Peter H Posted June 17, 2012 Share #101  Posted June 17, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) ............... I cannot see how Leica can differentiate a interchangeable lens system with APS-C sensor. It is impossible. .......................  Why is it impossible? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 17, 2012 Posted June 17, 2012 Hi Peter H, Take a look here Stefan Daniel Interview Offers Clues. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
-ph- Posted June 17, 2012 Share #102  Posted June 17, 2012 I must raise a point about the Live View. At what point, between seeing your subject, raising the camera to your eye and pressing the shutter, would you use it ?  Rangefinders have always been about speed. The only point at which I would use it would be in landscape (which I don't do) on a tripod, which the M is not meant for ??  At the point where I frame the shot and focus the lens. Rangefinder lines are not very precise, so getting the shot better framed removes the amount of post-processing. And of course, it would greatly help all those lenses <28 and >75 mm where the current rangefinder is not useful. (Certainly on the wide side as it does not show more than 28 mm and while it can be used at 135 mm, it gets awfully small way before).  And what does "which the M is not meant for?" mean? It has a tripod mount, so I dare to mount it to my tripod. I shoot a lot of landscape with the M9 as I think it is the best camera for that smaller than a medium format camera.  Peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
oronet commander Posted June 17, 2012 Share #103 Â Posted June 17, 2012 The two points ask for a 24x36 camera with M compatibility of some type. Â Absolutely. I cannot see any interest in any other sensor size. Even if cheaper than an M, the new Leica is going to be expensive and the market is totally crowded with smaller-than-FF sensors. The niche of FF electronic mirrorless cameras is open for someone to take, with many uses and posibilities. Â I don't know about you, but I'm totally uninterested, generally speaking, by anything smaller than 24x36. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted June 17, 2012 Share #104  Posted June 17, 2012 Eeek. Live View, EVF, IS, Scene Modes? Will we shoot it like a compact as well ?? Oooh, I'm getting all weak at the knees.  Some of us have enough problems focusing precisely as it is. I cannot imagine holding an M at arms length like a P&S for better framing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ming Rider Posted June 17, 2012 Share #105 Â Posted June 17, 2012 Some of us have enough problems focusing precisely as it is. I cannot imagine holding an M at arms length like a P&S for better framing. Â Neither can I. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted June 17, 2012 Share #106  Posted June 17, 2012 Neither can I.  Ming, the Visoflex II did not make my knees weak. It was an obvious adjunct to a rangefinder camera. The SLR won out because of mechanical integration – you could develop auto aperturing and TTL exposure metering. This was impossible with an M at that time; and while the M5 and M6 cameras and later models did have TTL metering, auto aperturing remained impossible. So a Visoflexed M remained a cumbersome beast to work with.  A EVF camera with interchangeable lenses (M-compatible of course) handles just as a SLR camera, but without the bulky mirror box and its flipflopping mirror. That is, you raise it to your eye, focus and shoot. An 'electronically Visoflexed' M would retain its rangefinder, for 'general photography'. For the time being.  But let us be clear about this: Such a camera will be for users who do prefer the rangefinder for general photography, but occasionally want to use the camera for different purposes. As electronic viewfinders improve further, the rangefinder itself will increasingly be seen as irrelevant however by the majority who want Leica lenses and not necessarily a M camera. The M10 (or whatever it may be called) may well be the last of its longlasting breed. Despite its acronym, the Electronic Viewfinder Interchangeable Lenses camera is the future.  The question of its ultimate sensor size is a different subject. But as no manufacturer is tied beforehand to a pre-existing film type, the possibilities are without limit: 36x36mm, 24x36mm, 24x32mm, 24x24mm, 19x28.7mm, 18x27mm, 18x24mm, 15.7x23.6mm … and anything beyond that and in between. It will be the survival of the fittest. Hopefully, Leica will be amongst the fittest.  