jaapv Posted July 25, 2012 Share #61 Posted July 25, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Nobody said anything about replacing... If the M becomes just another me too camera, then the M will cease to be. A small company Leica cannot survive if it cannot distinguish it self from the other brands. Other companies make cameras with EVF/Live View/Video much cheaper. Nobody else is making a Digital Rangefinder. Now that being said, lets not confuse Live View with EVF. Live View is kind of a given with CMOS as is Video (not to mention high ISO). So as it has been mentioned in the media by several interviews of Leica top people. It will happen someday. The question is how Leica will continue to make the M unique with EVF, Video and Live View? If EVF replaces the Rangefinder, then the M will lose it's uniqueness. It will be just another mirror-less camera. If the M+ has both, then it's up to the buying public to decide. The consumer has been conservative in the past. The buying public rejected the M5, while embracing SLR's, but then accepted the M4-2. But who knows, it's a different world now since the M5 was rejected by the consumer. Your right, Things Change. Companies go out of business. It's a tough world, and Canon, Nikon, etc. are in it to win. Leica has to be careful, creative, and think differently than the rest of the pack if it's to survive. The MM is an example of thinking out of the box. There is more at stake here than just whether we have a Visoflex or "R" replacement, and I am certain Leica knows it as well. Remember Leica also has to sell it's image in order for it to sell product, it sells to photographers collectors, and others. I am afraid that we photographers may be a minority at this day and age. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 Hi jaapv, Take a look here M10 with Live View - I'm wrong to yawn about this ?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
andybarton Posted July 25, 2012 Share #62 Posted July 25, 2012 What's PDK? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
swamiji Posted July 25, 2012 Share #63 Posted July 25, 2012 They had no reason to make a digital camera with that philosophy. Then maybe they should look into expanding their range of collectibles to other things than just cameras. Maybe figurines or something. I'd rather a camera be "me too" than "me not." I can't believe that Leica is scared. They simply have to develop the technology they need. You mean technology you need? You may speak for some, but not everybody. No it's not fear, it's strategic planning. The M10 is done, finished and in production. Whether it meets your or my needs is mute. They seem to be following Apples play book, if so they don't care what you or I think. They are trying to stay unique in a crowded playing field. If they blend in too much they are history. So what features should be in the M11 or M12, Do you have a crystal ball. Mirror-less cameras my be gone by then, or may replace the DSLR and be the de-facto standard. But what ever happens industry wide, Leica has to be unique. They have to be seen as playing by their own rules, and not just following trends. That may not please us photog's, but it's the name of the game. How else do you explain the MM? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
swamiji Posted July 25, 2012 Share #64 Posted July 25, 2012 Nobody said anything about replacing... It has been mentioned from time to time, and commented on early in this thread. As such I thought should be addressed. Or are you saying the M? should have EVF, Live View and optical viewfinders? A little to over the top for "Me too", don't you think? Imagine a Nikon D5 with both optical and live view? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CalArts 99 Posted July 25, 2012 Share #65 Posted July 25, 2012 What's PDK? Porsche Doppelkupplung Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted July 25, 2012 Share #66 Posted July 25, 2012 You mean technology you need? You may speak for some, but not everybody. It has nothing to do with what I need. Due to new technology, the M system can be greatly expanded for more usability in numerous ways. I can't see a downside to this if Leica has the resources and can sell the various items. I'd prefer to leave Apple and Porsche out of the discussion. But I showed that Sinar was thinking about live view 20 years ago. The MM did not exactly require a lot of R&D so I don't consider its development to mean much other than that Leica thinks it can sell some and make a profit on it. Having the courage to make a 21st century M system would impress me. I completely understand if they are afraid to do this or simply don't have the ability. Uniqueness is irrelevant if other brands are eating your lunch when it comes to performance. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlesphoto99 Posted July 25, 2012 Share #67 Posted July 25, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Imagine a Nikon D5 with both optical and live view? Ummm, yes, since the introduction of the D3 in 2006. Looking through the viewfinder of an slr is optical (just with a mirror in the path). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted July 25, 2012 Share #68 Posted July 25, 2012 It has been mentioned from time to time, and commented on early in this thread. As such I thought should be addressed. Or are you saying the M? should have EVF, Live View and optical viewfinders? A little to over the top for "Me too", don't you think? Imagine a Nikon D5 with both optical and live view? Well, as long as these are addons it does not bother me. The essence will remain a mostly manual rangefinder camera, although, the M11 will most likely have an AF option... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stealth3kpl Posted July 25, 2012 Share #69 Posted July 25, 2012 +1 Pete Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
