What do you want in the next digital M?

[Rick]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

What's wrong is that something that's wrong and could be fixed by changing mentality .

 

Leica is clearly not a software company, and does not realize that photography has been changing during the years and is moving from a hardware only business to a predominantly software business..

 

How do you know that Leica does not realize that photography has "been changing?" I would guess that somebody over at Leica has a handle on the progression and history of where photography has come from and where it is now, don't you think?

 

Also, I would have to disagree about your statement that photography is predominately a software business.

 

They need to do something quick if they do not want to be eventually stuck forever in the lens only business (like Zeiss, and that's not that bad)..

 

I'd say that would be true for all of the camera manufacturers except Leica at least has a strong lens component.

 

 

There are two solutions:

 

1) Develop your own software in-house, and protect your IP because you think your software is more advanced than the competition. This needs a lot of resources, and is something even giants like Canon, Nikon, and especially Sony are struggling to do right.

 

2) Use an open OS (Linux, Android, ...), keep a couple developers to half-bake the usual meh firmware on that, and then immediately release the open source project and let the community enhance the camera. If properly done, even end users will be able to configure their own firmware a-la-carte, selecting the firmware branch they like (minimalistic, geeky, etc) and which features to enable, all from their web-browser.

Soon you will have a much better camera for free, as people will fix and enhance your product out of passion for photography and tecnology.

 

In my opinion, it is clear that Leica (and not only) should go for solution 2.

 

Leica has taken path number 1. I just really don't see number 2 as a viable option, although it is amusing to think Leica may have to hire a second firmware developer so they can have a "couple developers" to carry out your second option.

[Exodies]

Who is going to pay for your camera repairs after the open firmware has broken it?

(If you don't think firmware can destroy the hardware, try this - a sensor cleaning function (ie keeps the shutter open while you wipe it like we have) with a bug such that the shutter release button is active...).

Allowing random firmware would be a nightmare for hardware support.

[pop]

Who is going to pay for your camera repairs after the open firmware has broken it?

(If you don't think firmware can destroy the hardware, try this - a sensor cleaning function (ie keeps the shutter open while you wipe it like we have) with a bug such that the shutter release button is active...).

Allowing random firmware would be a nightmare for hardware support.

 

This is a recurring myth: that open source software is more likely to break the hardware than the closed source variety.

 

If this was the case, an unholy number of servers, PCs, internet routers (both at offices and at home), cell phones, SAN storage devices and so on should be broken by now. Closed source software is no more and no less likely to break your hardware than open source software is.

 

Also, "open source software" has nothing whatsoever to do with "random firmware".

[pico]

Who is going to pay for your camera repairs after the open firmware has broken it?

 

(If you don't think firmware can destroy the hardware, try this - a sensor cleaning function (ie keeps the shutter open while you wipe it like we have) with a bug such that the shutter release button is active...).

 

 

You underestimate hacking. They could destroy your components by cooking it to death by opening the shutter with the sensor being alive.

[Exodies]

I didn't say open firmware was more likely to break the camera, just that it could. Therefore why would Leica guarantee the camera?

It would be random in the sense that nobody could know what software was in use except by unloading it and examining it byte by byte.

[CheshireCat]

Also, I would have to disagree about your statement that photography is predominately a software business.

 

I said it is moving to a predominantly software business [from mechanical to electronic and finally software].

This is especially true with Leica, which is only left with RF and lenses as a core. All the rest is a collage of meh "second hand" technologies recycled from third-parties (the Maestro chip and EVF are a nice example).

RF will soon depart from this earth, despite the heartfelt support of many users in this forum, and all will be left of Leica is a great lens design department (that still needs to catch up on AF et cetera).

 

I'd say that would be true for all of the camera manufacturers except Leica at least has a strong lens component.

 

I believe the other manufacturers are on par with Leica as far as optical technology is concerned. They just optimize for something different than performance/size ratio.

[CheshireCat]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

(If you don't think firmware can destroy the hardware, try this - a sensor cleaning function (ie keeps the shutter open while you wipe it like we have) with a bug such that the shutter release button is active...).

 

If the shutter is physically damaged, Leica may not replace it in warranty even if the camera is running the stock firmware.

[Rick]

I said it is moving to a predominantly software business [from mechanical to electronic and finally software].

This is especially true with Leica, which is only left with RF and lenses as a core. All the rest is a collage of meh "second hand" technologies recycled from third-parties (the Maestro chip and EVF are a nice example).

RF will soon depart from this earth, despite the heartfelt support of many users in this forum, and all will be left of Leica is a great lens design department (that still needs to catch up on AF et cetera).

 

I really hope I precede this event. Luckily, Leica will have about a half a century if, all works as planned on my end.

