Jump to content

Is the new Q the future M-E

Vip

By Vip
in Leica Q3 / Leica Q2 / Leica Q

 Share

Recommended Posts

AlanG

AlanG

Posted
Posted

Advertisement (gone after registration)

 

I'm excited about the possible paths the Q could lead to.  As much as I like M line, at some point my eyesight is going to hinder my use of manually focusing a lens and I'll need autofocus.  I would love a system that takes M lenses natively while also offering up some autofocus lens options.

 

Nikon was able to add AF and retain the F mount. So there is no reason why Leica couldn't do that too. But cameras can be made with a shorter flange to focal plane distance than the M has. Plus the mount could be made wider. So I don't think they'd want to give up those opportunities when a simple adapter could be used.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 145
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

LUF Admin
LUF Admin

I had the same idea that the Q might be a test, if M photographers would go with a EVF.   Stefan Daniel today explained that this is not going to happen: The optical rangefinder and the resulting e

cpclee
cpclee

I've always felt the M should have remained a pure rangefinder camera with no EVF or focus peaking or video and let a FF autofocus mirrorless camera like the Q with interchangeable lenses fill those n

holgerf
holgerf

Well, it’s an interesting thought to compare the Q with the M6 in terms of size because that’s we all did when we complained size of M8, M9… So here we go.   What is from the view of our perception

Posted Images

cpclee

cpclee

Posted
Posted (edited)

I will say this again.  

 

Leica needs to bring out a digital M in M2/3/4/6 dimensions, with optical frame lines and a cloth shutter and without EVF or video.  Essentially this will be a traditional M that just happens to shoot digital and will be their marquee / flagship system.

 

Then they need to bring out an interchangeable lens Q system that is full frame, AF, and mirrorless with EVF and video.  This system will have a wide range of native, AF lenses including fast primes, zooms and long teles. It will have M and R adapters and will capture the AF, mirrorless, video, pixel peepers and R customers in one fell scoop.  This will be their universal / volume system. 

 

Their current approach of monkeying around the M system (with a bloated M 240 in terms of both size and functionality) to try and entice two very different groups of customers into one system is a big mistake in the long term.  M purists don't like the bloat, and the mirrorless customers have no use for the optical rangefinder.  This approach will lead to kludgy designs with none of the traditional M charms.  I have never seen a more uninteresting M product than the M240.  I absolutely do not want one. Everytime I see an M 240 user with EVF + a big lens + grip attached I think "how ridiculous".  These customers are far better served by an interchangeable lens Q system, and the fact that they exist tells you there is a ready market for such a system.

 

They can drop the T because no one is interested.  No one buys a Leica so they can use slow / plastic lenses.  The whole idea was doomed from the outset. 

 

They need to listen to their customers more.

Edited by cpclee
  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
Avatar

Avatar

Posted
Posted

^ I think they are listening closely and that's why the Q is the way it is. I expect soon a zoom version as well as a removeable lenses model.

 

I agree that there should and probably (hopefully) will be a model much as you describe but wouldn't be surprised if the M240/246 platform continues to evolve as well.

 

I had a T for a week and maybe the T got us to the Q.

 

 

Expecting the Q to be at my door in a couple of hours!

Link to post
Share on other sites
saxo

saxo

Posted
Posted (edited)

Is that really true of digial MF? .....

 

 

I'm excited about the possible paths the Q could lead to.  ....

 

It is true for MF. The reasons are simple:

 

Digital MF is no MF, it is cropped MF. At least the majority of digital backs is even smaller than 4,5x6cm, and there is no digital back with 55x55mm (6x6) on the market available.

 

What you would need to have real advantage of digital MF (comparable to analog times): is a MF sensor which equals the FF (Leica-format) sensor in terms of technology standard (CMOS of current technology) combined with a sensor size of 55x55mm and no crop MF.

 

And in addition: how needs such a resolution? For over 90% of all tasks you don't need it. There is currently no demand. Maybe if you use more digital frames, where the user can zoom in, more or less endless, for exploring details, it can be of interest. Otherwise the distance of view for great enlargments limitis the necessity of resolution.

 

I totaly agree: a Q-system with an adapter or with original M-Mount would be great camera. AF is of help, but already the current EVF is for elderly eyes a great help compared to a RF.

 

Martin

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

Mijo

Posted
Posted

Nikon was able to add AF and retain the F mount. So there is no reason why Leica couldn't do that too. But cameras can be made with a shorter flange to focal plane distance than the M has. Plus the mount could be made wider. So I don't think they'd want to give up those opportunities when a simple adapter could be used.

