New Summicron

[adan]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

DNG uncompressed on the M9 is, indeed, 36Mp (Mine are 36.2 due to cluster factor),

 

Pico, megaPixels and megaBytes are two different things. The M9, compressed or uncompressed, is always an 18 megaPixel camera. Period.

 

The file size can be 18 megaBytes or 36 megaBytes (or 4-9 megaBytes in JPEG), depending on compression - but that corresponds to the amount of tonal data within each pixel - NOT more pixels.

 

As to the 50 Summicron APO:

 

To me it smacks of a Bugatti Veyron. Something for the man (women aren't this silly) who has to know he owns the only production car with 1,000 (now 1,200) hp - even when stuck in traffic on the Étoile doing 3 kph.

 

Check the ownership rolls of the Veyron, and I suspect you'll find few professional F1 drivers. They don't need to "prove" something in fantasy-land - they do it in the real world.

[jaapv]

 

If this is where Dr Kaufmann intends to take the company, then he will really have to improve his skills in presenting new products. Hype up product releases, create a proper rumour buzz months ahead (the buzz around the internet pre-May 10 pales in comparison with the buzz surrounding Apple product launches, for instance). Remove Berliner Philhamoniker and hire Nicki Minaj, Will.I.am or some such empty-headed artist, play loud music and have lots of ladies with little pieces of shiny clothing walk about among the well-heeled crowd dangling 10,000$ cameras around their wrists like some pimped-up iPhone. And ensure that there's a proper venue and that all who appear dress to the occasion (a trumpeter in jeans?!).

I can only assume that you speak in jest;) Actually the Berliner Philharmoniker were (not surprisingly) an excellent introduction, the trumpeter a good photographer as well and the jeans well suited to the C/O Berlin ambiance. Dangling ladies would have been entirely inappropriate.

Actually the band that finished off the evening until two at night managed to clear room with decibels.

 

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited May 11, 2012 by jaapv

[Advertisement]

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

[andyedward]

First off, I won't be buying this lens. I mean I will really try not to. But, it is an absolutely amazing piece of optic. The corner to corner sharpness and high contrast is really an achievement. I'd be the first to congratulate Peter for this amazing lens. On future high pixel M systems it is going to be amazing. Think about that D800 sensor in the M10 with a lens like this. What would touch it? And, more, what amazing images the system would produce. I think it is a marvel.

 

The cost is something everyone has to work out for themselves just like they do with a Noctilux or an exotic super car. This lens for most would be a once in a lifetime lens, like a sports car but, less.

 

Rick, you have perfectly summed up my sentiments towards this lens, with the exception that I am willing to take the initial financial hit to acquire one. I personally think it's release is a far more significant event in the evolution of M cameras than the MM announcement

Edited May 11, 2012 by andyedward

[Guest]

I would cash in on the insurance and queue up for a new 50mm Summilux ASPH.

 

The old man from the Age of the 5cm Elmar

 

Ein Mann, ein Wort!

Best advisor (with Andy Piper) since my lurking days when the M8 came out.

Thank you, Lars and a good week-end!

[earleygallery]

I look forward to seeing some exceedingly sharp photos of tiddles sitting in the garden, I'll marvel at the 100% crop of his whiskers!

 

When can one buy this lens? Can one buy this lens? Will Leica send out copies with blotched paint, back to front aperture rings and loose elements as with some other models?

 

I'm not being bitter, honestly. But I do think Leica are concentrating their energy on the wrong products.

 

How many photographers regularly print so large that they will really need the extra performance? This at a time when more and more imagery is published on line.

 

Regardless of all that, who will say, when looking at a fantastic photograph, "I wish the photographer had used the ASPH Summicron".

[IkarusJohn]

Let's stay on point, shall we?

 

Sean Reid's careful test shows that while the removal of the Bayer array (and consequently no demosaicing and reconstruction of the image) does result in an increase of definition that is barely visible at 100% viewing, this is surely not enough to compensate for the advantage of a larger sensor with twice as many pixels.

There is no need to "compensate for the advantage of a larger sensor". The comment was that the M9M, not having a Bayer array, gives the quality of medium format with a Bayer array. There's no mention which medium format size. It's just a general comment.

 

I would say that the improvement would be visible, IF:

 

— you put the camera on a heavy duty tripod; and

— killed the subject so that it could not move; and

— focus-bracketed carefully to minimise unwanted defocus blur, and

— printed to meter size.

 

The simple fact of shooting hand-held (and with undead subjects to boot) will completely mask any definition advantage that the M9M has. So it boils down to a matter of shooting style. Like they say, a Harley-Davidson is not a motorcycle, it is an attitude.

