Likaleica Posted September 24, 2015 Share #1141 Posted September 24, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Since this thread started with speculations about a new M, and has morphed into a possible new S, I suggest we start a thread in the S forum to filter further intel. In a recent Leica blog, Vincent Laine (Q designer) said," "At Leica we have three design categories or directions: Iconic, Contemporary, and Professional. Iconic is what most people know Leica for and it is the M Design (Classic U-shaped bod, top cover-leather-bottom cover, etc.). Contemporary is the latest addition to our portfolio and was introduced with the Leica T. The last category is Professional and is everything S stands for basically." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 24, 2015 Posted September 24, 2015 Hi Likaleica, Take a look here NEW M.. This year.. This Fall.... I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
IkarusJohn Posted September 24, 2015 Share #1142 Posted September 24, 2015 Since this thread started with speculations about a new M, and has morphed into a possible new S, I suggest we start a thread in the S forum to filter further intel. In a recent Leica blog, Vincent Laine (Q designer) said," "At Leica we have three design categories or directions: Iconic, Contemporary, and Professional. Iconic is what most people know Leica for and it is the M Design (Classic U-shaped bod, top cover-leather-bottom cover, etc.). Contemporary is the latest addition to our portfolio and was introduced with the Leica T. The last category is Professional and is everything S stands for basically." That's interesting, and I guess not that surprising. They ignore the X cameras and the PanaLeicas and the Q - I guess that means the M & Q are contemporary (and the PanaLeicas don't count)? I would love (but doubt I could ever afford) a 35mm based S camera with EVF rather than mirror box. Actually, I'd love an S(007) but could never justify it even if I could afford it. The challenge is going to be delivering the focusing accuracy of a calibrated optical view finder (on an M camera), or better focusing on a high quality focusing screen through an SLR (on an S camera) using an EVF. To date, I'm not aware of any off the sensor focusing matching these two, focus peaking or not, and the refresh rate and blackout has been problematic. If Sean Reid covers this with any discipline, I will be tempted to renew my subscription and I will endure his horrible site for another year. Surely, the technology must be getting close as logically reading focus and framing off the sensor should be accurate - so far, I'm unconvinced. If Leica don't pull this off, it will be very disappointing. Cheers John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted September 24, 2015 Share #1143 Posted September 24, 2015 For me there is a fascinating, high quality wide angle MF point-n-shoot camera that Leica could emulate with an MF sensor. With an economical focus verify or even with out one I think it could become a hit. Simple, easy to build, economical. Why not? Mine are two: Plaubel true 6x9cm and Brooks almost 6x9cm. Why Brooks slighted the format is beyond me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted September 24, 2015 Share #1144 Posted September 24, 2015 They ignore the X cameras and the PanaLeicas and the Q - I guess that means the M & Q are contemporary (and the PanaLeicas don't count)? Indeed the Panaleicas don’t count. Cooperating with Panasonic, i.e. exchanging their expertise to improve the products of both parties, is one thing, but selling a rebadged Panasonic is something else entirely. I would love (but doubt I could ever afford) a 35mm based S camera with EVF rather than mirror box. So do I … I have no idea about the price but given that I am a journalist rather than a dentist this could get difficult. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
biglou Posted September 24, 2015 Share #1145 Posted September 24, 2015 For me there is a fascinating, high quality wide angle MF point-n-shoot camera that Leica could emulate with an MF sensor. With an economical focus verify or even with out one I think it could become a hit. Simple, easy to build, economical. Why not? Mine are two: Plaubel true 6x9cm and Brooks almost 6x9cm. Why Brooks slighted the format is beyond me. The Brooks Veriwide 100 is wider than you think, the image measures 55x91mm, Leica New-York made an external finder for it. Still use mine occasionally and it surprises me every time with wonderful capability. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted September 24, 2015 Share #1146 Posted September 24, 2015 Indeed the Panaleicas don’t count. Cooperating with Panasonic, i.e. exchanging their expertise to improve the products of both parties, is one thing, but selling a rebadged Panasonic is something else entirely. How is is it something else, please? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted September 24, 2015 Share #1147 Posted September 24, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) For me there is a fascinating, high quality wide angle MF point-n-shoot camera that Leica could emulate with an MF sensor. With an economical focus verify or even with out one I think it could become a hit. Simple, easy to build, economical. Why not? Mine are two: Plaubel true 6x9cm and Brooks almost 6x9cm. Why Brooks slighted the format is beyond me. MF - medium format? I'd be astonished if Leica made another medium format camera, let alone a rangefinder medium format camera like a Plaubel. They bought Sinar, not Plaubel ... Having said that, the constraint of using 35mm cine film in the Barnack camera isn't really relevant to digital. I'd have thought that a sensor manufacturer will make a sensor in any size of you order enough of them. Why not a simple medium format digital camera - I can't help but think that it would end up being a Q version of the SWC, with a fixed lens optimised for an outsized sensor. That would be an interesting camera, and who better to make it than Leica - makers of the M Edition 60, M-A and Monochrom ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted September 24, 2015 Share #1148 Posted September 24, 2015 How is is it something else, please? By not being an actual Leica. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted September 25, 2015 Share #1149 Posted September 25, 2015 By not being an actual Leica. Well, we do accept Panaleicas on this forum and with good reason. At least the lenses have Leica input, not that there is much wrong with the cameras in general. And there is the case of the Digilux2, which is rumoured to have more Leica DNA than a simple rebadge should have. This kind of thing happens in the best of families. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted September 25, 2015 Share #1150 Posted September 25, 2015 MF - medium format? I'd be astonished if Leica made another medium format camera, let alone a rangefinder medium format camera like a Plaubel. The camera I referred to is not a rangefinder, but a wide-angle viewfinder camera. The original Plaubel Veriwide was a true 6x9cm camera which, by the way, used a Leica viewfinder. Later so-called 6x9 cameras listed as Brooks Veriwide were not true to their published format. I have one of each. Forgive me, I could measure their film gates because I have both on the bench. Ask and I will make it so. EDIT: I fond my document. The original Plaubel image size is 55x90mm, and the Brooks is 55x80mm. FWIW, the original Plaubel negative is a perfect fit in the Leica Focomat IIa. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted September 25, 2015 Share #1151 Posted September 25, 2015 At least the lenses have Leica input, not that there is much wrong with the cameras in general. Indeed Leica and Panasonic do cooperate. Not just on the lenses of Panaleicas. Still the Panaleicas are basically Panasonic cameras with a Leica design and a different set of included software. Nothing wrong with that of course. And there is the case of the Digilux2, which is rumoured to have more Leica DNA than a simple rebadge should have. Yeah, rumours … has there ever been any substance to those rumours? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted September 25, 2015 Share #1152 Posted September 25, 2015 I'm not sure why the Digilux 2/Panasonic Lumix DMC-LC1 keeps coming up in discussion. It was introduced in 2003 and stopped in, what 2008? It's a Panasonic ... This discussion, was about the next M, but has morphed into speculation about the new full frame AF system camera. I don't see the relevance of rebadged Panasonics, no matter how much they rely on Leica licensed designs. What we're discussing is cameras designed and made by Leica. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edwardkaraa Posted September 25, 2015 Share #1153 Posted September 25, 2015 I wasn't referring to your comment Don't take it personally This thread is a river of sarcasm You were, but it doesn't matter. I didn't take it personally Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edwardkaraa Posted September 25, 2015 Share #1154 Posted September 25, 2015 It had better be at $8K vs $5K at most for the competition. I'm not sure how much would be the 50 cron AF worth, but I would think around 3K? That would make the body around 5K, still more expensive than the competition but not by much. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted September 25, 2015 Share #1155 Posted September 25, 2015 Indeed Leica and Panasonic do cooperate. Not just on the lenses of Panaleicas. Still the Panaleicas are basically Panasonic cameras with a Leica design and a different set of included software. Nothing wrong with that of course. Yeah, rumours … has there ever been any substance to those rumours? Never understood the thinking behind distinguishing what an 'actual' Leica is and what is not. I guess for a purist a Leica cannot share the same innards as some other camera, or have those components produced outside of a Leica factory. With that thinking many high end mechanical watches are a variation of the same Swatch movement produced in the Swatch factory. Truth be told, if Leica comes out with a great new camera body that turns out to have inside basically the same electronics as the new Sony Alpha, but playing nice with Leica glass, more ergonomic, and having different software, then I will be happy. Even if the electronics are printed in China under license with Sony. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted September 25, 2015 Share #1156 Posted September 25, 2015 I suspect all the electronics will have printed in China on them - but there is a difference between those cameras shared with Panasonic (badges and minimal other differences) and those cameras which are only badged Leica. There are no X, M, Q or S cameras badged Panasonic, Sony or anything else that I'm aware of ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted September 25, 2015 Share #1157 Posted September 25, 2015 Yeah, rumours … has there ever been any substance to those rumours?Not really, but it remains a nice thought. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted September 25, 2015 Share #1158 Posted September 25, 2015 I'm not sure why the Digilux 2/Panasonic Lumix DMC-LC1 keeps coming up in discussion. It was introduced in 2003 and stopped in, what 2008? It's a Panasonic ... This discussion, was about the next M, but has morphed into speculation about the new full frame AF system camera. I don't see the relevance of rebadged Panasonics, no matter how much they rely on Leica licensed designs. What we're discussing is cameras designed and made by Leica. Sorry for referring to a camera that still has an enthusiastic following in a camera forum... You may not have noticed, but the cooperation between Leica and Panasonic seems to have intensified of late, culminating up to now in the Q, making the connection between the two more than relevant. It may well be that, like the Q, the vast majority of the internals of the new camera will be stamped Panasonic. Not a bad thing at all, IMO, as it gives Leica access to technology that they would never be able to develop themselves, but it puts a bit of a perspective on the disdain sometimes expressed for Panaleicas here. And guess which camera expressed the cooperation first? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted September 25, 2015 Share #1159 Posted September 25, 2015 I'm not sure why the Digilux 2/Panasonic Lumix DMC-LC1 keeps coming up in discussion. It was introduced in 2003 and stopped in, what 2008? It's a Panasonic ... (...) I recall reading that the LC1 was a joint project by both Panasonic and Leica where engineers of both partners frequently met and jointly designed the camera. Obviously, the partner which was capable of producing an electronic device did produce it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted September 25, 2015 Share #1160 Posted September 25, 2015 I suspect all the electronics will have printed in China on them - but there is a difference between those cameras shared with Panasonic (badges and minimal other differences) and those cameras which are only badged Leica. There are no X, M, Q or S cameras badged Panasonic, Sony or anything else that I'm aware of ... The only difference is that Panaleicas come in two flavors Pana and Leica. The Q, R,S, M whatnot does not. So the question is when you say 'there is a difference' do mean one that matters, or just stating the obvious. Does it matter if the components/electronics inside are unique? And how unique does it have to be to be branded as 'actual'. These are not issues for me as a photographer, but more to do with marketing and how much you can charge me as a consumer who is looking for something original/unique My point is that when we are discussing future Leica bodies, including the M, it is less and less sensible to differentiate between 'actual' and 'non actual' Leica's, if 'actual' just means lack of a cheaper counterpart. If, just for arguments sake, Leica can re-badge a Sony so it is as simple as an M, adapt the Sony sensor to play well with Leica glass then it would have made a great EVIL camera. Sure it will not sell as dearly as an 'actual' Leica. People will say its just a Sony. That is why Leica is trying to stay unique, like with the Q. Question is does it have the resources to keep developing the necessary know how, or will it have to share? In the crowded compact market, Leica obviously had to dilute the brand or leave. I am glad they cooperated with Panasonic on the D-lux. Will the same happen with the other lines? Time will tell. The only place Leica has no competition is optical rangefinder bodies. Here they can stay unique, and I hope they do. But if they branch out, it will be more and more difficult for them to remain 'actual'. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.