swamiji Posted July 26, 2012 Share #70 Posted July 26, 2012 Ummm, yes, since the introduction of the D3 in 2006. Looking through the viewfinder of an slr is optical (just with a mirror in the path). You caught me, I was a bit tired, what I meant was Optical, and EVF. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
swamiji Posted July 26, 2012 Share #71 Posted July 26, 2012 It has nothing to do with what I need. Due to new technology, the M system can be greatly expanded for more usability in numerous ways. I can't see a downside to this if Leica has the resources and can sell the various items. I'd prefer to leave Apple and Porsche out of the discussion. But I showed that Sinar was thinking about live view 20 years ago. The MM did not exactly require a lot of R&D so I don't consider its development to mean much other than that Leica thinks it can sell some and make a profit on it. Having the courage to make a 21st century M system would impress me. I completely understand if they are afraid to do this or simply don't have the ability. Uniqueness is irrelevant if other brands are eating your lunch when it comes to performance. Well, Apple Stores/Leica Stores... Don't discount brand uniqueness, it's why some of these smaller companies still exist. But never the less, I am still unconvinced that adding these "features" will do anything other than increase M9/MM sales and used market prices. These are not like the M8 were there was a large pent-up demand waiting to buy FF just waiting for the M9. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted July 26, 2012 Share #72 Posted July 26, 2012 So yes if you slip the best current FF CMOS into the M, if it uses the current IR filter, it will have its speed reduced somewhat compared to those that use a dichroic filter. If you want to know exactly how much this will be, ask Mr. Daniel. Or check the specs. If the IR absorption filter would reduce the sensor’s sensitivity for visible light by some significant amount, this would be reflected in its native ISO rating. But its ISO 160 (or 144, according to DXOmark measurements) is absolutely in line with that of other cameras, which is typically between ISO 100 and 200. Now unfortunately the sensor of the M9 and its cover glass isn’t documented but that of the M8 is. The transmission of its cover glass is higher than 80 or 90 percent for the largest part of the visible spectrum, except for red where some suppression is actually beneficial (and probably the reason why, for example, Canon is using IR absorption filters on top of dichroic filters). This wouldn’t have any significant effects on high ISO performance. Now one might argue that the IR absorption filter of the M9 is more effective, so it might also absorb more visible light. But then its native ISO rating would be significantly lower, which it isn’t (according to DXOmark it is ISO 144 compared to ISO 151 for the M8). And even assuming that the high ISO performance of the M9 was compromised by its more efficient absorption filter, one would have to conclude that the M8 does fare much better in the high ISO department – something nobody so far has found to be the case. So this theory has to be discarded. An M10 with a CMOS sensor may or may not excel at high ISO settings – contrary to popular belief, a CMOS sensor doesn’t guarantee low noise –, but that would depend on the sensor; the use of an absorption filter rather than a combination of a dichroic filter and an absorption filter would have nothing to do with it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted July 26, 2012 Share #73 Posted July 26, 2012 Or check the specs. If the IR absorption filter would reduce the sensor’s sensitivity for visible light by some significant amount, this would be reflected in its native ISO rating. But its ISO 160 (or 144, according to DXOmark measurements) is absolutely in line with that of other cameras, which is typically between ISO 100 and 200. Now unfortunately the sensor of the M9 and its cover glass isn’t documented but that of the M8 is. The transmission of its cover glass is higher than 80 or 90 percent for the largest part of the visible spectrum, except for red where some suppression is actually beneficial (and probably the reason why, for example, Canon is using IR absorption filters on top of dichroic filters). This wouldn’t have any significant effects on high ISO performance. Now one might argue that the IR absorption filter of the M9 is more effective, so it might also absorb more visible light. But then its native ISO rating would be significantly lower, which it isn’t (according to DXOmark it is ISO 144 compared to ISO 151 for the M8). And even assuming that the high ISO performance of the M9 was compromised by its more efficient absorption filter, one would have to conclude that the M8 does fare much better