 

 

 

I believe the other manufacturers are on par with Leica as far as optical technology is concerned.

 

I disagree. Leica is pretty much regarded as having more than just par optics.

 

They (other manufacturers) just optimize for something different than performance/size ratio.

 

As far as performance and size goes, I agree, these are not qualities other manufacturers seem to optimize in their lens design. Which is again, why I like what Leica is doing.

[jaapv]

I said it is moving to a predominantly software business [from mechanical to electronic and finally software].

As far as I am aware photography is still about photons hitting a sensitive surface, the amount being controlled by an aperture and a shutter, the focus being achieved by an optical process that has been formulated centuries ago by Abbé, the rest is ephemeral technology.

Software today, some other process tomorrow...

 

 

 

I believe the other manufacturers are on par with Leica as far as optical technology is concerned. They just optimize for something different than performance/size ratio.

You believe wrongly.

there is a distinct pecking order, with Leica and Zeiss at the top, the rest lagging behind.

[Michael Geschlecht]

Hello Everybody,

 

I would like to suggest a slightly different new "M". Altho it is a model which might have a somewhat limited demand.

 

It would be interesting to see a digital "M" body where the majority of the basic body, range/viewfinder & various other components are mechanical. That is to say a variant of the current MP (mechanical) in its standard as well as ala carte versions.

 

And then to make a removable digital insert which fills the current film & take-up chambers as well as utilizing the current film path.

 

In the beginning this might not be able to use a standard MP (film) body but with the MP's removable back, etc there might be a way to build an interim model.

 

It wouldn't necessarily have all of the bells & whistles of a current "M" (digita) but it might generate some interest.

 

This would do away with the necessity to replace the range/viewfinder, shutter, etc when updating the electronic components.

 

Best Regards,

 

Michael

[CheshireCat]

there is a distinct pecking order, with Leica and Zeiss at the top, the rest lagging behind.

 

Not really. Let's just talk about optical quality.

 

N.B.: I am a long time EF system user, and can only comment about that reflex system.

Let's rule out Canon's long tele primes - all amazing apochromatic glass - because Leica does not produce anything similar (anymore). Let's rule out also the high-quality new zooms for the same reason.

There are several high-end primes from Canon and Sigma that can compete with Leica's expensive equivalents. Just to cite a few: Canon TS-E 17/4 and 24/3.5 (v2), Sigma Art 35/1.4 and 50/1.4, Canon 85/1.2.

 

Voigtlander also produces some great lenses that are almost as good as Leica equivalents for a fraction of the price. I am sure that if Voigtlander wanted to produce more expensive lenses, they could produce lenses as good or better than Leica's. Therefore, in that sense, they are "lagging behind" just a bit, on purpose

 

P.S. You may want to spawn a new thread with this post, as this is clearly offtopic.

[jaapv]

It is far easier to create huge lenses with good to excellent specifications. Look at the Zeiss OTUS lenses. It only takes mid-range expertise to do so.

[jaapv]

That one has been around for the last fifteen years. It has remained vaporware, despite widespread Internet enthusiasm.

Hello Everybody,

 

I would like to suggest a slightly different new "M". Altho it is a model which might have a somewhat limited demand.

 

It would be interesting to see a digital "M" body where the majority of the basic body, range/viewfinder & various other components are mechanical. That is to say a variant of the current MP (mechanical) in its standard as well as ala carte versions.

 

And then to make a removable digital insert which fills the current film & take-up chambers as well as utilizing the current film path.

 

In the beginning this might not be able to use a standard MP (film) body but with the MP's removable back, etc there might be a way to build an interim model.

 

It wouldn't necessarily have all of the bells & whistles of a current "M" (digita) but it might generate some interest.

 

This would do away with the necessity to replace the range/viewfinder, shutter, etc when updating the electronic components.

 

Best Regards,

 

Michael

[bjornthun]

I want an "organic sensor" that will work even better with Leica wide angle lenses. Otherwise I'm happy with my current M9. M 240 is only a dream for now.

[Michael Geschlecht]

Hello Jaap,

 

Actually, this is an idea that has been around in pretty much the same way for about 30 years.

 

You can actually do what I have suggested today if you buy a Hasselblad 500C which has been around almost as long as a Leica M3. Just buy a (discontinued) 500C or 1 of its (discontinued) 2&1/4 successors & add a current digital back.

 

The same can be done with many other medium & large format cameras. Many of which have also been discontinued.

 

Many of the problems of 30 or 15 years ago were related to issues related to the development of suitable electronic components & miniaturization of said components. Many of these obstacles have, to a great extent, been dealt with & today's technology pretty much allows for what I suggested above in Post #524.

 

One of the issues which might be brought to the fore if what I have suggested were to be implemented is: The potential of millions of previously obsoleted cameras becoming functional again & therefore lessening the demand for basic camera bodies.

