Sony Monochrom???

[algrove]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

K-H

 

I do not think that Leica is struggling in getting M lenses to function with Leica digital camera sensors any longer with the advent of the M240. Frankly, I did not even have problems with my M9. As we all know Leica corrects pretty well in camera which works for me.

 

I am not sure what you mean by the word "traditional" as regards to M lenses.

[ModernMan]

It is hard for me to imagine that the market for an A7r monochrome would be large enough to support the business case for Sony. It is a rarefied group of people that would appreciate the nuance between a true monochrome camera rather than the B&W shooting mode already available not he A7/r, and appreciate it to the extent of buying another camera body dedicated exclusively for the purpose. My impression is that even in the "boutique market" of the Leica world, with many buyers steeped in decades of immersion in B&W photography, the market for the M Monchrome just a small segment, compared to the markets targeted by Sony.

[Steve P]

I wonder how large a proportion of photographers out there would like a monochrome only camera and could afford the Leica M Monochrom but are simply unwilling to pay that kind of money for such a specialised product. I guess the size of such a group is an unknown quantity until a manufacturer decides to take a chance, make one and find out. Of all current camera makers Sony seems to be the one most likely to take such a chance. I'm sure that should they do so, the last thing on their minds will be how to make it work best with Leica lenses.

[250swb]

Of all current camera makers Sony seems to be the one most likely to take such a chance.

 

I'm sure a lot of people who pre-ordered the A7R only to discover its shortcomings feel that Sony 'took a chance', and with their customers money no less!

 

The commercial logic of making a camera that is compatible with M lenses is considerable, there are so many available, owned by so many photographers, that the market will dwarf the ownership of Sony lenses forever. But Sony are throwing technology around in many directions, hoping some of it will stick, without going in any serious direction forward. By the time there are some Sony made lenses available for the A7R/mythical Monochrome A7M there will be another competing camera available made either by somebody else or even Sony themselves. At least with Leica you know it will be slow and steady, and for the large part it will work.

 

Steve

[marcg]

I'm sure a lot of people who pre-ordered the A7R only to discover its shortcomings feel that Sony 'took a chance', and with their customers money no less!

 

The commercial logic of making a camera that is compatible with M lenses is considerable, there are so many available, owned by so many photographers, that the market will dwarf the ownership of Sony lenses forever. But Sony are throwing technology around in many directions, hoping some of it will stick, without going in any serious direction forward. By the time there are some Sony made lenses available for the A7R/mythical Monochrome A7M there will be another competing camera available made either by somebody else or even Sony themselves. At least with Leica you know it will be slow and steady, and for the large part it will work.

 

Steve

I don't follow many other photog forums but I have only seen criticism of the A7® from people who wanted the camera as another platform for their own third party lenses - Leica.

To say that Sony took a chance on this - is once again to assume that Sony only intended to address the Leica lens owner market with their new product.

That can't be correct..

The people who took a chance with their money were the owners of Leica lenses who decided to take a chance on a Sony camera - but it was their choice.

Sony is made primarily for their own native lenses - and when those come out, I expect that we will see that Sony hasn't taken much of a chance at all.

[Steve P]

But Sony are throwing technology around in many directions, hoping some of it will stick, without going in any serious direction forward.

 

I agree with you. In fact it is for precisely this reason that I think Sony are most likely to try out a Monochrome camera. They seem more willing to throw it at the wall and see what sticks than just about any other manufacturer. Of course the biggest downside, as you rightly point out, is that photographers may end up investing in a system that withers on the vine, leaving them out of pocket and understandably resentful.

[adan]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The commercial logic of making a camera that is compatible with M lenses is considerable, there are so many available, owned by so many photographers, that the market will dwarf the ownership of Sony lenses forever.

 

Say what?

 

Leica's lifetime lens production, per serial number range: less than 5 million (and that includes R lenses)

 

Nikon lens production: 75 million+ Nikon marks production of 75 millionth Nikkor lens: Digital Photography Review

 

Canon lens production: 80 million+ EF lenses, not counting the 30 years of FL/FD lenses prior to autofocus. There Are Now 80 Million Canon EF-Series Lenses Running Around in the Wild

 

Not to mention Olympus OM, Pentax K/SM, Minolta M/Maxxum/Alpha, or the third-party lenses made for those mounts.