in the high ISO department – something nobody so far has found to be the case. So this theory has to be discarded. An M10 with a CMOS sensor may or may not excel at high ISO settings – contrary to popular belief, a CMOS sensor doesn’t guarantee low noise –, but that would depend on the sensor; the use of an absorption filter rather than a combination of a dichroic filter and an absorption filter would have nothing to do with it. I hope you've explained that to Stefan Daniel so he gets it right the next time he speaks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Ash Posted July 26, 2012 Share #74 Posted July 26, 2012 There are two reasons why I am looking forward to an M10: 1) Better high iso performance (although I anticipate that Leica will not set a new landmark for above mentioned reasons) 2) processing speed. I do not see any use for live view as I really enjoy the rangefinder but it would not bother me if it is a hidden feature. Regards, Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dimah Posted August 5, 2012 Share #75 Posted August 5, 2012 Live-view could help in solving back-focus issues: Imagine the next M provided the possiblity to calibrate the position of the sensor according to the position of the optical viewfinder by integrating live-view and some ultra precise stepping-motors able to reposition the sensor. You'd go through a testchart set-up at different distances and diaphragms and memorize a characteristic "compensation-curve" for all nasty high speed-primes suffering from back-focus/focus-shift issues. (And integrate "anti-shake" at the same time). Such an idea would make it obsolete sending lenses and bodies back and forth to Solms. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted August 5, 2012 Share #76 Posted August 5, 2012 Live-view could help in solving back-focus issues: Imagine the next M provided the possiblity to calibrate the position of the sensor according to the position of the optical viewfinder by integrating live-view and some ultra precise stepping-motors able to reposition the sensor. You'd go through a testchart set-up at different distances and diaphragms and memorize a characteristic "compensation-curve" for all nasty high speed-primes suffering from back-focus/focus-shift issues. (And integrate "anti-shake" at the same time). Such an idea would make it obsolete sending lenses and bodies back and forth to Solms. It would be a lot simpler to have that kind of adjustment on the rangefinder. But I don't see how the camera can know what aperture the lens is set to. So this would have to wait for electronically linked diaphragms, etc. When shooting with live view it will be unnecessary. Perhaps that is the way to use this camera when critical focus is required. Maybe Leica being Leica they will incorporate a tiny camera that can read the aperture of the lens. ;-) Nikon had mechanical linkage between the aperture and meter more than 50 years ago. Sensor based IS certainly would be a winner for this camera considering there are no IS lenses for it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BerndReini Posted August 5, 2012 Share #77 Posted August 5, 2012 Live view would be incredibly useful for portraiture and certainly couldn't hurt for other applications were critical focus is required. Focusing a Noctilux and reframing is enough to keep the nose or ears in focus and the eyes slightly unsharp, and that is annoying. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted August 5, 2012 Share #78 Posted August 5, 2012 Live-view could help in solving back-focus issues: Imagine the next M provided the possiblity to calibrate the position of the sensor according to the position of the optical viewfinder by integrating live-view and some ultra precise stepping-motors able to reposition the sensor. You'd go through a testchart set-up at different distances and diaphragms and memorize a characteristic "compensation-curve" for all nasty high speed-primes suffering from back-focus/focus-shift issues. (And integrate "anti-shake" at the same time). Such an idea would make it obsolete sending lenses and bodies back and forth to Solms. sounds a bit like an 800e. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted August 5, 2012 Share #79 Posted August 5, 2012 Isn't this going to be the M10.000 dollars? Shouldn't we discuss that first? And for that price, of course it's not going to have live view! You're in Leica land now. It might have a tiny blue led though, in the viewfinder. Not sure what it does yet, but I'd like that... probably. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bocaburger Posted August 5, 2012 Share #80 Posted August 5, 2012 Just happened to land on one of the TV shopping channels during a break from watching the olympics, & they were hawking a Fuji EVF camera. It has "blink recognition" that flashes "BLINK DETECTED" if it senses the subject blinked. It also has "smile detection" that assures you if the subject has smiled. That and more plus video, EVF, 14mp and a 26x optical zoom for under US$200. To me, that's the kind of camera I would buy if I wanted techno features. Why I would pay forty times more for a Leica is precisely because it has something no other current camera in the world has: an optomechanical rangefinder...and a dearth of carnival sideshow tricks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.