 

One reason I think Leica might, none the less, do this is that: Altho there was a time when the mechanical camera bodies & other accessories were an important part of Leitz/Leica's focus. There was a time period when Leitz was sometimes jokingly referred to as: "An accessory & adapter Company that also made cameras & lenses.

 

Today Leica is pretty much of a lens company that also makes cameras. So the issue of pre-existant functional bodies is not as significant an issue as it might be for some other Companies.

 

Another thought: It was mentioned above that part of the difficulties Leica are dealing with might be related to their inability to optimally utilize computer programs. People might keep in mind that 1 of the reasons for Leitz/Leica's accomplishments in terms of post World War II lens design was their early utilization of computers for lens design & development & their development of proprietary computer generated models which allowed them to produce lenses at the front of the field. They have certainly been adequately computer literate there.

 

Best Regards,

 

Michael

[Rick]

It is far easier to create huge lenses with good to excellent specifications. Look at the Zeiss OTUS lenses. It only takes mid-range expertise to do so.

 

Yes, the OTUS got a lot of press and it is a good and big lens, but it still doesn't stack up ahead of some of Leica's best. Roger from lens rental tested it earlier this year and here is part of his findings. Here are the MTF50 results given in line pairs/image height for the lenses, each tested at widest aperture. Center/Middle/Edge:

 

Leica Summicron f2.0 APO = 1680/1368/1368

 

Leica Summilux f1.4 = 1488/1152/1032

 

Otus f1.4 = 1248/1200/912.

 

For a big gawky lens, the OTUS sure got a lot of hype. And, what are you going to shoot it on? A little Sony A7r? Roger's tests with 50mm Canon and Nikon fair even worse. So, don't try and tell me that Leica isn't at the top of the optical food chain. If, you consider the small size of the Leica lenses, they eat everybody else's lunch. If, you add in the wonderful color and contrast, well you get the idea.

 

Now, add in a sensor that can take advantage of great optics by not smearing the corners all over the place and you have a system (M240 + Leica glass) that is hard to beat optically, no matter how far advanced you think the programmers are at Sony.

[CheshireCat]

Yes, the OTUS got a lot of press and it is a good and big lens, but it still doesn't stack up ahead of some of Leica's best.

 

Nice try. Roger is a great guy but properly testing lenses is very hard.

Here is what he replies to one of the comments in the article you cited:

 

It's possible there are typos. I double checked when collecting and again as I entered data, but the article took so long to write as I tried different ways to present the data that I might have transposed something going from one form of presentation to another. I'll have to get the original machine tracings out and double check. But after what we've found with the sensor stack issues, I also need to retest the Sigma and Otus lenses. They might actually be better than they appear from my test results.

 

You also "forgot" to include the result of the Sigma Art 50/1.4, which even with the mentioned sensor stack issues, at f/2 is better than the Summilux and even better than the APO Summicron in the mid frame.

[Rick]

Cat - Roger has tested 50mm lenses several times and the Leica are always on top.

 

Secondly, the Sigma Art is a nice lens and everyone was surprised how well it did. This is apparently one nice lens from Sigma (inexpensive too), but Leica has a constant history of exceptional optics.

 

You said, "I believe the other manufacturers are on par with Leica as far as optical technology is concerned." And, I disagree. Other than an occasional lens from the random manufacturer, they are not on par with Leica lenses.

 

Haven't you learned anything hanging out here over the last 3-years.

 

Rick

[mjh]

And then to make a removable digital insert which fills the current film & take-up chambers as well as utilizing the current film path.

Many years ago there probably was a market for such a product, back when analogue bodies were still in widespread use and digital cameras were expensive. This window of opportunity has come and gone and now this market is almost non-existent. This is now the exclusive realm of DIY projects like the Frankencamera.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[jaapv]

Cat - Roger has tested 50mm lenses several times and the Leica are always on top.

 

Secondly, the Sigma Art is a nice lens and everyone was surprised how well it did. This is apparently one nice lens from Sigma (inexpensive too), but Leica has a constant history of exceptional optics.

 

You said, "I believe the other manufacturers are on par with Leica as far as optical technology is concerned." And, I disagree. Other than an occasional lens from the random manufacturer, they are not on par with Leica lenses.

 

Haven't you learned anything hanging out here over the last 3-years.

 

Rick

Yes-but Leica rebranded several Sigma lenses and sold them as their own...

 

But I agree. The cupboards full of lens designs, collective experience and competence of the design staff and the ability to attract the foremost lens designers in the business (Karbe, Mandler, etc) make for an expertise that no other manufacturer can match..

 

The only manufacturer that comes close is Zeiss. But then there is quite a bit of (optical) cross-pollination going on in Hessen...