Jump to content

Leica T lens roadmap?


Recommended Posts

Leica might be reluctant to commit too far ahead if they aren't selling these cameras in the numbers they hoped for and anticipated. Will the new Boss support further investment of what is old internal technology ? Of course there are fans of it on the forum, but given the fanfare on its release and hand polished anticipation, I can't help think it's been a disappointment really. They are cropping up on EBay quite a bit

Link to post
Share on other sites

As discussed before on this forum, Leica seems to hold the roadmap to herself and won't publicize any information about forthcoming lenses until they are absolutely sure that they are going to produce a certain lens of sufficient quality. Although I understand this strategy (it prevents deceptions when it takes longer), it makes it difficult for us users of the T, to determine for which lenses to go at this moment. I am very happy with the 23 mm. Cron.

 

As I mentioned in another thread, I think that everybody is looking around for alternatives that don't brake the bank. Otherwise, in my opinion, a move to Leica M-lenses and thus a M-camera would be more sensible.

 

So, for now, I'm buying lenses in the more outer regions, a CV 12 mm and lenses longer than 50 mm.(Zeiss and R-lenses) knowing that Leica will (if ever) produce them in the later stages. And I am counting on it, that a 35 and 50 mm. fast, 50 and 75 mm. eq, (Cron/Lux) T-lens are the first to be delivered in a T-version.

 

Still wishfull thinking.

Edited by AndrewAM
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I really hope that the T can be a breath of fresh air for Leica and enable them to produce an affordable professional system for the digital age.

The M system is at once the jewel in the crown and a millstone around the neck of Leica (in my opinion). The new lens mount allows Leica to move forward and produce both beginner and advanced cameras that give users the opportunity to upgrade as their skills increase.

 

The Fuji X series of cameras show just how successful this can be and now Fuji are courting the professional market by, reportedly, offering a professional Support service in the future

Fujifilm Will Reportedly Launch Professional Services in the US Next Year

and supporting the young emerging photographer now…

dialogue | burn magazine

 

Leica can do this too and, drawing on its long history, do it better.

 

Mike.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe the T mount and the T camera and lenses are a great system.

Leica needs a robust APS-C system and this is a fine start.

Its so much more enjoyable picking up the T then the X-T1 due to the metal and design, and I love the touch screen focus.

 

However there is nothing in the future stopping Leica making different types of camera body for the mount. I have always said that the X-Vario/113 type body is very appealing for manual dial setters and so would be another type of T body that can exist.

 

I also believe that the "killer application" are a few stand out f1.4 lenses.

 

I believe the absence of a few killer primes and the non-traditional nature of the design has not immediately appealed to Leica die-hards to use as their own camera and perhaps not either as the camera to give to their notable other halves, who tend to like the X or Leicapannys.

 

Meanwhilst the lack of Leica f1.4 primes, a signature of the company, has perhaps not persuaded enough non-Leica folk to buy in, together with the lack of things like IBIS, given the intense competition from Fuji and Olympus.

 

Lastly, when I speak to non-Leica folk and dealers, they tell me something yet again different. They say there is alot of interest in the Leica T but the cost of the lenses puts people off. Whilst the 18-56mm gets a good rating overall, its not outstanding, and people baulk at paying more then the cost for the German made body on essentially a Japanese made kit lens, albeit a very good one but one no better and darker then the Fuji 18-55mm f2.8-f4 say.

 

With great reviews from critical reviews like Thom Hogan, I believe a price rethink on the kit zoom and 1 f1.4 lens could make a massive difference. With a future consideration of more body types, a v2 with the sony 24mp sensor and perhaps ibis and mainly some more f1.4 lenses.

Edited by colonel
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The Fuji X series of cameras show just how successful this can be and now Fuji are courting the professional market by, reportedly, offering a professional Support service in the future

 

Fuji is not that successful yet. Their camera division is still loss making and their CSC share in Japan is tiny, a good barometer. I love their cameras, especially unique ideas like the X100 series which are terrific, and they have made progress on the lenses in their system, but the X-T1 is the only camera that actually moved the needle on their performance. Whilst some things in their strategy are good to emulate I wouldn't take them as a gold standard. In fact Olympus, with an inferior sensor, has made much better inroads based on quality of objects, marketing and the concentration on lenses desired by DSLR emigres, especially IBIS and the excellent f2.8 zooms and portrait lenses which were quite early in their lens cycle.

 

rgds

 

Mirrorless market share in Japan during 2014

mirrorlessjapan.jpg

Edited by colonel
Link to post
Share on other sites

Zeds and Harold, I agree: although Fuji are creating a niche for themselves the race is by no means won. Nikon and Canon are wary of making a serious mirrorless camera system for fear of impacting on their DSLR sales. Leica do not have this problem.

 

I see the T system as a work in progress and as Harold says, some stand out 1.4 primes would make the T a real alternative to other systems. I believe they will come: hence my hope of a lens roadmap.

 

Other things on my wish list are DNG-only files, efficient dust reduction for the sensor and the EVF incorporated into the camera body rather than perched atop like an afterthought. Not much of a wish list, really.

 

But first, the killer prime lenses. Fast lenses on a T-sized camera: sounds good to me.

 

Mike.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

When you look at the lenses that Fuji produces for the APS-C sensor, three things Leica has to beware of when producing T-lenses.

