Lenses for SL now

[jmahto]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Do you guys think that we will be fine with our M if/when it gets the new EVF (hotshoe is ok) from the SL?  

 

My M works well with my R lenses.  It is the EVF for the long lenses that needs to have a lot more resolution to focus my long R glass when on the fly.  

 

Maybe, a good thing to just wait, we have time.  Also, it isn't like the new SL is 42MP and is going to make my 280/4 even more jaw dropping.  By the way, for me, I'm not a big birds and bugs shooter so I really don't need a dedicated SL for this sort of thing like Doug. 

 

A did use my 280/4 in Idaho this summer to take a picture of an Eagle along the Salmon River.  Imagine that, an Eagle sitting in a tree looking down at the "Salmon" River.  Go figure. 

 

 

Rick

My M works with R lenses even now but I can't use it for birds (I shoot mainly for my pleasure) due to delay/blackout/focusing issues. Even my old and rusty Canon 40D is easier to focus my 400/6.8 R with optical viewfinder for flying birds. Tells you how crappy M's EVF is for moving objects.

 

I will be delighted with EVF upgrade to SL's level in M and that will be huge for me. I will prefer internal if they can accommodate without compromising optical finder and form factor.

 

Although I gave up on 280/f4 (got to eat too ), I have Lanthar APO 180 that I would like to use more often with M.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Peter H]

Do you guys think that we will be fine with our M if/when it gets the new EVF (hotshoe is ok) from the SL?  

 

My M works well with my R lenses.  It is the EVF for the long lenses that needs to have a lot more resolution to focus my long R glass when on the fly.  

 

Maybe, a good thing to just wait, we have time.  Also, it isn't like the new SL is 42MP and is going to make my 280/4 even more jaw dropping.  By the way, for me, I'm not a big birds and bugs shooter so I really don't need a dedicated SL for this sort of thing like Doug. 

 

A did use my 280/4 in Idaho this summer to take a picture of an Eagle along the Salmon River.  Imagine that, an Eagle sitting in a tree looking down at the "Salmon" River.  Go figure. 

 

 

Rick

 

Certainly.

 

I have no problem with the M as a body for R lenses, though I can't think of anything surpassing my M lenses for all the virtues I most want...

 

And the idea of having the world's best EVF and OVF available in one sublime little camera as splendid as the M: what more could I ask for? (I'll think of something though, don't worry!)

[LocalHero1953]

I would use the SL for the specific photo shoot events that I do: portraits (studio or environmental), and concerts, music events and theatre etc. I.e. occasions when I am likely to go by car with a bag of kit which might include lighting. AF is less critical for these occasions as long as I have a good EVF and focus peaking. I would keep the lighter M for walking-about-all-day photography, whether with others or spending a day with street photography.

 

I believe the SL, excluding the grip, IS slimmer than the M already - else you'd struggle to fit an M lens on it.

 

Anyway, we all know  the next M will much slimmer and will have an L mount. The M-mount is finished except perhaps for a few future lenses to fill any gaps in the range. M-lenses will be attached via a new M-T/L adapter containing an electronic RF cam follower.

(  Ducks and runs for cover)

[Rick]

Certainly.

 

I have no problem with the M as a body for R lenses, though I can't think of anything surpassing my M lenses for all the virtues I most want...

 

And the idea of having the world's best EVF and OVF available in one sublime little camera as splendid as the M: what more could I ask for? (I'll think of something though, don't worry!)

 

Only one thing for me, Maestro II to eliminate EVF blackout.  

[Rick]

You know, Leica came out with the cool T.  It is a cool little camera.  But, Leica had the road map for a new mount in mind.  Now, the SL, same mount and remember the lens is the thing.  In that vein Leica created  true R solution and M and T.  They just needed proof of product.  Step 2, Leica makes a Q with faster processor and much better EVF (electronics were probably specked for the SL EVF).  The Q also tests Leica's new AF prowess.  Was all of this design steps for the SL?

 

Moving forward:  Leica now has three bodies that can each use the same processor, sensor, and two maybe 3 (I don't know how big the Q mount is) share the same mount.  

 

My big question is; will the new M, 2016, be the introduction of the new sensor to be shared by the entire line? Then, by the time Leica updates the SL it gets the new processor, other updated electronics, and we find that the new sensor in the new M had phase detection built in for future use with the SL?  Am I just way off here, thinking Leica can use the same sensor and offer it in the Q, M, and SL and save some on economy of scale?

