jdlaing Posted May 30, 2015 Share #241 Posted May 30, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) I think you mean Glass/Plastic 50-50. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 30, 2015 Posted May 30, 2015 Hi jdlaing, Take a look here The next speculation. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
luigi bertolotti Posted May 30, 2015 Share #242 Posted May 30, 2015 ... I love the idea of a fully electronic M mount camera, taking existing M lenses, and as a future platform for AF M mount lenses. It would need to be priced competitively - ie, no more than 50% above the A7? I don't believe it will happen for a moment.me too think it would be a logical evolution... and the best way to capitalize on the very complete M lens set... agree also that it would NEED to be priced competitively... but with Leica, this is ALWAYS a special matter... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted May 30, 2015 Share #243 Posted May 30, 2015 I would not expect a better competitivity than that of T lenses as far as lenses are concerned. AF lenses built in Germany would be at least as expensive as R ones which were dearer than Ms in the past. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 30, 2015 Author Share #244 Posted May 30, 2015 The R system failed because the development costs of a new FF camera, AF or not we're too high related to the projected sales/expected price point. Therefor it was upgraded to the S system where it was possible to charge a high price for low sales volumes. In retrospect a brilliant decision as the DSLR market is collapsing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted May 30, 2015 Share #245 Posted May 30, 2015 I just don't think the S system is anything but over priced. Now that Leica seems to be delaying the new CMOS S007 until perhaps the fall, other MF CMOS cameras are taking away new customers. This is not a good long term benefit since new cstomers buy lenses for a long time. I can't blame them when a 645Z is ⅓ the price of an S body and has 35% more pixels (37.5 vs 51). Then there is the glass argument, but new Pentax glass made for digital is excellent alibi not enough yet with 28-45, 55, 90 all being super sharp with some complaining that the 90 is too sharp for portraiture. Go figure! They seem to rely on legacy glass and started reproducing it again following high 645Z demand. Some of the longer legacy glass is still very good on the 645Z, such as the 120 macro, 150, 200 & 300. Around 80% of these MF FL give you 35mm equivalent. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanJW Posted May 30, 2015 Share #246 Posted May 30, 2015 I just don't think the S system is anything but over priced. Now that Leica seems to be delaying the new CMOS S007 until perhaps the fall, other MF CMOS cameras are taking away new customers. Agree. I got a chance to handle one of the first S cameras and was very impressed. It was a little larger than a Nikon or Canon with terrific ergonomics, a big sensor and Leica optics. But even though I could afford one and a couple of lenses, I saw better places to put my money. After all, you can buy a small car for what an S and some lenses cost. I also think the competitive pressure is from two sides: While the S might be less expensive than some Hasselblad/Phase One systems, as you note, there are some less expensive MF alternatives, and there is also the increased image quality from FF 35mm sensors. At least some of those big new 35mm FF sensors are going to be put to work in studios. A Canon 5Ds is about $3700. Of course there are some who must have MF and for those I suppose Leica will retain a small niche. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 30, 2015 Author Share #247 Posted May 30, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) I just don't think the S system is anything but over priced. Now that Leica seems to be delaying the new CMOS S007 until perhaps the fall, other MF CMOS cameras are taking away new customers. This is not a good long term benefit since new cstomers buy lenses for a long time. I can't blame them when a 645Z is ⅓ the price of an S body and has 35% more pixels (37.5 vs 51). Then there is the glass argument, but new Pentax glass made for digital is excellent alibi not enough yet with 28-45, 55, 90 all being super sharp with some complaining that the 90 is too sharp for portraiture. Go figure! They seem to rely on legacy glass and started reproducing it again following high 645Z demand. Some of the longer legacy glass is still very good on the 645Z, such as the 120 macro, 150, 200 & 300. Around 80% of these MF FL give you 35mm equivalent. I never said the S series was overpriced. I just pointed out that medium format is a whole different ball game with small series being the norm, thus spreading R&D over a smallish series of cameras is not abnormal. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mornnb Posted May 30, 2015 Share #248 Posted May 30, 2015 The R system failed because the development costs of a new FF camera, AF or not we're too high related to the projected sales/expected price point. Therefor it was upgraded to the S system where it was possible to charge a high price for low sales volumes. In retrospect a brilliant decision as the DSLR market is collapsing. There's more future in the M system as well. Note that the Sony A7 is likely to be what most full frame cameras will look like in the future. And the M240 was already that, before the A7 was out. DSLRs are about to be crushed by EVF mirrorless, the industry is going through the same sort of transition than occurred in the 50s and 60s, with Rangefinder to SLR. Through the sensor is better than through the lens, in terms of what you see is what you get. This time around, Sony and Leica are on the cutting edge and it's Canon and Nikon who are in trouble. Funny how history repeats isn't it? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 30, 2015 Author Share #249 Posted May 30, 2015 Agree. I got a chance to handle one of the first S cameras and was very impressed. It was a little larger than a Nikon or Canon with terrific ergonomics, a big sensor and Leica optics. But even though I could afford one and a couple of lenses, I saw better places to put my money. After all, you can buy a small car for what an S and some lenses cost. I also think the competitive pressure is from two sides: While the S might be less expensive than some Hasse:Dlblad/Phase One systems, as you note, there are some less expensive MF alternatives, and there is also the increased image quality from FF 35mm sensors. At least some of those big new 35mm FF sensors are going to be put to work in studios. A Canon 5Ds is about $3700. Of course there are some who must have MF and for those I suppose Leica will retain a small niche. I don't like small cars.