Mini M? [MERGED] AKA X-Vario

[Ecaton]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Slow lens. No EVF. No aperture ring. Not a replacement for my Digilux 2 in any way other than branding. I do think I'll get my Digilux 2 out today and shoot with it though and imagine what could have been.

 

But the Digilux 2 is a rebadged made in Japan Panasonic whilst the new vario Elmar is a true "Made in Germany" Leica

[Advertisement]

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

[Ivan Muller]

So will the new Mini M, be called the 'mm' to differentiate it from the 'MM'......??

[IWC Doppel]

I wonder if you're not confusing DoF with subject distance here. DoF depends on CoC (circle of confusion) which depends on film or sensor size as well as visual acuity, the latter depending on the subject size and distance aside from the sight of the photographer. All things equal i.e. for the same subject size and distance, the same focal length, the same aperture and the same sight of course, DoF depends solely on the size of the film or sensor.

 

Won't this be the same, I had understood the same subject crop, through your positioning and an effectively longer lens will mean that you are further away with a crop sensor and hence the change in the actual DOF, but I had understood that this is neatly matched by the change in distance. Hence the relative DOF will be the same for the same image even if the distances and perspective is slightly different ?

 

Ie what is oof in the image will be very similar if you move back to attain the same image with a cropped sensor

[luigi bertolotti]

Sorry for the OT Luigi, what do you mean?

 

.... nothing... a late night silly observation... the proportions of the Mini M in the "semi opened" box looked strange to me at first sight (lens "too much to the right")... but after checking, considering the approximation of images, proportions are about the same as X2, indeed...

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!

[vikasmg]

Er..uh..you mean like Jaguar and Range Rover?

 

Well those brands are Indian owned now - for doing much better than when they were US owned. Looks like they needed someone to have some faith in the British designers and engineers. The major US car companies don't seem to know too much about modern auto building and non-flabby cars.

 

 

- Vikas

[01af]

When depth-of-field increases then so does visual acuity.

I wonder if you're not confusing DoF with subject distance here.

Of course not. Instead, I just realised that I had the meaning of the term "visual acuity" wrong in my mind. Sorry

 

So let's start over:

 

When focal length, aperture, subject distance and visual acuity values are the same, is there another variable than film or sensor size in DoF calculation?

Yes, several. But even when we ignore those then depth-of-field, as well as field-of-view, will vary with sensor size when the said four parameters are kept constant. And it will vary in an unexpected way (wider depth-of-field for bigger sensors). Keep a different set of parameters constant, and depth-of-field will vary with sensor size in a different way.

 

In general, there is no way to create exactly the same picture with cameras of different formats, as you cannot keep all picture-forming parameters the same ... umm, with the exception of two cases: (1) reproducing a flat, two-dimensional subject, and (2) shooting at infinity distance—which in a way is just a variant of the former.

[jonoslack]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Of course not. Instead, I just realised that I had the meaning of the term "visual acuity" wrong in my mind. Sorry

 

So let's start over:

 

 

Yes, several. But even when we ignore those then depth-of-field, as well as field-of-view, will vary with sensor size when the said four parameters are kept constant. And it will vary in an unexpected way (wider depth-of-field for bigger sensors). Keep a different set of parameters constant, and depth-of-field will vary with sensor size in a different way.

 

In general, there is no way to create exactly the same picture with cameras of different formats, as you cannot keep all picture-forming parameters the same ... umm, with the exception of two cases: (1) reproducing a flat, two-dimensional subject, and (2) shooting at infinity distance—which in a way is just a variant of the former.

 

Hi There - well, I'm not convinced you're right about this. For example:

 

25mm lens on OMD µ43 focused at 50metres at f8

50mm lens on M(240) focused at 50metres at f4

 

This is actually something I've done to try and get a handle on image quality with the M in the early days. The picture had plenty of depth, only the shutter speed varied (of course).

 

I guess there might have been some subtle difference, but I couldn't really detect it.The images were cropped similarly and resized, and then handed round a number of people who really should know . . . and who really couldn't tell the difference.

 

all the best

[Alberti]

This camera does seem so compromised.

 

Although I have registered with my dealer is case there's something to surprise us, it looks like I will be disappointed.

 

- No FF

- No EVF built-in

- No interchangeable lenses or ability to mount M lenses

- Limited fixed lens, lens speed and zoom ratio.

 

Oh dear. [..] I was hoping that, for once, Leica were going to introduce a ground-breaking camera product instead of which they are still pedalling furiously to catch up.

 

Mark, I do think you capture all our dreams. This thread can be seen as an important marketing input, better than a multiple choice market survey, so will someone wake up at Solms?

[01af]

This is actually something I've done to try and get a handle on image quality with the M in the early days. The picture had plenty of depth, only the shutter speed varied (of course).

 

I guess there might have been some subtle difference ...