 

RickDreamer

[mjh]

and two maybe 3 (I don't know how big the Q mount is) share the same mount.

Last I looked there was no such thing as ‘Q mount’.

[Rick]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Michael,

 

Right.  But, what I mean is the diameter of the mount the same as the T?  I imagine the Q is an entirely different thing like my Sony RX1?  I was musing along the lines of Leica developing parallel lines with different forms and uses, but with similar components.  I was trying to stretch the analogy to lens development for the Q being a similar diameter.  But, while I have your ear, can you see the same or similar sensor in the M, Q and SL with some shared electronics and processor?  Is this some part of the road map in the spirit of economy of scale?

 

Rick 

[IkarusJohn]

You know, Leica came out with the cool T.  It is a cool little camera.  But, Leica had the road map for a new mount in mind.  Now, the SL, same mount and remember the lens is the thing.  In that vein Leica created  true R solution and M and T.  They just needed proof of product.  Step 2, Leica makes a Q with faster processor and much better EVF (electronics were probably specked for the SL EVF).  The Q also tests Leica's new AF prowess.  Was all of this design steps for the SL?

 

Moving forward:  Leica now has three bodies that can each use the same processor, sensor, and two maybe 3 (I don't know how big the Q mount is) share the same mount.  

 

My big question is; will the new M, 2016, be the introduction of the new sensor to be shared by the entire line? Then, by the time Leica updates the SL it gets the new processor, other updated electronics, and we find that the new sensor in the new M had phase detection built in for future use with the SL?  Am I just way off here, thinking Leica can use the same sensor and offer it in the Q, M, and SL and save some on economy of scale?

 

RickDreamer

 

Im sure there's something in that, with an element of leapfrogging. The SL sensor is a slight improvement on the Q sensor; I'd be amazed if the M sensor isn't a further improvement. I know nothing about EVF, but surely a similar quality EVF and at least maestro 2 processor. 

 

Standardisation and maximising return on R&D is really important to Leica, along with one off releases like the Q, but improvement is also continuous. Development of the SL started in 2012; I'm sure Leica is working on lots of things at the moment, including an SL2. 

 

I rather hope there won't be Hermes, Audi, titanium painted and stainless steel versions of this camera, or an SL-P ...

[mjh]

But, what I mean is the diameter of the mount the same as the T?

As there is just a lens and a sensor with nothing in between, the only relevant diameter would be that of the rear element. This could be quite large, even larger than the L mount would allow, but I don’t know for sure.

 

can you see the same or similar sensor in the M, Q and SL with some shared electronics and processor?  Is this some part of the road map in the spirit of economy of scale?

Sure, sharing components would make sense. All new models should use the Maestro II or its successor. With the sensor this could be a tad more difficult but the SL and Q already share a somewhat similar sensor, apparently based on the same design by the same manufacturer (which Leica won’t disclose but one can guess). A sensor for the next M could be based on the same design, but who knows what will be available in, say, a year’s time? Maybe the successor of that sensor will be ready then, or CMOSIS has something that blows it out of the water? Or maybe Sony can offer a bespoke version of their BSI sensors? Time will tell.

[rramesh]

Im sure there's something in that, with an element of leapfrogging. The SL sensor is a slight improvement on the Q sensor; I'd be amazed if the M sensor isn't a further improvement. I know nothing about EVF, but surely a similar quality EVF and at least maestro 2 processor. 

 

Standardisation and maximising return on R&D is really important to Leica, along with one off releases like the Q, but improvement is also continuous. Development of the SL started in 2012; I'm sure Leica is working on lots of things at the moment, including an SL2. 

 

I rather hope there won't be Hermes, Audi, titanium painted and stainless steel versions of this camera, or an SL-P ...

 

In the fast evolving consumer electronics age, its hard to standardise. What is possible is the adoption of a coherent roadmap to the future with constant innovation. In this regard, I think Leica is on the right track. The innovation on the T (unibody, touch screen, T mount), the Q (EVF, full frame sensor, controls) and the SL (unibody, interchangeability, weatherproof) is indeed proof of this roadmap coherence. I think the M will be the culmination of the bringing together of the best of manual controls with the best of electronics adoption. But Leica should not and will not stop there. The future is indeed promising for photographers.