So, there's no advantage to be had shooting medium format handheld? While I'm sure your comment is at least partly right, that is not the point which Jaap was making. Resolution is still resolution.

 

The camera will force you into a dedicated black-and-white frame of mind.

Umm, isn't that the point. It's a black and white camera.

 

And here's another thought: Can you point to one single picture by Henri Cartier-Bresson, Robert Capa, Robert Frank, Garry Winogrand, Eliott Erwitt – you name them – that would have been made more striking by five percent more resolution?

No. So? Their pictures are famous, not for the quality of the equipment they used, but the qualities of their images.

 

If your point is that this camera will not take better photos than the predecessors, no one will disagree with you. Also, if youre saying that higher resolution won't take better pictures, or that it will be difficult to capture, and display that resolution, again no argument. But the implication that the resolution isn't available is rather silly. Also, having the resolution won't make the photo worse.

 

If I have still missed your point, I'm sorry. In your last post, it did seem to be shifting.

 

You might say, quite rightly for all I know, that this resolution cannot be utilised, and will not improve images one jot. I think photography passed that milestone some time ago. My camera equipment has capabilities well beyond my skills. But it gives me tremendous pleasure. M9M owners will be no different.

 

Cheers

John

[philipus]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I can only assume that you speak in jest;)

 

I like this thread, it's extremely entertaining.

 

Actually I meant it with a grain of seriousness, too. As I understand it, it is a massive achievement to construct a lens with performance such as that which the new lens supposedly has. And that costs a lot to develop.

 

Still, did the world really need this lens? I don't think so and I am wondering for whom, really, Leica made it, just as I wonder for whom they made the monochrome M and why it costs so much more than the M9.

 

Actually - and I stress that I only intend this comparison as a matter of economic priniciple and nothing else - raising prices in this manner reminds a bit about the prostitute who realised she made more money by raising prices significantly, thus having to work less and attracting more wealthy customers as she was then perceived as a luxury prostitute (was it in Freakonomics this was described? I forget).

 

But it is likely pointless to discuss the metaphysics behind Leica's business decisions. Clearly any company wants to make as much money as possible and when the fan base is as loyal as Leica's why not cash in on it?

 

There comes a point when customers say 'enough'. I'd be willing to bet we're still - objectively in terms of the whole client base - far from that point.

Edited May 11, 2012 by philipus

[luigi bertolotti]

I look forward to seeing some exceedingly sharp photos of tiddles sitting in the garden, I'll marvel at the 100% crop of his whiskers!

 

When can one buy this lens? Can one buy this lens? Will Leica send out copies with blotched paint, back to front aperture rings and loose elements as with some other models?

 

I'm not being bitter, honestly. But I do think Leica are concentrating their energy on the wrong products.

 

How many photographers regularly print so large that they will really need the extra performance? This at a time when more and more imagery is published on line.

 

Regardless of all that, who will say, when looking at a fantastic photograph, "I wish the photographer had used the ASPH Summicron".

 

James, I do not disagree on any of your points : similar observation came to my mind too,,, but, fact is, I have the impression that, given the results of the last years, Leica co. hasn't made great business ERRORS (to be precise... I 'd be curios to see the profit & loss of the S2 biz till now... but probably hasn'n been, at least, a cash drainer) : so we can give them some credit, even if one can find nothing of interest for himself in this last product intro (and so is for me, indeed).

 

 

Can one buy this lens? Will Leica send out copies with blotched paint, back to front aperture rings and loose elements as with some other models?

 

Surely someone can... in this forum someone has already said to have ordered it... will it be a number sufficient to define this odd Summicron a success ? To be evaluated in next years... my idea is that at half the price it would be anyway a costly 50 f2 even for Leicistes... and probably they won't sell it in double numbers... Hopingfully, at such a price they will setup a strong QA at final stage... if not, shame to them, and the problems will emerge (here, too...)

 

How many photographers regularly print so large that they will really need the extra performance?

 

Some do... in my (little) town, in the last 6 months, I went to TWO exhibitions all based on big BW prints (no famous names) : some of them, well inside the market of xx.xxx Euros photos, surely could buy this toy... how large is this market niche ? I haven't idea... probably Leica has a decent visibility on this, and made some evaluations, which can, or cannot, prove wrong.

 

I do think Leica are concentrating their energy on the wrong products.