The old man from the Kodachrome Age Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ming Rider Posted June 17, 2012 Share #107 Â Posted June 17, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) I meant weak at the knees with horror at the thought of the M being 'Bastardised' with electronic gismo's. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted June 17, 2012 Share #108 Â Posted June 17, 2012 Some of us have enough problems focusing precisely as it is. I cannot imagine holding an M at arms length like a P&S for better framing. Â Algrove, why should live view mean that you are obliged to focus doing the Frankenstein Stance? Go take a look at the X2. Â The old man from the Kodachrome Age Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted June 17, 2012 Share #109  Posted June 17, 2012 I meant weak at the knees with horror at the thought of the M being 'Bastardised' with electronic gismo's.  Don't worry, it will be a temporary condition. As I have already explained …  Meanwhile, I intend to update my M9 and keep it going as long as batteries and cards and household current are available – or until I can no longer hold or focus it, which will probably happen first – while I wait for the Leica EVIL camera, hopefully at a price that an old age pensioner can afford.  The old man f rom the Kodachrome Age Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
farnz Posted June 17, 2012 Share #110  Posted June 17, 2012 Algrove, why should live view mean that you are obliged to focus doing the Frankenstein Stance? Go take a look at the X2. The old man from the Kodachrome Age ... or the Digilux 2.  Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted June 17, 2012 Share #111 Â Posted June 17, 2012 I meant weak at the knees with horror at the thought of the M being 'Bastardised' with electronic gismo's. Â You don't have to use a clip-on EVF if you don't want it, just like you don't have to use an attachable optical viewfinder for wide-angle lenses if you don't need or want it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted June 17, 2012 Share #112  Posted June 17, 2012 Absolutely. I cannot see any interest in any other sensor size. Even if cheaper than an M, the new Leica is going to be expensive and the market is totally crowded with smaller-than-FF sensors. The niche of FF electronic mirrorless cameras is open for someone to take, with many uses and posibilities. I don't know about you, but I'm totally uninterested, generally speaking, by anything smaller than 24x36.  That is my opinion as well.  The 24x36 format guarantees full compatibility with the M and R systems. There is no offer in the mirrorless 24x36 space, and that format provides not just better image quality, but a different look to the pictures (a look deeply rooted in the tradition of Leica). It is not a question of pixels, ISO noise or so, but a question of pure or simple aesthetics of the output. APS-C pictures look flat in comparison.  Anyway, is almost impossible to differentiate the product in the APS-C to m4/3 mirrorless space. The optical excellence is not exclusive of Leica. The m4/3 systems has lenses from Schneider, Vogitlander, Panasonic, Olympus... Sony has Zeiss. Etc. You have ultra-small bodies (NEX, Olympus, Panasonic) and larger "pro" bodies (by the same brands). Even optical viewfinders (Fuji). What is supposed to be the differentiation factor in a Leica camera? Just the red dot? It worked well for compact cameras (rebranding, with minimum investment by Leica), but not for higher segment cameras manufactured by Leica.  Stefan Daniel is not clear in this point... but I would bet the managers are thinking on this problem, and the conclusions will be similar. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bocaburger Posted June 17, 2012 Share #113 Â Posted June 17, 2012 Â A EVF camera with interchangeable lenses (M-compatible of course) handles just as a SLR camera, but without the bulky mirror box and its flipflopping mirror. Â I'm curious, what EVF camera are you suggesting "handles just as a SLR camera"? The latest ones I've looked thru, up to and including NEX-7 and Oly OM-D, did seem somewhat crisper than the 1st-gen EVF attached to my LX5, and with a faster refresh rate they are less nausea-inducing when moving the camera about, but I still have the feeling I'm looking down a tunnel at a tiny TV screen. And I don't care for the way they brighten-up in a dark environment because every time I take my eye from the finder I've got one dilated pupil, and with the slow-down of visual accomodation that comes with age...annoying. I find rear-LCD viewing virtually unusable, which is the only reason I went from the DLux3 to an LX5, and maybe in the future there will be an EVF that replicates looking thru a Leica, or a mirrored SLR, but at this point, speaking personally, I would not want an EVF for my main camera system. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellie Posted June 17, 2012 Share #114 Â Posted June 17, 2012 Imho, Leica already has a camera in "the mirrorless 24x36 space" - the M, and it looks like it still is better for many situations especially in contrasty scenes (see this EVF review NEX-7 Six Month On).. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted June 17, 2012 Share #115 Â Posted June 17, 2012 Imho, Leica already has a camera in "the mirrorless 24x36 space" - the M, and it looks like it still is better for many situations especially in contrasty scenes (see this EVF review NEX-7 Six Month On).. Â It is pricey, it only has manual focus lenses, etc... Â The idea is to develop a new system with AF lenses at a lower price... and the problem is how to do it or, if you prefer, where to place it. Â The user of classical rangefinder cameras is able to pay, at this moment, $7,000 for a digital camera and $2,000 or more for a lens. He or she likes manual focus lenses and the optical viewfinder. Â The potential user Leica is targeting is different. He or she want a small camera, with AF lenses, with the red dot, but even if he (or she) is able to pay a premium price the limit is around that of high quality systems in the market (Nikon D800, Canon 5D Mark III), and he (or she) would consider using an EVF, and optical viewfinder or any other alternative because is (are) open to experimentation and detached from the tradition (say, they are young people). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted June 17, 2012 Share #116 Â Posted June 17, 2012 There is zero chance that Leica will offer such a FF EVIL for less than $6K IMHO. It will be APS or it won't exist at all i'm afraid. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmradman Posted June 17, 2012 Share #117 Â Posted June 17, 2012 There is zero chance that Leica will offer such a FF EVIL for less than $6K IMHO. It will be APS or it won't exist at all i'm afraid. Â You are probably right on lens interchangeable APS EVIL but hope, regardless of "Leica reasonable" price, you are wrong on FF EVIL - where EVIL is add on to M finder. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted June 17, 2012 Share #118 Â Posted June 17, 2012 Never said the contrary. An M with a clip-on EVF would still be an M in my book not an "EVIL" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaques Posted June 17, 2012 Share #119 Â Posted June 17, 2012 I believe there won't be a full frame (non-rf) offering from Leica this year. But maybe someone else? Â as I see it- other than the m9 and offshoots- Leica is a step behind- to me the X2 looks clunky- what's the point of clip on EVF's? They are not for me... Â At this point I would rather something truly revolutionary- a redesign of the entire RF system incorporating SLR like (?) capabilities-some kind of advanced digital optical mechanical symbiosis?? An entirely new viewfinder that is twice as large? Night vision? The kind of advanced optics and electronic rangefinders found in telescopes, binoculars... weapons systems... better ISO also:eek: Â a tiny modular FF camera that can shoot in infrared, B&W, cine- AF 'moving' sensor'- whatever back is required- capable of using multiple lens mounts, manual and dedicated AF. and all for under 3 grand of course! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ming Rider Posted June 17, 2012 Share #120  Posted June 17, 2012 I believe there won't be a full frame (non-rf) offering from Leica this year. But maybe someone else? as I see it- other than the m9 and offshoots- Leica is a step behind- to me the X2 looks clunky- what's the point of clip on EVF's? They are not for me...  At this point I would rather something truly revolutionary- a redesign of the entire RF system incorporating SLR like (?) capabilities-some kind of advanced digital optical mechanical symbiosis?? An entirely new viewfinder that is twice as large? Night vision? The kind of advanced optics and electronic rangefinders found in telescopes, binoculars... weapons systems... better ISO also:eek:  a tiny modular FF camera that can shoot in infrared, B&W, cine- AF 'moving' sensor'- whatever back is required- capable of using multiple lens mounts, manual and dedicated AF. and all for under 3 grand of course!  Sounds just the ticket. Put me down for one Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.