jaapv Posted September 7, 2015 Share #781 Posted September 7, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) If you just look at the Forum, you'll find all sorts of demands expressed. Lenses with autofocus are bigger. With digital sensor it is sensible to design lenses with a large rear opening to ensure light rays to hit the sensor rectangularly (otherwise you'll always have the problems of "Italian-flags" and/or smeared edges). So we have to take bigger lenses into account - even if we prefer smaller ones. Bigger lenses need a bigger opening for the body's bayonet. This may lead to bigger bodies. If we'll really have a new Leica camera-system soon, this does not mean that all other Systems are dumped. There sitll will be the M- and the T-System for those who prefer it smaller.- Other Producers have many customers - inspite of their big cameras. Adaption of M-lenses will not be impossible if they offer a proper adapter. Though I am not sure, whether M-lenses with wide angles will show best results on a sensor which has not been designed for their special demands If they want this alleged camera to be able to use M lenses, the register distance must be at least 1 mm less than an M camera. Instead of going to great lengths to get decent results with this geometry, the solution would be to create is very wide mount, which would allow top-class lenses. Wide mount = large camera. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 7, 2015 Posted September 7, 2015 Hi jaapv, Take a look here NEW M.. This year.. This Fall.... I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
lct Posted September 7, 2015 Share #782 Posted September 7, 2015 (?) A small EVIL can perfectly use M lenses the same way as do M & Sony bodies. If it is slimmer than the M i will just need an adapter. Am i missing something? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted September 7, 2015 Share #783 Posted September 7, 2015 (?) A small EVIL can perfectly use M lenses the same way as do M & Sony bodies. If it is slimmer than the M i will just need an adapter. Am i missing something? The problem could arise from the (small ?) DIAMETER of the speculated new mount with "thin" register : a certain combination diameter/length could cause vignetting on some WAs Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted September 7, 2015 Share #784 Posted September 7, 2015 But if they are launching a new system in direct competition to Sony, they better improve their marketing. With a 1.0% market share being Leica’s declared goal, I don’t see them competing with Sony … Anyway, whenever a new camera or a new system is developed there is a schedule for the marketing effort where many steps like writing copy for brochures and catalogues, preparing advertising campaigns, ‘training the trainers’, and similar stuff happens before the announcement date and thus stays – hopefully – under the radar of the general public and the rumour sites. That’s how marketing works I’m afraid. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted September 7, 2015 Share #785 Posted September 7, 2015 The problem could arise from the (small ?) DIAMETER of the speculated new mount with "thin" register : a certain combination diameter/length could cause vignetting on some WAs Thank you for your effort Luigi but i am too stupid to understand i'm afraid. Why would the "new" mount's diameter be smaller than the Sony's? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edwardkaraa Posted September 7, 2015 Share #786 Posted September 7, 2015 With a 1.0% market share being Leica’s declared goal, I don’t see them competing with Sony … Anyway, whenever a new camera or a new system is developed there is a schedule for the marketing effort where many steps like writing copy for brochures and catalogues, preparing advertising campaigns, ‘training the trainers’, and similar stuff happens before the announcement date and thus stays – hopefully – under the radar of the general public and the rumour sites. That’s how marketing works I’m afraid. I understand what you say, but wouldn't you agree that a few smartly formulated leaks with more defined info would encourage more people to wait for the release of this camera instead of buying the new a7/a7r II to use their Leica M/R glass on? Just wondering. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted September 7, 2015 Share #787 Posted September 7, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) That would be not very respectful towards the customers. It assumes that they do not make an informed choice for a camera that suits them but stampede after the newest shiny thing. If I were looking for a second or other camera to use my M lenses, I would not go for a sub-optimal solution just because it happens to be available. I would wait for somebody, be it Leica, Sony or Fuji, to produce a camera that fits my needs. If the Sony is optimal for the user, there would be no reason for him to wait for Leica anyway. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edwardkaraa Posted September 7, 2015 Share #788 Posted September 7, 2015 That would be not very respectful towards the customers. It assumes that they do not make an informed choice for a camera that suits them but stampede after the newest shiny thing. If I were looking for a second or other camera to use my M lenses, I would not go for a sub-optimal solution just because it happens to be available. I would wait for somebody, be it Leica, Sony or Fuji, to produce a camera that fits my needs. If the Sony is optimal for the user, there would be no reason for him to wait for Leica anyway. Customers will buy the best available option. The Sony is a flawed but still practically the best option. The new Leica is vaporware. No body knows if the rumor is true. But if it were true, it would be easily the best option. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted September 7, 2015 Share #789 Posted September 7, 2015 Thank you for your effort Luigi but i am too stupid to understand i'm afraid. Why would the "new" mount's diameter be smaller than the Sony's? No reason, indeed... ... we are in the field of pure speculations.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted September 7, 2015 Share #790 Posted September 7, 2015 I would love this, though having an ISO dial would make it complete. You can't have an ISO dial anymore. It would have to have 6400 minimum detents. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted September 7, 2015 Share #791 Posted September 7, 2015 I understand what you say, but wouldn't you agree that a few smartly formulated leaks with more defined info would encourage more people to wait for the release of this camera instead of buying the new a7/a7r II to use their Leica M/R glass on? Just wondering. Leaks only cause people to speculate which can take just about any direction – it’s completely unpredictable in its effect. Just the opposite of what you want to achieve with a well-planned marketing campaign. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildlightphoto Posted September 7, 2015 Share #792 Posted September 7, 2015 If I were looking for a second or other camera to use my M lenses, I would not go for a sub-optimal solution just because it happens to be available. I would wait for somebody, be it Leica, Sony or Fuji, to produce a camera that fits my needs. If the Sony is optimal for the user, there would be no reason for him to wait for Leica anyway. I've waited far too long for an adequate camera. I've given up on optimal. I bought a Sony. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted September 7, 2015 Share #793 Posted September 7, 2015 You can't have an ISO dial anymore. It would have to have 6400 minimum detents. The Fuji X-T1 has an ISO dial (by popular request) but after it was introduced many customers realised it wasn’t such a good idea after all … “What was Fuji thinking?” and all that. Also Canon had once released a camera with an ISO dial, only to eliminate it in the next version. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted September 7, 2015 Share #794 Posted September 7, 2015 You can't have an ISO dial anymore. It would have to have 6400 minimum detents. Fuji didn't get the message... fuji xt1 iso dial Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UliWer Posted September 7, 2015 Share #795 Posted September 7, 2015 If they want this alleged camera to be able to use M lenses, the register distance must be at least 1 mm less than an M camera. Instead of going to great lengths to get decent results with this geometry, the solution would be to create is very wide mount, which would allow top-class lenses. Wide mount = large camera. I fear you are still looking at the times of change from screw-mount to M-mount. The solution then was to shorten the register distance by 1 mm for the M, so with the added MM of the adapter you exactly got the right register distance for screw-mount. You need this reduction of the register distance with a new system only, if you put the adapter on top of the bayonet - like we know it from the M. But you can -especially when you have a larger diameter - also construct an adapter with retracted M-bayonet. Then the body can be larger, if you need that, but you don't miss the opportunities of using M-lenses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colonel Posted September 7, 2015 Share #796 Posted September 7, 2015 I only want a RF camera to be able to use my RF lenses When I use a Sony I want to use native Sony lenses Using a Leica lens on a Sony means you are loosing many of the Sony features such as AF, eye detection, etc. and many of the Leica features, e.g. RF Its fun using different lenses on different systems but I prefer in most cases to use the lens designed for the system ... The primary reason I shoot Leica M, whether digital or film, is the paired back workflow which leaves me to control the focus, shutter and aperture in a beautifully easy and mechanical way This is so fundamental that I think there are two main categories of users with the M: 1. Those that just want a small, high quality FF camera. 2. Those that want the beautiful RF back to basics workflow with high quality IQ The former category will always be distracted by other FF options for any spec. or financial reason that makes sense to them The latter category is composed of users that wish Leica the best to improve the M by evolution Although I fall into the later category I still love the Qs, Ts and other fun cameras Leica comes out with. I am just talking about the M line here. Personally I think Leica gets it, so I am confident in what they provide for each generation of M is what I will find a nice and useful progression ... Oh, and I probably will buy a 50mm Q if it ever comes out Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted September 7, 2015 Share #797 Posted September 7, 2015 I fear you are still looking at the times of change from screw-mount to M-mount. The solution then was to shorten the register distance by 1 mm for the M, so with the added MM of the adapter you exactly got the right register distance for screw-mount. You need this reduction of the register distance with a new system only, if you put the adapter on top of the bayonet - like we know it from the M. But you can -especially when you have a larger diameter - also construct an adapter with retracted M-bayonet. Then the body can be larger, if you need that, but you don't miss the opportunities of using M-lenses. Err-yes. How are you going to operate the focusing on the lens? The focusing ring on some lenses is very close to the mount. And what about the tab on legacy lenses? That would be miserable ergonomics. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edwardkaraa Posted September 7, 2015 Share #798 Posted September 7, 2015 Leaks only cause people to speculate which can take just about any direction – it’s completely unpredictable in its effect. Just the opposite of what you want to achieve with a well-planned marketing campaign.The more reliable and specific the info, the less the speculation. If you need a proof just look at this thread Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UliWer Posted September 7, 2015 Share #799 Posted September 7, 2015 Yes, focussing tabs of some old lenses would probably be ruled out by my assumption. If you look at the present line of M-lenses, they all have the scales at their base and the focussing ring is above it. The red dot might cause the biggest problems... Of course, all of this is speculation, since we neither have seen any new system, nor do we know if it is really coming with "fatter" bodies where the register distance differes from the M. Tough when it comes with such specs, this does not necessarily mean that use of M lenses was ruled out. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted September 7, 2015 Share #800 Posted September 7, 2015 As I said, if the mount is wide enough, the register can be short. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.