 

Thinking well.. did they concentrate MUCH company resources on these products ? A lens, surely in Herr Karbe's mind by some years, after all is ONE lens... not to be an iconoclast, but probably the SLR Magic f 0,95 (or 0,92 !) has requested not smaller resources to be engineered (production costs are another matter...) ; and the M9-M ? No new body to design, no new sensor to integrate, no new RF/VF system... new firmware plus some engineering and styling/finishing details... after all not a big industrial investiment... the rumored EVIL, with its possible new lenses line (AF ? Zooms ?) if designed from the scratch will be a much higher investiment... involving much more risks even if, for MYSELF, I consider it much more interesting than a esoteric monochrome M and a supercostly Summicron that for me, as a Leica customer, are indeed "wrong" products in the sense that the chance I'll buy them is 0,01% (hate zeros by principle... )

[earleygallery]

Luigi, thank you for your response to my post.

 

I've said elsewhere I like the idea of the M9M and I really do think it will sell well. I've only seen online images of course and to be frank I'm not particularly impressed (I see very 'digital' looking skies and highlights) but I know that one needs to judge quality in print form, especially for this camera.

 

It's innovative, and that is very much in the Leica tradition.

,

The lens, well I know why a Noctilux is so expensive and why it's so desirable. But a 50mm f2 Summicron for how much? The jury's out. I'll never buy one, I hope enough people do however.

 

We shall see at Photokina if Leica have any products for the majority of their customer base, and if they have real ambitions to extend that customer base by introducing a viable camera/system to sit below the M range (no the X2 isn't the answer). Let's remember the

ambitions of Blackstone and the significant number of Leica stores they plan to open. As a business model for a company such as Leica, having their own stores is a huge drain on resource and they simply have to shift boxes to pay the bills. Sorry if that's stating the obvious.

 

My point about QC is a serious one however. If Leica are going ever more upmarket they really cannot send out shoddy goods, It's bad enough to send out 3K lenses with faults, and 6K cameras with peeling skin etc. The devil is in the detail as they say.

[andyedward]

I am quite new to leica, but get the impression everything they produce will be sold, simply because it's a "leica". Collectors and posers with money will buy anything produced, and leica know this, so they limit supply and hike their prices up (hence the limited edition herpes). They don't care who buys it and whether or not it's ever used.

 

I have to admire the prowess of leicas Marketing Machine though, although I believe they are overly dependent on their historical ties with deceased stars. This was evidenced by what happened on thursday evening [pass the bucket, I feel sick], and we pay heavily for it. If I was a descendent of HCB, I would want royalties from the sale of the MM.

The MM was leicas last opportunity to make the most of the m9, and I think they succeeded, but now its time to look to the future instead of the past.

 

However, if it wasn't for the excellent image quality that their lenses provide, I wouldn't touch a leica product simply because of their astronomical pricing policy. They need to continue developing low and mid range products, or they will fail to attract new customers, resulting in a return to financial difficulty.

 

I don't believe any other manufacturer of 35mm format lenses can produce such high image quality across a wide variety of focal lengths, so I am stuck with leica:).

[jaapv]

Leica is not into the business of creating mediocre products just to expand their production. They will, for turnover’s sake, seek out and rebadge excellent products from elsewhere, but for their own lines they will craft the best they can within a given set of parameters. As that is done with conventional production methods, just to preserve the character of those products, it makes for high prices and leisurely production rates. So be it. Mainstream products can bought from a large number of estimable producers elsewhere. Leica does not compete with those. When they talk about expanding their business they are not thinking of mushing their product down to a common denominator, they are thinking of drawing more people into their concept.

 

As for collectors, celebrities and the most fortunate in this world, the occasional foray into a luxury edition aimed at the more glitzy part of the market - what is wrong with creating a product that appeals to a select coup of customers?- does nothing to harm the brand. Leica has been doing it since the beginning of their camera venture nearly a century ago. Even then these products are as well built and usable as any other tool leaving their factory.

 

Your last sentence says it all. That is the way it is and it contradicts the rest of your post...

Edited May 11, 2012 by jaapv

[johnbuckley]

This is a really interesting debate, mostly good humored, and revealing of different sides/approaches/needs.

 

Position 1: the new Summicron is an amazing achievement, and makes our M9s and their successors something greater than a mere 35mm (equivalent) camera. Too bad about the cost, but quality is expensive.

 

Position 2: the new Summicron is symbolic of Leica appealing to a false god, releasing a lens that will be of value, mostly, to rich show offs. Going for that market shows Leica has lost its way.

 

Position 3 (siding with 2, possibly without the values critique): no photographer needs the extra resolution, unless he is selling wall-sized images.

 

Position 4 (siding with 1): Leica should be commended for trying to achieve something great, and the APO-Summicron is great, possibly awesome. Don't buy it if you don't want it. There are other lenses that will serve your needs. But don't put down Leica, and don't put down those that want to buy it, and can.

 

I side with Position 4. Even as I have learned from and admire Lars for many things, including his spirit, I disagree with his critique of Leica for building this lens. On this one, I think Jaap (Position 1) is closer to what's correct. Position 4 is the synthesis I most agree with.

