Time for Digilux 4

[ddp]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Nikon may have chosen "other ways", but as far as I know, their cameras do not use full frame sensors. Current shipping models (D2X, D200, D80 etc.) seem to use DX format sensors.

 

Jeff.

 

Correct - Nikon still uses a crop factor...and *shockingly* many pros still get by with this. They just created a new line of lenses to deal with digital and such at that end.

[Riley]

Uh.. I wanted to say, if 4:3 really acquires a significant market share, with pro models and so... I am not so an expert of DSLR market, but it seems to me that at the moment the 4/3 is not so recognized... Canon and Nikon chose other ways... and (I seem, repeat) that pro users like more Full Frame DSLR...

 

the FF 5D is technically dull against the 1.3x crop 1DMkIII

[Irek]

My concern is mostly about lack of availability of digital R system on the market after cease of Digital Modul. This situation can long a year, maybe two. What's during this period? My proposition is to design new Digilux like camera but with advantages which come from electronic industry TO LOWER PRICE OF BODY OF CAMERA SYSTEM, of course, by utilizing parts from the shelf (sensor and software from M8), with possibility to use extremly good lens from R system. Such camera can hit market ca. Christmas 2007. I think it's possible. And maybe with some new lens, lighter and cheaper than oryginal R system lens and with autofocus capability, but ready for FF R10 ;-).

And I showed my point of view.

 

In my oryginal post viewfinder case was only one of a few propositions. Strangely it brings most of attention. Some of you said that Digilux 3 takes a very good photos, having not so good viewfinder as it can be. It's exactly electronic (autofocus, for instance) and software algorithms in work. Think about it.

By the way.

Everybody has his own expectations about camera system. I have showed my own. It's forum for exchange of such opinions, I think. So, don't be such agressive. I am only pressing Leica a little, to analize some other possibilities ;-) and your opinions can strenghten my litlle action or not.

Regards

Irek

[asabet]

Slightly OT, but I'd like to see Leica make the next Digilux as small as possible. The D2 is the perfect size for me.

[jonoslack]

Slightly OT, but I'd like to see Leica make the next Digilux as small as possible. The D2 is the perfect size for me.

I Quite agree - and there is a BIG HOLE in the market for a small and well made dSLR - something the size of the Olympus 400/410, but with the traditional Leica build quality (like the Olympus E10), together with weather sealing and image quality.

 

It's there to be made, no new technology needed, and I'm sure there is a big market.

[miami91]

I Quite agree - and there is a BIG HOLE in the market for a small and well made dSLR - something the size of the Olympus 400/410, but with the traditional Leica build quality (like the Olympus E10), together with weather sealing and image quality.

 

It's there to be made, no new technology needed, and I'm sure there is a big market.

 

I would agree, but given the size of the lenses, much smaller a body would be awkward and poorly balanced. For example, I can't imagine mounting the Olympus Zuiko 7-14 on something the size of an M body ---- ergonomically it just wouldn't work.

 

Jeff.

[jonoslack]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I would agree, but given the size of the lenses, much smaller a body would be awkward and poorly balanced. For example, I can't imagine mounting the Olympus Zuiko 7-14 on something the size of an M body ---- ergonomically it just wouldn't work.

 

Jeff.

Hi Jeff - but have you seen the new Olympus lenses? they're tiny. Look at this thread from the Olympus forum at dpreview, and remember that the E1 makes the digilux 3 look really big:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=23034676

 

Sure, if you're using the 7-14, then this body might be a bit odd (by the way, it's a splendid lens, I have it next to me!).

[miami91]

Hi Jeff - but have you seen the new Olympus lenses? they're tiny. Look at this thread from the Olympus forum at dpreview, and remember that the E1 makes the digilux 3 look really big:

E-410, comparing the size: Olympus SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

 

Sure, if you're using the 7-14, then this body might be a bit odd (by the way, it's a splendid lens, I have it next to me!).

 

Wow, that's pretty shocking. Strange thing is, even the kit lens is smaller, even though it covers about the same focal range (14-42 v. 14-54). I find that kind of irritating, truth be told! Why haven't four-thirds lenses been made smaller to date? Anyway, you're right, it looks like there's room for miniturization of the four-thirds line. I just think there's a point at which it could be too small.