 

If a Q system does materialize, I'd be suprised if it was a M mount (as adapters for M and R would make more sense).  If the T were a FF system, I would have considered that a replacement for an M body when my eyesight worsens. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
AlanG

AlanG

Posted
Posted

If a Q system does materialize, I'd be suprised if it was a M mount (as adapters for M and R would make more sense).  If the T were a FF system, I would have considered that a replacement for an M body when my eyesight worsens. 

But if your eyesight worsens, will you really care about the difference between full frame and APS in the final images?

Link to post
Share on other sites
earleygallery

earleygallery

Posted
Posted

I didn't bring a ruler, but I held it side by side to my M9 and it was about 3-4 mm thinner and about 5 less wide. Also it felt quite lightweight, the whole Q package about as much as the M9, perhaps with the 28/2.8 attached. With my 35/1.4 attached, the M9 felt way heavier. So just from the body size and feel the Q is for me the better digital "M".

 

PeterIMG_0469.jpg

 

A couple of things to bear in mind. The Q doesn't have a focal plane shutter to accommodate. Nor will the sensor be located at the back of the camera - if you dismantled it I'm sure you'd find like any other fixed lens digital, the sensor unit forms part of the lens assembly, effectively bolted to the back of the lens. 

 

Quite different from how the inside of an M looks. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
luigi bertolotti

luigi bertolotti

Posted
Posted

But if your eyesight worsens, will you really care about the difference between full frame and APS in the final images?

Oh well... ;) I admit that most of my prints are around 20x30 / A4... and many from M8 are as good as many from M240...   , as for the matter of FF in itself, I must confess that my most appreciated gain has been the comeback to the "usual" focals... B)

Link to post
Share on other sites
wildlightphoto

wildlightphoto

Posted
Posted

A couple of things to bear in mind. The Q doesn't have a focal plane shutter to accommodate. Nor will the sensor be located at the back of the camera - if you dismantled it I'm sure you'd find like any other fixed lens digital, the sensor unit forms part of the lens assembly, effectively bolted to the back of the lens. 

 

Quite different from how the inside of an M looks. 

 

I'd be willing to bet the Q's shutter and OIS is a single assembly made by Copal.

Link to post
Share on other sites
saxo

saxo

Posted
Posted (edited)

That just means they're taking a larger share of a shrinking market - surely not a good position for a mass market manufacturer like Sony! 

 

Nope, Sony is just entering the profitable high end scene with full-frame EVF-cameras like alpha 7 r/s. Canon and Nikon still stick to their old fashioned SLR's.

 

The high end market is profitable. The mass market of pocket cameras with sensors sizes less than 4/3 dies. These customers take their smartphones instead.

 

By the way: Sony is meanwhile the world leading sensor manufacturer. Compared to RAM-Chips, the CMOS chips are difficult to produce. This know-how is a key feature for digital cameras. I believe only 3 companies may survive (Nikon, Canon, Sony), and of course Leica!

 

Martin

Edited by saxo
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
-ph-

-ph-

Posted
Posted

 

By the way: Sony is meanwhile the world leading sensor manufacturer. Compared to RAM-Chips, the CMOS chips are difficult to produce. This know-how is a key feature for digital cameras. I believe only 3 companies may survive (Nikon, Canon, Sony), and of course Leica!

 

Actually, I am not sure about Nikon and Canon, as their business model is so crafted towards SLR cameras - they need to come up with a mirror less solution eventually, and move their customers over to it. This will be very exciting years for those companies.

On the other side, I would put Olympus onto the list of companies with a good prospect. They have completed the transition to mirror less some years ago and now a very nice setup with great lenses around 4/3rds sized sensors, being both very small and affordable.

 

Peter

Link to post
Share on other sites
saxo

saxo

Posted
Posted (edited)

 

A.....I would put Olympus onto the list of companies with a good prospect. They have completed the transition to mirror less some years ago and now a very nice setup with great lenses around 4/3rds sized sensors, being both very small and affordable.

 

Peter

 

 

Yes, Olympus is a great company, like Minolta was. Sony bought a great stake (10%) of Olympus in 2012. At that time Olympus had great problems. Meanwhile Sony sold half of the stake. It seems, this deal was a win-win situation. In addition Olympus has more to offer than only cameras (medical equipment), like Canon.

 

But still Nikon and Canon are the big two.

 

I thought Leica is clever and takes the chance for the most compact EVIL camera system of the world: Q with interchangeble M-lenses. Even with an adapter for M, to realize an AF-mount in the new Q. The Q is a great stepp into the right direction. I would wait for the second step, but as Stefan Daniel mentioned, there is nothing scheduled for M-lenses..... IMHO a wrong decision.

 

Martin

Edited by saxo
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.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...