 

I'm sorry, but <0.3% of the total is not a market; it is an accounting error.

 

You might just as well have said, in 1959:

 

The commercial logic of making the Nikon F compatible with M lenses is considerable, there are so many available, owned by so many photographers, that the market will dwarf the ownership of Nikon lenses forever.

 

In 1959, your logical proposition regarding the prevalence of M lenses in the market might well have been true (certainly truer than today) - but even so, your conclusion would have been wrong, by a factor of 15.

[Paul J]

I don't see why they wouldn't try one out. Great. Sony are a very exciting company at the moment.

[marcg]

 

The commercial logic of making a camera that is compatible with M lenses is considerable, there are so many available, owned by so many photographers, that the market will dwarf the ownership of Sony lenses forever.

 

You are also assuming that they are all cheesed off with their M cameras and that are all itching to find something else to use them on - and that that something would be a Sony.

[jaapv]

Well, judging by the overblown reactions each time some manufacturer brings out something that is either vaguely styled like a digital rangefinder, or can in some way take rangefinder lenses, or both, there must be a group of users that yearns desperately for greener pastures.

[250swb]

Say what?

 

.

 

A wholly predictable reply as ever.

 

I say M lenses will outnumber Sony lenses, then you spout numbers for everything other than Sony lenses as if you are teaching a lesson.

 

The lesson is to either take the jist of a remark openly and generously as in a person to person conversation, or if you want to get anal and into specific's and use figures to show your knowledge at least read the post that you are replying to. You will note that I never once mentioned Nikon, Canon, Olympus nor any other brand.

 

Your reply fully deserves a

 

Steve

[gyoung]

...'yearns' for a camera whose price reflects its ephemeral technology, and is made by a company who has a record of turning out reliable electronic 'toys', in quantity, on time, and doesn't expect customers to send anything that DOES go wrong back to the factory for weeks on end...

 

:o:o

 

Gerry

[jaapv]

Which begs the question: why spend an extraordinary amount on something you don't like....

[gyoung]

??? I haven't ever done that, some cameras I have owned I REALLY like, (S1a, M3, FM2) others have been good tools for the job. I have had to use some provided by my employer I haven't liked (Mamiya tlr for instance) but never spent my own money on one. The only one I have bought which turned out to be a lemon was a Leica (R4) and Leicas service dept incompetence made me very wary of anything electronic from them.

 

Gerry

 

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

[adan]

I say M lenses will outnumber Sony lenses......etc. Steve

 

OK. My main point was that if one wants to put non-Sony lenses on an A7r, there are tens of millions that will work just fine, and if M lenses have problems on that camera, they are just a drop in the bucket.

 

Sony has a plenty big market to reach with the A7/A7r - without worrying about M compatability. If every Leica M lens in existence evaporated tomorrow - - it would have virtually zero effect on the viability of the Sony cameras, one way or the other.

 

However, I did check with our Sony tech rep, who says the current base of Sony Alpha/Minolta Maxxum lenses sold is over 13 million. He did not know what the totals for NEX lenses have been in the few years they've been around.

 

If you are talking about Sony (and Zeiss sold by Sony) lenses specific to the new FF-mirrorless-Alpha mount of the A7's, of course they are starting from zero. Which was why I remixed your quote to reference the Nikon F. Nikon also had "zero" SLR lens sales as of 1959, but that did not mean they trailed Leica lens output "forever."

 

Forever is a long time. If you are seriously suggesting that Sony won't eventually outproduce Leica M in lenses that fit the A7 series, I think you are wrong. If you were just blowing smoke, you left out a smiley of your own.

 

[250swb]

Forever is a long time. If you are seriously suggesting that Sony won't eventually outproduce Leica M in lenses that fit the A7 series, I think you are wrong. If you were just blowing smoke, you left out a smiley of your own.