 

As for the 7-14, I just got it a few days ago. Haven't done much but the odd pic around the house, but I'm impressed. It's monstrous in size, and incredibly bulbous in front, but the build quality is very high and it's *amazingly* wide. I've also found, perhaps not surprisingly, that the widest aperture of f4 isn't really a problem --- I'm able to hand-hold down to about 1/4 a second with good results (or 1/8 of a second more consistently). So f4 combined with ISO 400 allows me to do most of the low light photography I need.

 

Jeff.

[audidudi]

Why haven't four-thirds lenses been made smaller to date?

As I understand it, the answer is actually very straightforward: The physical size of the sensor is roughly analogous to the size of film; i.e., for a given print size, a larger piece of film/sensor requires less enlargement than a smaller piece of film/sensor. When more enlargement is required to achieve a given print size, the resolution of the lens used with smaller formats must increase proportionately or the resolution of the print will be reduced. And as a general rule, higher resolution lenses tend to be larger in size relative to the the piece of film/sensor upon which the images are being captured. Therefore, taken altogether, this means 4/3 lenses will tend to be larger relative to the 4/3 format size than 35mm lenses are relative to the 35mm format, because they must resolve correspondingly more detail at the time of exposure in order to yield similar print resolution.

 

Mind you, there are exceptions to every rule and some of the above isn't literally true, but it is true in conceptual terms. As such, I doubt you'll ever see any 4/3 lenses that are truly small, but merely small-ish...

[miami91]

As I understand it, the answer is actually very straightforward: The physical size of the sensor is roughly analogous to the size of film; i.e., for a given print size, a larger piece of film/sensor requires less enlargement than a smaller piece of film/sensor. When more enlargement is required to achieve a given print size, the resolution of the lens used with smaller formats must increase proportionately or the resolution of the print will be reduced. And as a general rule, higher resolution lenses tend to be larger in size relative to the the piece of film/sensor upon which the images are being captured. Therefore, taken altogether, this means 4/3 lenses will tend to be larger relative to the 4/3 format size than 35mm lenses are relative to the 35mm format, because they must resolve correspondingly more detail at the time of exposure in order to yield similar print resolution.

 

Mind you, there are exceptions to every rule and some of the above isn't literally true, but it is true in conceptual terms. As such, I doubt you'll ever see any 4/3 lenses that are truly small, but merely small-ish...

 

Understood. But we're talking about two four-thirds cameras here. I'm saying that given the much more compact nature of the brand new Olympus four-thirds releases (both bodies and lenses), I'm disappointed that the 14-50 Leica D kit lens, as well as some other contemporary Olympus four-thirds lenses, is so much larger. I realize the art/science of lens-making is constantly improving, as are most technology initiatives, but I might have expected Leica to be pushing the small lens envelope rather than Olympus, given their history with optics.

 

Jeff.

[jonoslack]

Wow, that's pretty shocking. Strange thing is, even the kit lens is smaller, even though it covers about the same focal range (14-42 v. 14-54). I find that kind of irritating, truth be told! Why haven't four-thirds lenses been made smaller to date?

 

Hi Jeff

The simple answer here is that it's much slower - the 14-54 is f2.8/f3.5, and, truth be told, it's 2.8 for most of the zoom range. There's also the build quality . . .

 

In general terms the fact that Olympus have been trying to keep the lenses telecentric has some effect on the size (as I understand it).

 

As for the other Jeffrey's post about lens size, I don't think it's right - smaller lenses tend to resolve more lines per inch anyway (compare the mtf values for 4/3 vs 35mm lenses), and taken to it's logical conclusion it would seem to be impossible to make a 10mp dlux 3 with such a small lens (on a small sensor).

 

Rumour has it that the new 410 also has much better noise at high iso than previous 4/3 offerings

 

I do think these new releases bode well for a small and effective 4/3 slr system in the next year or so.

[coachjpg]

• A EVF, the notorious EVIL, which would need to have fast video, be without grain. It offers a number of attractive advances. Automatic gain, shooting information.
  
• A conventional reflex system as in any dSLR, perhaps this time a prism finder though
  
• An exceptional development in OVF. With a coupled zoom inbuilt driven. from information gathered incamera by the lens coding firmware.
  

