Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
rramesh

Full Frame T?

Recommended Posts

I understand that the T mount may be able to support a full-frame sensor. Would it be conceivable for Leica to introduce a full-frame T down the road?

 

This would be perfect for enthusiasts who crave a full-frame Leica without a rangefinder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is why I think that this is very unlikely: Leica is making quite a commitment to the APS-C size sensor by designing a whole new set of lenses to cover this sensor. I believe the reason for this is that the APS-C sensor is a very good compromise in terms of image quality from the sensor, and image quality AND very importantly size of the lens. The new T-zooms seem to be of very good quality and they don't seem unwieldy on the T camera.

 

I know that the speed of the X Vario zoom was a compromise of quality and size and I think the APS-C sensor is a calculated compromise for the same reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here is why I think that this is very unlikely: Leica is making quite a commitment to the APS-C size sensor by designing a whole new set of lenses to cover this sensor. I believe the reason for this is that the APS-C sensor is a very good compromise in terms of image quality from the sensor, and image quality AND very importantly size of the lens.

 

Yes, its true that with the T announcement, Leica has announced a range of lenses made in Japan.

 

While, the immediate objective is an attempt to capture a new segment besides just the Leica M fans, with the T, one is now able to use not only the T lenses but also all of the other M and R lenses. This is huge.

 

Imagine what Leica will achieve if the T were to be full-frame down the road. After all, if this were to be a new platform, would Leica want to just stop at an APS-C?

 

Isn't this what Leica did when they announced first the M8 and later the M9, using the same platform?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There certainly seems to be enough real estate to later fit a full frame sensor on the T.

 

The key difference between the T and the M8 in this regard however is that M lenses were originally designed to optimally cover the 35mm image circle. So the upgrade from M8 to M9 came at no compromise to the glass, which was ready.

 

These lenses have been designed for the APS-C sensor. Much like DX lenses on FX Nikons, perhaps they will work, but may require the full frame sensor to crop to APS-C when mounted. Or perhaps they are designed already future-proofed, ie fine on full frame already.

 

Speculation. But important if you are going to invest in the glass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no way that those T lenses cover full frame. Show me any other 23 mm f2 lens or 18-56 that small that can cover full frame.

 

I bet that someday Leica follows the Nex -> A7 model and makes a fullframe version with new lenses. They can't really evolve the M much without destroying its essence. So the T is the indicator for Leica's design philosophy moving forward. A lot will depend on how well it sells.

Edited by AlanG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If any of this is an indication of Leica's innovation, then they will skip full-frame. think about it, what is full frame anyway? They already have a bigger sensor in the S2. Why ever compete head to head with companies like Sony? Go bigger I say!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree; there is no way the 23mm Summicron T could support FF. You only have to look at the size of the 24mm Elmarit M (stop slower) and 24mm Summilux M (stop faster) to see how big a FF 24mm Summicron would be.

 

If the mount itself could support FF, you can think of a future T full frame camera which could still use the APS-C lenses in the same way that a Nikon FX camera can use DX lenses in crop mode.

 

However, it would be a big job to design a range of new AF FF lenses which I doubt the market would bear. An article in the latest LFI seems to conclude an APS-C sensor is probably "good enough" for the great majority of the target demographic.

 

I'm pleased I can use my M lenses on this camera...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At one time Nikon tried to convince the world that APS-C was good enough. I can't see Leica turning the M into an AF camera. And they can't take the M much further other than a few refinements here and therevwithou ruining it.

 

For the T, they are getting other companies to make the lenses and everything in the body too. (Other than milling and polishing the aluminum block.) Why can't they order up as many FF lenses as they want? So all that matters is if they can see enough potential profit. The T is their test to see if a simplevdesign and Japanese lenses will fly at these prices.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I understand that the T mount may be able to support a full-frame sensor. Would it be conceivable for Leica to introduce a full-frame T down the road?

 

This would be perfect for enthusiasts who crave a full-frame Leica without a rangefinder.

