Jump to content

CEO Alfred Schopf and future products


hoppyman

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Yes, my first thought was that the next S will be CMOS. What MP though? We all know 50MP is doable according to Phase One.

 

My next thought was the T. OK, so it will be CMOS, but we surmised that. His fondness for APS-C also sounds like what many of us have surmised.

 

We have been discussing this for over 100 days. It hopefully will not be another 100 days before we know the answers.

 

Not forgetting a new M Monochrom, cmos based......

Will be great for the 100 years Anniversary of the fist 24x36 BW film camera....

 

82 days before we know :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

x
  • Replies 743
  • Created
  • Last Reply

The T is not supposed to be a medium sized camera a la Fuji but a smaller one a la Ricoh so there will be little room for a built-in EVF i'm afraid. BTW the length of the Leica CL was 120mm. Same for chimping cams like Ricoh GXR, Samsung NX100 but also the Sony Nex-7 with built-in EVF. Would we buy a Sony instead of the T for this only reason? I know i would not as i expect the T to fit perfectly my M lenses but what about average Joe and soccer moms photographers? I suspect they will have to accept some compromise to wear a red dot, as usual.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The T is not supposed to be a medium sized camera a la Fuji but a smaller one a la Ricoh ....

 

You say ? I'd bet it won't be SO smalll... not a Nex, just to say... look at the X series sizing... people that buy Leica (imho) don't like toomuch superminiaturization (the red dot can't be TOO small... :p) ... I'd look at X Vario as base dimensions...

Link to post
Share on other sites

If it's AF, it's probably less important. The EVF will be acceptable, provided it is fast and frames accurately.

 

The quality of the EVF is moe critical if you plan to mount M lenses.

 

Faint whiffs of P&S are inevitable if this is to be a small, AF APS-C camera.

 

John

 

PM sent.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The T is not supposed to be a medium sized camera a la Fuji but a smaller one a la Ricoh so there will be little room for a built-in EVF i'm afraid.

 

If true, they've lost me. ...again.

 

Sent from another Galaxy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Any camera with a focussing method other than a coupled rangefinder will always be a 2nd best workaround for using M lenses. Leica should have kept the M8.2 in the line up, as they have done with the M9, and saved the R&D that they have spent on the T (or whatever it ends up being called), which now really is Fuji's market space.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Any camera with a focussing method other than a coupled rangefinder will always be a 2nd best workaround for using M lenses.

Who says that Leica cared about a ‘workaround for using M lenses’? Leica’s cameras for using M lenses are the M and the M Monochrom. If Leica should introduce an EVIL camera then chances are that M lenses will be adaptable in theory, and Leica will probably make sure they can be adapted in practice. But that would not imply an EVIL camera was intended to be used with M lenses primarily.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Leica needs differentiation in the portfolio of products.

 

The M line is the M line.

 

The T line is the T line.

 

The S line is the S line.

 

Different concepts, products, prices and public.

 

The question is if the T line makes economic sense for Leica. And the same goes for further developments in the M or S lines.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Who says that Leica cared about a ‘workaround for using M lenses’? Leica’s cameras for using M lenses are the M and the M Monochrom. If Leica should introduce an EVIL camera then chances are that M lenses will be adaptable in theory, and Leica will probably make sure they can be adapted in practice. But that would not imply an EVIL camera was intended to be used with M lenses primarily.
Sorry, there were two ideas, expressed in two sentences. As to the first, "Leica cameras for using M lenses" also include the M-E, and I was saying that they should also include an M8 variant. There is a huge gap for an affordable digital rangefinder camera to use with Zeiss/CV and Summarit lenses. As to the second, it seems to me to be a mug's game to introduce an APS-C interchangeable lens camera, with a new proprietary lens mount and a mix of autofocus zooms and primes, which may or may not be compatible with M-mount and other manual focus lenses. No one other than the Louis Vuitton crowd would pay the stupidity tax for a similar (or lesser) specced Leica camera over the Fuji or Sony equivalents at half the price.

