CheshireCat Posted April 8, 2015 Share #981 Posted April 8, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) It is all because the film Leicas were designed to a minimum thickness with the register distance of the lenses. A DSLR has far more leeway in that respect. I don't think the register distance has anything to do with that. Where did you get the 6mm number ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted April 8, 2015 Posted April 8, 2015 Hi CheshireCat, Take a look here What do you want in the next digital M?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
dimitri_c Posted April 8, 2015 Share #982 Posted April 8, 2015 Hello - Nothing new… Improved dynamic range is a necessity The best bult-in EVF With this, I would be very happy. - Dimitri Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted April 8, 2015 Share #983 Posted April 8, 2015 I don't think the register distance has anything to do with that. Where did you get the 6mm number ? Of course it has. It dictates the sensor-flange distance. The 6 mm comes from a guesstimate of looking at the sensors of other manufacturers that have dust removal systems. Those are fat mechanisms. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted April 8, 2015 Share #984 Posted April 8, 2015 Hello - Nothing new… Improved dynamic range is a necessity The best bult-in EVF . With this, I would be very happy. Leica can build in an EVF for all I care,, as long as it does not impact the functioning of the optical viewfinder. This is, after all primary a rangefinder camera. I think the way to go is a stick-on one, but this time anticipate future improvements. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
menos I M6 Posted April 8, 2015 Share #985 Posted April 8, 2015 Sensor cleaning system equals a 6 mm thicker camera. Do we really want that ? Surely not. What is an absolute MUST in any further Leica digital sensor based product with changeable lenses is the design and production of the product for commonly available user cleaning methods. The current situation where Leica advices against the user cleaning the sensor by tactile method is absolutely ridiculous. It is like the policy of an eye glass wearer to come back to the shop for a glasses cleaning whenever gently blowing air over the smeared glasses is not helping with the image quality deterioration issue the user has, given that user has paid top currency for the best of the best glass to beginn with. We need a robust sensor (as does other digital sensor camera makers have for years). I cannot count the times I have cleaned sensors for years on many different Nikon bodies with not a speck of an issue, while all we hear about the sensors in Leica M cameras is issues with materials used, manufacturing issues and issues where Leica does go out of their way when these sensors rot by themselves and replaces them. I have a Leica M9 which had it's sensor replaced by Leica due to (at that time invisible to the user) sensor corrosion issue. Promptly the very first wet cleaning of the new sensor (oil spots from the camera itself) provoked a scratch on the sensor. Mind you - identical new, sealed cleaning materials and methods have been applied as had been over years with Nikon bodies and even the very same M9, an M8.2 and a M Mono. Now the sensor scratches by merely looking at it? I didn't buy a new digital Leica body after that incident (and having been presented the quote for sensor replacement at full cost) and won't until this sensor nonsense is settled with a proper design. For the most part I have been going back to shooting film actually, enjoying it immensely ;-) A dust vibration feature is a camera function best suited for larger cameras, not bound by size restrictions as a Leica M. A proper sensor design with robust cover glass is half way there and good enough for experienced users who know how to clean a sensor professionally. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mornnb Posted April 8, 2015 Share #986 Posted April 8, 2015 Sensor cleaning system equals a 6 mm thicker camera. Do we really want that ? Maybe Leica can figure out a way of doing it that doesn't equal a 6mm thicker camera, don't underestimate the creativity of engineers. If you've ever taken long exposure landscape shots at f10 and above, you will understand the importance of this feature. But even on cameras with built in sensor cleaning, it's not entirely successful. Whatever you do theres always a few specs, dust is a persistent bugger. Black frame noise reduction eliminates noise that cannot be removed any other way. Make it a user selection if desired - but no complaints about noise in that case....,Any serious photographer would welcome the option. Once.... There needs to be an option to disable it, serious photographers care about timing. Leica can build in an EVF for all I care,, as long as it does not impact the functioning of the optical viewfinder. This is, after all primary a rangefinder camera. I think the way to go is a stick-on one, but this time anticipate future improvements. I'd rather the EVF stay optional. An EVF is not a necessity if you have a Rangefinder, no need to build the bulk of an EVF into the camera. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mornnb Posted April 8, 2015 Share #987 Posted April 8, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Surely not. What is an absolute MUST in any further Leica digital sensor based product with changeable lenses is the design and production of the product for commonly available user cleaning methods. The current situation where Leica advices against the user cleaning the sensor by tactile method is absolutely ridiculous. It is like the policy of an eye glass wearer to come back to the shop for a glasses cleaning whenever gently blowing air over the smeared glasses is not helping with the image quality deterioration issue the user has, given that user has paid top currency for the best of the best glass to beginn with. We need a robust sensor (as does other digital sensor camera makers have for years). I cannot count the times I have cleaned sensors for years on many different Nikon bodies with not a speck of an issue, while all we hear about the sensors in Leica M cameras is issues with materials used, manufacturing issues and issues where Leica does go out of their way when these sensors rot by themselves and replaces them. I have a Leica M9 which had it's sensor replaced by Leica due to (at that time invisible to the user) sensor corrosion issue. Corrosion is not an issue that affected the M240. However I would point out that there are reasons why Leica's sensors are more fragile. Leica keeps the layer of glass on the sensor, the sensor stack, as thin as possible. Because the sensor stack has a very measurable impact on lens performance, hence Leica has optimised their sensor to work as well as is possible with classic Leica glass made for a film era. There are disadvantages to this, which is sensor dust is closer to the pixels and appears more defined, plus the sensor glass is more fragile. But, the first priority to Leica is that the sensor works well with their lenses. Here are various manufacturers sensor stack thickness: Leica M9 0.8mm Canon 6D 2mm Nikon D700 1.7mm Olympus OM-D EM-5 3.8mm Fuji X Pr0-1 2.2mm Sony A7r 1.85mm Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted April 8, 2015 Share #988 Posted April 8, 2015 Of course it has. It dictates the sensor-flange distance. The 6 mm comes from a guesstimate of looking at the sensors of other manufacturers that have dust removal systems. Those are fat mechanisms. The only thing that dictates the flange distance is the M lens system specification. You cannot change the flange distance. Besides, the M has a larger flange distance than most other mirrorless cameras. The Sony A7 MkII has a moving sensor for full in-body image stabilization (IBIS) and cleaning, and the flange distance was [obviously] not been modified. Yet the camera is about as thick as an M240. Keep in mind that this is for a full (fat) advanced IBIS mechanism. A simple vibration cleaning system could probably be fitted at the sides of the sensor with no increase in thickness. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted April 8, 2015 Share #989 Posted April 8, 2015 Thanks for confirming that the register distance of the system dictates the sensor-flange distance. The Sony register distance is cjonsiderably shorter than Leica's, so the small difference to the 240 is indeed caused by the cleaning mechanism and IS. Otherwise it would be as thin as a NEX7 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted April 8, 2015 Share #990 Posted April 8, 2015 Plus Leica modified their original silly cleaning advice. Corrosion is not an issue that affected the M240.However I would point out that there are reasons why Leica's sensors are more fragile. Leica keeps the layer of glass on the sensor, the sensor stack, as thin as possible. Because the sensor stack has a very measurable impact on lens performance, hence Leica has optimised their sensor to work as well as is possible with classic Leica glass made for a film era. There are disadvantages to this, which is sensor dust is closer to the pixels and appears more defined, plus the sensor glass is more fragile. But, the first priority to Leica is that the sensor works well with their lenses. Here are various manufacturers sensor stack thickness: Leica M9 0.8mm Canon 6D 2mm Nikon D700 1.7mm Olympus OM-D EM-5 3.8mm Fuji X Pr0-1 2.2mm Sony A7r 1.85mm Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted April 8, 2015 Share #991 Posted April 8, 2015 ... Otherwise it would be as thin as a NEX7 If by "thin" the distance from the flange to the back of the body is meant, please see here: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m-type-240/315958-2014-possibly-big-year-leica-2.html#post2599264. If the thickest place is meant, the NEX7 is even fatter. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted April 8, 2015 Share #992 Posted April 8, 2015 If by "thin" the distance from the flange to the back of the body is meant, please see here: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m-type-240/315958-2014-possibly-big-year-leica-2.html#post2599264. If the thickest place is meant, the NEX7 is even fatter. Totally unfair. That is the NEX7 grip. They could have made it much smaller, but then only garden gnomes would have been able to use the camera Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted April 8, 2015 Share #993 Posted April 8, 2015 Thanks for confirming that the register distance of the system dictates the sensor-flange distance. The "register distance" is just another name for the "sensor-flange" distance, therefore it does not dictate itself . The Sony register distance is considerably shorter than Leica's Which means there is much more empty space to put a sensor cleaning mechanism like this: https://support.nikonusa.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/16067/~/nikon-sensor-cleaning-system Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted April 8, 2015 Share #994 Posted April 8, 2015 Totally unfair. That is the NEX7 grip. Please look closely at the photograph. The ruler lies on the display of the camera. The grip occludes part of the ruler. Both cameras lie on the flange. The NEX7 - with the M lens adapter - is thicker than the M (Typ 240), not taking the grip into account. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cirke Posted April 8, 2015 Share #995 Posted April 8, 2015 Sensor cleaning system equals a 6 mm thicker camera. Do we really want that ?with new generation of modern batteries it will be the same or even thiner do we want a thin camera or do we want a 100% modern pro camera ? I like the M6 size but I prefer a camera with more possibilities Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted April 8, 2015 Share #996 Posted April 8, 2015 Accepting that both sensor cleaning systems and IBIS "require" an increase in thickness of the M body is not good enough. For a company that prides itself on its industry-leading mechanical engineering expertise and given the continuing miniaturisation of electronic systems, we, as customers, should not expect Leica to limit their designs by what's in past or competing products, but to design systems that meet our expectations (leaving aside the clear evidence from this thread that identifying what Leica customers want is like herding cats:p). If Leica is to limit itself by the components it can buy off the shelf, then I do not believe that the rangefinder alone (much though I value it) will be enough to keep the Leica M distinctive and desirable. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cirke Posted April 8, 2015 Share #997 Posted April 8, 2015 I do not believe that the rangefinder alone (much though I value it) will be enough to keep the Leica M distinctive and desirable.it is so good not to fill alone :-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted April 8, 2015 Share #998 Posted April 8, 2015 If by "thin" the distance from the flange to the back of the body is meant, please see here: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m-type-240/315958-2014-possibly-big-year-leica-2.html#post2599264. If the thickest place is meant, the NEX7 is even fatter. Not the 240, the A7 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted April 8, 2015 Share #999 Posted April 8, 2015 The "register distance" is just another name for the "sensor-flange" distance, therefore it does not dictate itself . The king of rephrasing has spoken Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted April 9, 2015 Share #1000 Posted April 9, 2015 Please look closely at the photograph. The ruler lies on the display of the camera. The grip occludes part of the ruler. Both cameras lie on the flange. The NEX7 - with the M lens adapter - is thicker than the M (Typ 240), not taking the grip into account. Indeed, the NEX7 with the M lens adapter is about as thick as the M. Now please look closely at the diagram below. The long red segment is what you measured, and the short red segment is the actual thickness of the NEX7 body hosting a sensor with vibration dust removal mechanism. You can see how the M240 has plenty of space (volume) to host new nice goodies, and how unfair your thickness comparison was . 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! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/215101-what-do-you-want-in-the-next-digital-m/?do=findComment&comment=2795198'>More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.