 

I don't think they will, I see the T as their APSC format solution, investment in lenses and flexibility to use the higher format M lenses is a great position to fill an obvious gap. Sensors will improve allowing the smaller format to challenge older larger formats such that we may find this sensor size adequate for a greater number of needs. Leica will obviously continue to develop and support the M and it will always be positioned above the T

 

I can see the potential for the new M offering perhaps two paths, the full feature technology leveraged option and a paired down purist version. Hopefully the size and weight of the new M will be back into M6 territory at least for my hypothetical purist version. I'm back on my want list again....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There is no way that those T lenses cover full frame. Show me any other 23 mm f2 lens or 18-56 that small that can cover full frame.

 

I bet that someday Leica follows the Nex -> A7 model and makes a fullframe version with new lenses. They can't really evolve the M much without destroying its essence. So the T is the indicator for Leica's design philosophy moving forward. A lot will depend on how well it sells.

 

The question was and is whether the current mount can support FF lenses...I remember the same question was asked when Sony introduced the NEX E mount. We all know the answer to that now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it is inevitable and that the T is the start of Leica realising there is a whole market segment out there who will never adopt a rangefinder but having cut their teeth on a DLUX or similar model want a system of Leica lenses and an appropriately modern camera to use them on.

 

I'm not denigrating the M or ME just pointing out the marketing opportunity.

 

LouisB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
At one time Nikon tried to convince the world that APS-C was good enough.

Sensors have come a bit further since then. Outside photo-geek forums there is very little interest in full-frame or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

T is an APS-C system. It will take Leica a couple of years to build a complete system (it is just a body, one prime, and a zoom right now); full-frame considerations play no role in the forseeable future. And there is really no point anyway. Leica already has a 35 mm system whereas T is for customers who are best served with an APS-C system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One element of the FF vs APSc argument that has not been put forward here is the difference in depth of field available from a longer lens. The 23/2 will naturally have less depth of field than a 35/2 although it's supposed to be an equivalent.

 

I'm not a Bokeh addict myself but this was a major selling point of recent FF mirror less cameras. There seems to be a strong market desire for this.

 

I agree that APSc quality is probably as good as needed for many photographic applications and M compatibility is great but a 50 equivalent will need to be a summilux to give summicron depth of field and the size/cost advantage will disappear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One element of the FF vs APSc argument that has not been put forward here is the difference in depth of field available from a longer lens.

This has been put forward many, many times … And medium format allows for even longer focal lengths and even less depth of field. We know. As it happens, Leica has both a 35 mm and a medium format system so these demands are covered. But now they have a new system catering for a different set of photographers and this is an APS-C system, not because Leica couldn’t design another 35 mm system but because they wanted this system to be APS-C-based. T is APS-C, period.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another way at looking at it is to ask whether there's a market for the T design DNA and operating model in an M camera. That M9 flight of fancy was derided at the time but if the T achieves widespread acceptance, I can't see why an M camera would not be of interest - same body concept, FF with (optional) rangefinder.

 

Or are we M users too set in our ways?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 years from now, we are going to laugh at the notion that we used APS-C sensors...so if the lenses are going to last decades like their M brothers, they need to cover full frame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 years from now, we are going to laugh at the notion that we used APS-C sensors.................................................

 

Indeed. Most people don't need anything that large.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 years from now, we are going to laugh at the notion that we used APS-C sensors...so if the lenses are going to last decades like their M brothers, they need to cover full frame.

 

What you call full frame is an arbitrary size chosen originally for pragmatic reasons. There’s nothing magic about it and it’s only by convention that it’s the 35mm format that we call full frame. Sensors and their associated electronics are getting better all the time. It’s possible, I think, that 5 years from now people will wonder why we thought we needed anything larger than APS-C.

 

When you leave behind the film analogies that have shaped digital camera development, you free yourself to think differently about how a digital camera should work. With the T Leica have taken a step on that road.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...