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bocaburger Posted May 30, 2015 Share #250 Posted May 30, 2015 I like small cars...just not inexpensive one's Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkP Posted May 30, 2015 Share #251 Posted May 30, 2015 I've occasionally thought that I could sell all of my M equipment at a good price and get a Phase One or S2 or maybe even a 654Z with two lenses and leave it at that. The technical quality of images from these cameras (especially the dynamic rnge of the Phase One sensors) are truly astounding. Then I thought what a stupid idea! Portability & weight are now very important to me, and the range of Leica lenses I have gives me great choice regarding what I walk out the door with. I don't do any studio work. I don't want to walk around with a large camera because of all the obvious disadvantages beyond just the weight & bulk. IQ goes without say, but I print to A2 rarely larger. So for me overkill - what I lose in pixels (which I'm not sure will help me using the camera handheld and with my usual print size) I gain in every other way with the M system. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 31, 2015 Share #252 Posted May 31, 2015 I haven't read the whole thread, nor do I own a digital Leica at the moment. But now that the M has a microphone, has it been suggested to have the possibility to record audio notes onto images? Canon has had this feature since the first EOS 1D, I find this feature super fast and useful to get facts right onto captions for publications. ...or is this already possible with the M240? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mornnb Posted May 31, 2015 Share #253 Posted May 31, 2015 So for me overkill - what I lose in pixels (which I'm not sure will help me using the camera handheld and with my usual print size) I gain in every other way with the M system. Wait for the Sony A9 as a second body for when you need a few more pixels, it's rumoured to be 46 or 50MP. Given the optical performance of M lenses you should be able to get near medium format quality on a sufficiently high resolution sensor. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted May 31, 2015 Share #254 Posted May 31, 2015 We'll all have to be patient and wait and see. The would be board of directors here. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
semi-ambivalent Posted May 31, 2015 Share #255 Posted May 31, 2015 The would be board of directors here. Did anyone else notice the stick of dynamite? What's that about? s-a Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted May 31, 2015 Share #256 Posted May 31, 2015 The R system failed because the development costs of a new FF camera, AF or not we're too high related to the projected sales/expected price point. Therefor it was upgraded to abandoned and replaced by the S system where it was possible to charge a high price for low sales volumes. In retrospect a brilliant weird decision as the DSLR market is collapsing. There, I fixed that for you. Oh, and the S system is DSLR too, so you can draw your own conclusions... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thighslapper Posted May 31, 2015 Share #257 Posted May 31, 2015 Having contributed to this thread initially then ignored it till now I have read the subsequent posts with some interest....... I still think it is highly likely the next M will incorporate the ability to use AF lenses. It is the one thing that is missing and puts off a whole cohort of potential customers. On reflection I think Leica can only adopt one of two approaches: a. An upgrade of the current M body with electrical contacts on the mount and an sensor sensor suited to AF ..... as an additional option if users wish to use AF lenses b. An identical looking M with optical finder mechanism removed and a hybrid finder instead with a T type mount for AF lenses and manual M lenses being used as per the T via an adapter. The AF lenses would be derivatives of the T line (which are actually excellent) (a) requires a selection of compromises and is technically difficult, but you would keep those who want AF happy ...... and a potential new group of customers...... without alienating the hardcore RF users....... but you still need an ugly add-on EVF with all that goes with it.... (b.) gives you yet another derivative product line ..... albeit sharing a large % of the basic components and assembly ...... but may just split the current customer base rather than adding more ...... All the other improvements ..... speed, EVF latency, EVF/screen resolution, pixel count, sensor type, ISO performance, battery life, better firmware are just a matter of choosing/modifying existing technology and don't involve major design changes ....... and will happen as a matter of course .... At the end of the day Leica are in the market to sell cameras and make money, not pander to the whims of a small minority of customers on the Leica Forum. That is what will drive the process. Leica behave in a rather unusual manner ..... they tend to incrementally change things for a spell then suddenly try and leapfrog ahead of the opposition with some unexpected developments (did you see the T coming ?). I would suspect they have been working on (a) ........ but would not be surprised if they ended up choosing (b.) as the final option. There is a limit to how much you can modify the original M format without tying yourself in knots ...... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mornnb Posted May 31, 2015 Share #258 Posted May 31, 2015 Having contributed to this thread initially then ignored it till now I have read the subsequent posts with some interest....... I still think it is highly likely the next M will incorporate the ability to use AF lenses. It is the one thing that is missing and puts off a whole cohort of potential customers. Not going to happen. With manual focus the current designs have a purity, where the only concern is size and optical performance, this is a major advantage Leica has. And the Rangefinder makes manual focus so simple that autofocus is not really required. The M is all about compact size and high optical performance. When you start adding in electric equipment for focusing and aperture, you increase the size/weight and decrease the internal space that can be used for optical elements. Here's an example, Zeiss. Their autofocus lens for the Sony A7, compared to the Leica M Mount version. Both these lenses have similar optical performance, but look at the difference in size. And weight, 630 grams vs 381 grams. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted May 31, 2015 Share #259 Posted May 31, 2015 ... and the Leica Summilux 35mm FLE is even smaller... The M camera body can be reduced in dimensions and weight by replacing the rangefinder-viewfinder with an EVF unit. The internal electronics of the current M camera should be updated and adapted to the new operation type (new processor, electronic shutter, maybe focusing aids). This body would make sense if the size is smaller and lighter and the price lower. Is there a market for it? I don't know, but the product would be unique, strongly differentiated. Do people consider AF a must? I am not sure because there are two reasons for keeping the M system out of the radar of many potential buyers: the manual focus-rangefinder, and the price. I don't care about AF... specially when you get super small lenses with the highest quality! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thighslapper Posted May 31, 2015 Share #260 Posted May 31, 2015 Not going to happen. Famous last words ....... Are you a Politician by profession ???? Most other sane people never say never ...... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.