 

Anyway, I'm sorry that I wandered onto the armchair CEO thread - I will leave you to it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, there were two ideas, expressed in two sentences. As to the first, "Leica cameras for using M lenses" also include the M-E, and I was saying that they should also include an M8 variant. There is a huge gap for an affordable digital rangefinder camera to use with Zeiss/CV and Summarit lenses. As to the second, it seems to me to be a mug's game to introduce an APS-C interchangeable lens camera, with a new proprietary lens mount and a mix of autofocus zooms and primes, which may or may not be compatible with M-mount and other manual focus lenses. No one other than the Louis Vuitton crowd would pay the stupidity tax for a similar (or lesser) specced Leica camera over the Fuji or Sony equivalents at half the price.

 

Anyway, I'm sorry that I wandered onto the armchair CEO thread - I will leave you to it.

Ummm... How do you propose to incorporate AF in an M mount. Leica cannot build an AF camera (if they so desire) other than by changing the mount.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, there were two ideas, expressed in two sentences. As to the first, "Leica cameras for using M lenses" also include the M-E, and I was saying that they should also include an M8 variant. There is a huge gap for an affordable digital rangefinder camera to use with Zeiss/CV and Summarit lenses. As to the second, it seems to me to be a mug's game to introduce an APS-C interchangeable lens camera, with a new proprietary lens mount and a mix of autofocus zooms and primes, which may or may not be compatible with M-mount and other manual focus lenses. No one other than the Louis Vuitton crowd would pay the stupidity tax for a similar (or lesser) specced Leica camera over the Fuji or Sony equivalents at half the price.

 

Just to pick you up on a few points here, there are also the M7 and MP which have used M lenses for much longer than the M/MM! Not forgetting all the earlier film M's in use either.

 

If there's a huge gap for an affordable rangefinder, why did Epson/Voigtlander drop theirs?

 

The 'Louis Vuitton' crowd is exactly the type of customer Leica are aiming for, that's why they have a new store in Burlington Arcade. If you don't know what Burlington Arcade is then you may not appreciate the the point but it's basically a very exclusive small arcade of shops in one of the most expensive parts of London, full of 'luxury item' shops.

 

Store Listing - Burlington Arcade

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ummm... How do you propose to incorporate AF in an M mount. Leica cannot build an AF camera (if they so desire) other than by changing the mount.

 

You do like to make absolute statements and I think you are missing Stephen's point.

 

I honestly couldn't care either way but I don't see why an AF lens couldn't use the M mount. It might not be ideal and the lenses would likely have a fatter barrel than manual focus M lenses but the Contax G demonstrated that the lenses need not be large. Naturally, there would need to be some sort of electronic linkage between lens and body so an AF M mount lens wouldn't be backwards compatible with existing M bodies other than, perhaps, in simple manual focus mode (though I suspect such lenses would have dispensed with the RF cam so would only be usable on the M240 and successor bodies). Of course, this isn't what the T is going to be (we already know that) but that doesn't mean it couldn't be done.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If there's a huge gap for an affordable rangefinder, why did Epson/Voigtlander drop theirs?

 

I doubt that the demise of the RD-1 had anything to do with whether there was a gap for an affordable rangefinder camera or not. The project wasn't well managed from the start and there were problems with servicing (at one point Epson were replacing cameras that needed nothing more than an RF calibration). It was also very non-core business for Epson – essentially a vanity project – and I suspect it was decided it was too much hassle to continue with it. I think the fact that people are happy to pay £1000 for a used M8 and £2000 for a used M9 indicates that there is a market for an "affordable" digital RF. Of course, that doesn't mean that there is sufficient demand to enable Leica to enter this market with a new product built to a sufficient standard at an "affordable" price point.

 

The 'Louis Vuitton' crowd is exactly the type of customer Leica are aiming for, that's why they have a new store in Burlington Arcade.

 

I'm not sure it automatically follows that those who like to buy luxury bags, watches and clothing want to buy cameras with interchangeable lenses, whatever the price or brand name attached.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...