 

Either 1 or 3 would rock my socks

 

I think there's another option, while we're defining future products for Leica. Why not a laser range finder? Give me a red dot in my viewfinder that shows what the laser is hitting. Give me a joystick under my right thumb that lets me move the red dot around in my frame. Give me some kind of optical signal that tells me when the lens is focused on the distance the laser reports.

 

Leica is already good at laser rangefinders.

 

This approach would allow you to use any length lens, as long as it doesn't obstruct the viewfinder.

[Riley]

can anyone tell me if D3 has focus confirmation for

MF non 4/3rds lenses ?

 

L1 seems to be offered at very low prices lately

clearing for a new model ?

[Guest stnami]

Still no small wide primes Mr Riley

[NZDavid]

I really liked the look of the Digilux 2 (simple, intuitive analog control interface), but the Digilux 3 looks to be a pretty massive beast, and is now festooned with controls which makes it less "Leica-like". If the results are cracking I'll consider it. But I'd like to see a more compact model.

[luigi bertolotti]

I Quite agree - and there is a BIG HOLE in the market for a small and well made dSLR - something the size of the Olympus 400/410, but with the traditional Leica build quality (like the Olympus E10), together with weather sealing and image quality.

 

It's there to be made, no new technology needed, and I'm sure there is a big market.

 

Me too agree at all : when I put in my hands the Oly E400 (at a shop, did not buy....), and read reviews on it, my first thought was "well, a fine device full of plastic: if Pana/Leica makes something in this size, with right quality and Leica lenses, can be the time I add a SLR and... who knows what will be of my beloved M4?...." Really a big hole in the market; my only SLR is a Contarex: is the first time I had been really tempted by a certain kind of SLR.

[spylaw4]

I really liked the look of the Digilux 2 (simple, intuitive analog control interface), but the Digilux 3 looks to be a pretty massive beast, and is now festooned with controls which makes it less "Leica-like". If the results are cracking I'll consider it. But I'd like to see a more compact model.

 

I suggest that you read Sean's review regarding this point. IMO the D2, rather than being simple, lacks one or two very useful analog controls, which can now be found on the D3/L1, e.g ISO change/WB for starters. Easier to change rather than have to go menu-ing.

This is not to knock my beloved D2!

[Enrique Santa]

Me too agree at all : when I put in my hands the Oly E400 (at a shop, did not buy....), and read reviews on it, my first thought was "well, a fine device full of plastic: if Pana/Leica makes something in this size, with right quality and Leica lenses, can be the time I add a SLR and... who knows what will be of my beloved M4?...." Really a big hole in the market; my only SLR is a Contarex: is the first time I had been really tempted by a certain kind of SLR.

 

 

I own an Oly E 400, and yes is plenty of engeniered plastic, but lets think together: E 400 is focused in amateur market, so wy not an strong and cheap plastic body, for a cam that is going to be used for two or three years?. Wiht this marketing strategy, Oly is selling a lot of lenses, even pro lenses to amateurs, like me. I´m more interested in image quality than in a pro and perdurable body. Quality of pictures?: exceptional a Kodak A10100 sensor and a very reasonable kit lenses. Compact: sure, and light. So we have to know what are we going to demand to Leica : a "pro" body or a complete 4/3 line, like Oly, that include cams, for amateur and for pro, and a complete line of lenses, again like Oly, with lenses focused in amateur and pro market, and cam as light and compact as posible.

Oly has done it. I think Leica could do . By the way: I have pursached an 11-22, a heavy lens, and the result with E400 is fantastic and the cam still is very confortable to handle.

[karlitos]

can anyone tell me if D3 has focus confirmation for

MF non 4/3rds lenses ?

 

L1 seems to be offered at very low prices lately

clearing for a new model ?

 

 

There is no confirmation when using the R lenses and adapter. I've been using a 90mm f2 R recently and find it surprisingly easy to focus with the 'poor' VF

 

Karlitos.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[jonoslack]

Oly has done it. I think Leica could do . By the way: I have pursached an 11-22, a heavy lens, and the result with E400 is fantastic and the cam still is very confortable to handle.

 

Ah - that 11-22; it's a splendid lens - and weatherproof as well, sharp to the corners, handles beautifully. So many of those Zuiko 4/3 lenses are real winners. There is a gap for small fast primes however.