 

Firstly, do it right the first time. Fuji is improving all the time, but has to make two iterations of the same lens with very short intervals, before the quality is up to scratch ( look at the 35mm./1.4 or the 56 mm./1.2) This is not good for customer confidence! So wait for production until the quality is Leica-quality, before selling it to the public. We can wait...

Second, keep watch on the size , even when it means no ultra fast lenses. These Fuji lenses are almost equalling the size of DSLR-lenses. This can't be the intention for the T-line. So as fast as possible, isn't the only aim for the T-lenses, compactness is also important. A (APO-) Summicron quality will suffice if it is necessary to keep the scale down or make them manual and find a solution for the aperture coupling (electronics, not Leica's forte!).

Third, incorporate weatherproofing as soon as possible. I tend to buy lenses once, don't make me buy a second version when the next weatherproofed T- camera is developed.

 

Just some thoughts....

Edited by AndrewAM
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

My dream is that Leica keep the T as-is, maybe with another lens. The T fits like a T. It is great as-is.

 

If another Leica T-like is developed I hope it is full-frame, but if that does not happen I won't be disappointed.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

My dream is that Leica keep the T as-is, maybe with another lens. The T fits like a T. It is great as-is.

 

If another Leica T-like is developed I hope it is full-frame, but if that does not happen I won't be disappointed.

 

It is a great little camera, already a joy to use. But there will be a second version, if there is enough money to be made with. And when that time comes I foresee the same discussions as happened between the M9/8 believers and the M240/M60 hopefuls!

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a great little camera, already a joy to use. But there will be a second version, if there is enough money to be made with. And when that time comes I foresee the same discussions as happened between the M9/8 believers and the M240/M60 hopefuls!

 

I appreciate that, Andreas.

 

Until large, very high-resolution monitors become commonplace, and they will, I am putting my money into smaller sensors, great optics. So very much good work can be done with less pixels. Just my two bits worth.

 

Oh, I use 8x10 cameras as well, but I'm an Olde Pharte. :)

--

Pico - pax

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I believe in the APS-C sensor for the future, it will improve in DR and ISO capabilities substantially in the near future, when the market keeps growing. Making FF obsolete and it will give MF a new breath of life.

 

I would like that!

 

that makes no sense

but enjoy !

Link to post
Share on other sites

that makes no sense

but enjoy !

 

It makes a lot of sense if we constrain our expectations to viewing on any monitor made. Who prints today? Sure, I have 40" prints from a FF sensor, but that's a market of less than 1%.

 

Nobody cares because you can't share full-frame on the 'net. Nobody except keyboard artists who only write about 'em.

.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I always get turned off by format wars. FF will always be better then APS-C given the same sensor technology. Whether it matters to you is up to you, how marginal it is is also up to you.

For my taste I always prefer more control over DOF but also like lens size control. Which is why I like the M series in that the lenses can be small but still FF. Many times I almost bought a 645D or S but shrunk back when considering when I would actually not be bothered to take them due to weight.

Link to post
Share on other sites

When technology of camera's and sensors is progressing in the way it is, I believe the definitions of APS-C, FF and MF camera's will become more dynamic. We are barely two decades in the development of digital camera's.

Perhaps the size of sensor doesn't matter anymore within the next two decades, when you want the best quality, but the type of sensor does.

 

Quality of the picture itself will improve in all image sizes, but the ergonomics of camera and lenses will change big time in the near future. MF-sensor size will stay the same, but there are opportunities to lessen the size and improve the body, making them easier to use. Is a 50 MB or more sensor in a FF then more usable or desirable? Or is a smaller and more ergonomic MF-camera with a 50 MB or more sensor the way to go.

Time will tell, but I think the MF-camera's will then become also available for "prosumers". The prices will come down eventually.

 

The APS-C camera's will have the (proven) capabilities of the FF camera's within no time, only in a compacter package. Making it easier to travel with them and thus, using them more.

 

What place the FF-camera will then have in the photographic world, I don't know, but saying that the quality will always be better than APS-C, or other size, is not relevant. You choose the camera you need for the job, not the camera that can do it all. It doesn't exist. The other formats will evolve and improve and so their place in the pick order will change.

 

Then the user will be spoiled for choice and can have it all. But I agree, the choice will be highly personal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Size of sensor will absolutely always matter. It's simply physics.

 

What is good enough for you is up to you. If you are not interested in absolute quality then a RX10 will cover all bases !!!

 

There is a massive difference in DOF. Try 35m at f1.4 on FF, APS-C and M4/3s

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well a 35/1.4 lens in MF (if it exists) would trump your mentioned FF-lens. A Noctilux 35 mm. T-lens (who knows what Leica is working on at the moment?!) would equal the M-Lux 50 mm. in DOF. All this is possible in optical physics. This "who's is larger" discussion is not really relevant.

 

When you compare the extremes in the current systems, there will always be differences in what is technical and optical achievable/available. But you are talking of 10 to 20% of the shots, where you really need this "extremes" in DOF or other characteristics of lenses. For the other 80% of shots,"optimum" optical quality is easily achievable in each current system. And when the systems evolve, and they will, the gap will close. Or you just change the system you use for the task, to match the optimal quality desired. Whether it is all economic feasible is a different matter.

 

The haptic quality of systems is becoming much more important, when making a choice

 

Horses for courses, of course!

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.

×
×
  • Create New...