 

Your vote?

[jaapv]

Yes Luigi - the chance you will buy them is maybe infinitesimally small, so is the chance that I will, but if you (and I) had the spare money ready, how high would the chance be that you would buy these products? In my case close to 100%.

[archi4]

Lars, your clarity and wisdom always brings a breath of fresh air into a discussion.

I for one enjoy your views and rationality and thank you for it.

[Peter H]

Lars, your clarity and wisdom always brings a breath of fresh air into a discussion.

I for one enjoy your views and rationality and thank you for it.

 

Me too.

 

But the nonsense is quite entertaining as well.

 

[gberger]

This is a question for someone who might know the answer.

 

I've seen some fairly good to excellent B&W prints turned out by two retired photographers who used to work for National Geographic, but both stated that the gray scale on their negatives was limited by the printers- - - the printers couldn't take advantage of the range on the negatives.

 

Has the capability of printers improved sufficiently to take advantage of what can be produced by the new camera and lens?

[andyedward]

Leica is not into the business of creating mediocre products just to expand their production. They will, for turnover’s sake, seek out and rebadge excellent products from elsewhere, but for their own lines they will craft the best they can within a given set of parameters. As that is done with conventional production methods, just to preserve the character of those products, it makes for high prices and leisurely production rates. So be it. Mainstream products can bought from a large number of estimable producers elsewhere. Leica does not compete with those. When they talk about expanding their business they are not thinking of mushing their product down to a common denominator, they are thinking of drawing more people into their concept.

 

Your last sentence says it all. That is the way it is and it contradicts the rest of your post...

 

You make many good points, jaap. I realised my last post was a contradiction whilst writing it, hence the " " at the end. I like to take a balanced view, and life is often a contradiction.

 

From an objective standpoint, I actually admire the expertise of Peter and his forbears, along with leicas production methods and values, and wouldn`t want this to change. As I said previously, leica have no competitors in the 35mm sector, and some of their pricing is justified, such as the 50 lux. Why should they compromise their standards?

 

Subjectively, whist I understand that leica must make a profit, I think they are in danger of pricing genuine enthusiasts out of the market, simply because they can guarantee that collectors and posers with money will buy leica in their absence, which I detest. If the MM costs £6K, the M10 will cost £7k+. Leica can afford a "take it or leave it" attitude, but some prices are climbing insidiously higher, regardless of increased production costs. They also need to continue developing their lower and mid range products, otherwise buyers new to leica will be hard to find.

 

Unfortunately, leica do not offer a cheaper FF alternative to the M9, and from their perspective I guess they don't have to. I remember advice which recommended prioritising the purchase of good glass because digital bodies lose their value and are quickly dated.

As I said, the next M body will cost over £7K, so if you have financial limits, like most of the members of this forum, the aforementioned advice to prioritise good glass is impossible to achieve. I guess buying a used m9 is a the best policy in this scenario

 

I do want the best imaging quality and aim to buy the 50/2 apo sooner or later. I will have to sell my d3x to part-finance it, leaving me temporarily without a camera, but have tremendous faith that this lens will deliver. I just wish it wasn't so damned expensive! It represents the future of M lenses on high pixel cameras, one of which I hope to own one day!

 

I'm getting tired, so I apologise for my incoherent ramblings!

Edited May 11, 2012 by andyedward
clarity

[40mm f/2]

I am not using 50mm lenses (I tried before) but that Summicron makes much more sense than any Noctilux for almost all applications. I don't understand why the price of the recent noctilux did not generate so much discussion as this 3000$ cheaper lens. I wonder if that price reflects the real production costs or its value as status symbol (the best available).

[Manolo Laguillo]

This is a question for someone who might know the answer.

 

I've seen some fairly good to excellent B&W prints turned out by two retired photographers who used to work for National Geographic, but both stated that the gray scale on their negatives was limited by the printers- - - the printers couldn't take advantage of the range on the negatives.

 

Has the capability of printers improved sufficiently to take advantage of what can be produced by the new camera and lens?

 

They were referring to a simple sensitometric fact: the negative's density range is wider than the paper's ability to seize it. But this ineludible reality begins with the scene itself, where the different light levels reflected by it conform a range that the negative can't seize.

Edited May 11, 2012 by Manolo Laguillo

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[jaapv]

Not really - the limiting factor is the printer - or in case of the chemical process the paper. despite the formalizing by Ansel Adams and the (not entirely his) Zone System there is a limit to what you can do. It really depends on your postprocessing skills ( or printing skills) but there are choices to be made in the process. Of course, if you are photographing a grey rabbit on concrete on a foggy day you will have no problems at all.