with an Olympus EM-5 and a 300mm zoom lens. Would you see a difference in lens and body footprint? Then compare a Canon 5dMkIII with a 50mm f1.4 lens with an Olympus EM-5 with a 25mm f1.4 lens, would you see a difference in lens and body footprint? I can see the difference but I won't say which is smaller, I don't want to influence your decision. But of course this is about smaller sensor systems. And you now have to imagine what the difference would be with systems more in keeping with an Olympus E-M5 because not all of them have a native 600mm equivalent lens, nor a f1.4 50mm equivalent prime, and sometimes not much in between either.

 

Steve

[jaapv]

I will begin to believe you when I see the announcement of the 600mm equivalent lens for the X1 (lol), or even the NEX7. And no, not some fudged compromise with an adapter. That is how small a system is, the ratio between the widest range of available lenses in the smallest size overall package, not showboating around a couple of lenses made for 'street' photography.

 

 

Steve

 

That would put any long-zoom bridge camera at the top of the heap.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[lct]

...compare a Canon 5dMkIII with a 50mm f1.4 lens with an Olympus EM-5 with a 25mm f1.4 lens, would you see a difference in lens and body footprint?...

Not a fair comparo Steve. You should compare the 50/1.4 on FF to a 25/0.7 (!) on 4/3 as far as DoF is concerned. No wonder which would be the bulkier.

[AlanG]

That would put any long-zoom bridge camera at the top of the heap.

 

I venture a guess that these outsell the Noctilux. Choosing the "best" camera or lens for a given person varies widely. That is why there are so many choices.

 

Image quality of smaller cameras has increased over the past few years but Nikon and Canon still offer the most versatility of all systems via their 24x36mm format lens and body offerings. Yet smaller cameras are quite popular too and outsell FF 35mm bodies by far despite the lack of smaller lenses with the shallow DOF of a Noctilux.

 

But if you use an APS with a Noctilux on it, you'll get an image that can't be made with an M and a 75mm 1.4. So it goes both ways and this approach could appeal to some too.