Well—in this context, 50 m is pretty close to infinity, so of course the differences will the very subtle. But if there is something moving in your frame then the different shutter speeds will cause a visible difference in the pictures. And at closer distances, the differences will be slightly less subtle ... generally, the closer you get, the bigger the differences will become (in fact, at magnifications beyond life-size they will become huge). For most practical intents and purposes, however, using equivalent focal lengths and equivalent apertures will get you close enough to the pictures being "the same." But they will never be exactly the same (with the exception of the two special cases mentioned above).

[dhsimmonds]

Well all this theoretical stuff is I am sure quite fascinating, but in the end it is the final photographic result that really matters regardless of sensor size etc.

 

I know for example that a Leica D lens shot wide open with a good mFT sensor is capable of

beautiful shallow DOF equally as pleasing as anything that I have shot with either APS-c or full frame cameras with very expensive lenses.

[250swb]

Mark, I do think you capture all our dreams. This thread can be seen as an important marketing input, better than a multiple choice market survey, so will someone wake up at Solms?

 

Look on the bright side, when Leica have finally used up overstocked components meant for the X2 and odds and ends from other slow selling cameras incorporated into the mini-M design the cupboard will be bare. Like the M-E using up the last bits from the M9 it will signal an end. So what comes after will be great,.....won't it?

 

 

Steve

[Nick_S]

Look on the bright side, when Leica have finally used up overstocked components meant for the X2 and odds and ends from other slow selling cameras incorporated into the mini-M design the cupboard will be bare. Like the M-E using up the last bits from the M9 it will signal an end. So what comes after will be great,.....won't it?

 

Steve

Well, the Monochrom is a very creative use of the M9 parts bin. Innovation and the practical constraints of mass production can go together.

 

Nick

[Paul Reading]

M is for Megabucks

[250swb]

Well, the Monochrom is a very creative use of the M9 parts bin. Innovation and the practical constraints of mass production can go together.

 

Nick

 

While a very fine camera the MM was a de-evolution of the M9, in the same way that a cloned woolly mammoth would be the de-evolution of an elephant. It would be certain to get everybody going wow!, but beyond that it would still be a genetic dead end.

 

I think what people crave is evolution, a Leica camera system, similar to the ethos of the M line, that can be built on over the years, not another one-off camera with a lifespan of a year.

 

Steve

[jaapv]

Look on the bright side, when Leica have finally used up overstocked components meant for the X2 and odds and ends from other slow selling cameras incorporated into the mini-M design the cupboard will be bare. Like the M-E using up the last bits from the M9 it will signal an end. So what comes after will be great,.....won't it?

 

 

Steve

I think it shows time and time again that Leica does not overstock parts - they appear to come in from the suppliers on a just-in-time (or sometimes sorry-late;)) basis like most modern production processes. Otherwise they wouldn't run out from time to time.

[luigi bertolotti]

Well all this theoretical stuff is I am sure quite fascinating, but in the end it is the final photographic result that really matters regardless of sensor size etc.

 

I know for example that a Leica D lens shot wide open with a good mFT sensor is capable of

beautiful shallow DOF equally as pleasing as anything that I have shot with either APS-c or full frame cameras with very expensive lenses.

 

Yes, no doubt that a fine shallow DOF can be achieved also on a m43... maybe (I don't remember significant examples) also in P&S if one can control the aperture (provided it is sufficently wide) ; but, as you say, the arguments were about the "theory" of DOF... and I keep firmly the opinion that in the final photographic result (print) if you take two pictures made to be "identical as far as possible" , the one taken with a larger sensor (or film) will have a narrower DOF. Any argument against this has never convinced me completely... and, at the end, DOF is a visual impression very hard to "measure" in rigorous terms....

[lct]

...oof in the image will be very similar if you move back to attain the same image with a cropped sensor...

DoF changes with the subject distance for sure but perspective as well. Hard to get some shallow DoF with a small sensor camera but at close distance though.

[marknorton]

Does anyone think this thing is anything more than an X2 with a re-designed top-plate and a rather unambitious (if optically good) zoom lens?

 

I'd love to think that Leica has an unexpected white rabbit to pull out of the hat but feel doomed to disappointment.

 

With apologies to Shakespeare, it all seems to be a much ado about nothing.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[mjh]

Yes, no doubt that a fine shallow DOF can be achieved also on a m43... maybe (I don't remember significant examples) also in P&S if one can control the aperture (provided it is sufficently wide)

If the field of view is the same and the entry pupil is the same, DoF will be the same as well. But there are limits. The DoF of a Noctilux cannot be achieved with a MFT lens as the lens speed would have to be higher than 1:0.5, which is impossible. Of course, even a theoretically possible 1:0.63 lens for APS-C would not really be viable.

[lct]

Does anyone think this thing is anything more than an X2 with a re-designed top-plate and a rather unambitious (if optically good) zoom lens?...

A 120 fps refresh rate would be great but i don't hold my breath.