 

 

This is getting tiresome. You will note the jist of my post was that Sony are throwing around technology and not settling on any one direction that can be identified as a way forward. 'Forever' was used to accentuate the idea that if the specific lenses for the A7R aren't already available they may never be that many before another change of direction. The photography market isn't what it was, cameras are built in short runs, nobody settles down like Nikon to make the F series for the next forty years.

 

The way you cherry pick words out of a paragraph is an insidious internet trick, and I don't know why anybody should do it just to show they have some irrelevant facts and figures on hand. If I said "I would love to think that when tyrants die they will all go to hell and not heaven" you'd 'quote' me saying "I love tyrants, they will all go to heaven".

 

But as you can't deal with analogy, take the 5 million Leica M lenses you mention, add all those made by Cosina Voigtlander, add all the LTM versions that can be adapted,

add all the other M and LTM lenses by miscellaneous other manufacturers such as Canon, etc and now tell me again there isn't a market for a body with that specifically optimised lens to sensor distance.

 

If we want to pick at the logic of what you've said, explain why, if it isn't economically possible for Sony to do it, Leica are doing it with the M240? Leica can make a profit with R&D on 100,000 bodies (or fewer). If we just take your figure of 5 million lenses that makes 50 lenses are out in the world for every body sold. It increases by adding LTM's. And you think the Sony A7 lens range is going to exceed that ratio before another change of direction? Dream on, not even a Sony fanboy could imagine that.

 

Steve

 

 

Steve

[almoore]

This is getting tiresome...The way you cherry pick words out of a paragraph is an insidious internet trick...Dream on, not even a Sony fanboy could imagine that

 

If it is getting tiresome then it isn't down to the consistently polite Andy P.

 

One man's 'insidious internet trick' is another man's perfectly rational and reasonable response to a poorly constructed dismissal of an interesting new camera. The A7 clearly isn't a direct replacement for a Leica M, but it's far from 'disappointing' to anybody that was bright enough not to expect it to be a cut price M240. On release it appears to be reliable, works with SD cards even if they haven't been formatted in a voodoo ceremony, gives robust malleable image files and has two relatively affordable lenses in key focal lengths that comfortably match the resolution of far more expensive Leica equivalents; those two lenses alone make it interesting to me.

 

Surely it's possible to discuss something as trivial as cameras without abrasively dismissing others as 'fanboys'.

[Steve P]

almoore:

Where can I find this "Voodoo Ceremony" formatting device of which you speak?

[CaptZoom]

Exactly. What has primarily put me off is Leica's poor QC record.

 

 

Some one pointed out (in the other A7 thread) that we maybe erroneously assuming that Leica's QC is declining or has declined recently. Instead he alluded to Leica having poor QC for the last several decades, but did not assert this due to lack of sufficient information from Leica (information that's not likely to be made public by Leica any time soon, if indeed ever). Assuming it's true that Leica QC has been subpar for several decades, it seems not to have diminished (significantly) the love Leica products receive. We are after all on a Leica forum discussing mainly Leica products, and until recently, one couldn't get a hold of Leica's most expensive lenses. It is also interesting to see how Leica addresses (actual and perceived) QC issues, now that there are cameras and lenses combinations arriving in the market that are challenging (maybe not besting) either IQ, or good enough IQ and overall size and weight advantages. If I recall correctly, you own two of the systems I'm thinking of: Sony's A7r and Olympus' OMD-1.

Interesting times indeed to be in photography.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[asiafish]

I'd like to see Canon and Nikon do a monochrome camera. I'd pay $2500 for a Canon 6D Monochrom or $3000 for a Nikon Df Monochrom and I have no doubt such a camera would enjoy the same IQ benefits that the MM does.

 

I own the Leica M Monochrom and am blown-away by its image quality, but a mainstream DSLR mount would be attractive (and affordable) to far more users, and DSLR lenses have no similar issues compared to rangefinder wides and their corner smear and magenta shift. That said, the M Monochrom at least has no issues with magenta shift that I've heard of or seen (would be a gray shift).