New Leica M in September 2016? The speculations.

[kkonkkrete]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

In the future it will be possible to change the filter characteristics electronically: no need to physically move things around.  Stereo shutter glasses use electronically controlled components to turn the filters opaque and then transparent again 60 times per second.  I'm pretty sure in the not-too-distant future, it will be possible to dynamically control the filter characteristics of the Bayer filter layer (remember when white LED's were 'impossible'?)

[mjh]

In the future it will be possible to change the filter characteristics electronically: no need to physically move things around.  Stereo shutter glasses use electronically controlled components to turn the filters opaque and then transparent again 60 times per second.

It might be possible but not with the LCD technology used for shutter glasses. And I doubt the ‘not-too-distant future’ part.

[Guest satrycon]

the Leica PK2016 press release is talking about a focus towards "professional photographers" whatever that really means in this day & age.

[IWC Doppel]

the Leica PK2016 press release is talking about a focus towards "professional photographers" whatever that really means in this day & age.

 

Seems to me they are lining up for something around the S, perhaps Hasselblad got there first ?

 

I can see a good reason why they might want/need to ensure they are seen as closer to the professional photographer. Seems that their strongest product line with the greatest history (the M) is perhaps more positioned as a camera that augments the professional with a strong amateur / enthusiast following.

 

I do also wonder if the new M might perhaps start with a new M that will provide all of the (to me undesirable) digital communication functionality expected from a lot of professionals, photographers, then be trimmed back to please the more puritanical among us (That's probably me)

[ski542002]

Seems to me they are lining up for something around the S, perhaps Hasselblad got there first ?

 

I can see a good reason why they might want/need to ensure they are seen as closer to the professional photographer. Seems that their strongest product line with the greatest history (the M) is perhaps more positioned as a camera that augments the professional with a strong amateur / enthusiast following.

 

I do also wonder if the new M might perhaps start with a new M that will provide all of the (to me undesirable) digital communication functionality expected from a lot of professionals, photographers, then be trimmed back to please the more puritanical among us (That's probably me)

 

might want/need to ensure they are seen as closer to the professional photographer is a laudable goal, but building that kind of relationship also implies backend support with timely lens repairs, body tuneups etc.  As of this writing, they're not even close to meeting the requirements of a professional. Having any piece of equipment out for repairs for more than 2 weeks is an unacceptable burden.

[pico]

The only advantage of a converted colour image is the possibility to simulate colour filters. And, as with all simulations, that one is easy, close, but no cigar.

 

That simulation is the deal-maker for me.

[Paul J]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

the Leica PK2016 press release is talking about a focus towards "professional photographers" whatever that really means in this day & age.

Puts plans on hold. Gets popcorn.

[Jeff S]

 

The only advantage of a converted colour image is the possibility to simulate colour filters. And, as with all simulations, that one is easy, close, but no cigar.

 

But remember, one is generally limited to one color filter at a time with film/Monochrom, and the effect is global, i.e., the entire image.  With a color file, using PP effects, one can use simultaneous multiple color channel effects and/or use them locally, not just globally.  These PP effects have become increasingly useful as software (e.g., LR) has improved over the years.

 

As with many film/darkroom vs digital/lightroom tools, the latter often provide not just more convenience, but more flexibility and choice.

 

Tradeoffs.

 

Jeff

[Paul J]

Agree but for the orange  bit, which is demonstrably untrue.

A monochrome sensor has a clear advantage in resolution <no interpolation of a Bayer matrix>, better per-pixel acuity <no negative optical effects by aberrations of the Bayer filter> and a better tonal range, <due to better microcontrast because of the two former factors combined>. You should try a Monochrom side by side to a regular M one day...

 

The only advantage of a converted colour image is the possibility to simulate colour filters. And, as with all simulations, that one is easy, close, but no cigar.

Agreed. Digital images, colour or black and white, become compromised and look more and more digital with every adjustment you make.

[jaapv]

That simulation is the deal-maker for me.

I prefer the real thing

[jaapv]

But remember, one is generally limited to one color filter at a time with film/Monochrom, and the effect is global, i.e., the entire image.  With a color file, using PP effects, one can use simultaneous multiple color channel effects and/or use them locally, not just globally.  These PP effects have become increasingly useful as software (e.g., LR) has improved over the years.

 

As with many film/darkroom vs digital/lightroom tools, the latter often provide not just more convenience, but more flexibility and choice.

 

Tradeoffs.

 

Jeff

Yes, but it is not hard to do local contrast/brightness adjustments.

[Paulus]

So no Leica M at the Kina, but a new camera with a new bayonet? Would that make sense?

[jaapv]

Not really - if Leica is to be believed they are going to push the professional side of the business, so I do not expect any earth-shattering announcements - but then, I could easily be wrong.

[Jon Warwick]

I know we're on an M section, but we got talking about the professional side of the business .... so with that excuse(!), would S lenses work natively (i.e., without any adapter) on a mirrorless medium format body (e.g., like a larger sensor version of the SL?).

Or are such currently SLR lenses specifically designed such that they only work flawlessly with an SLR?

[mjh]

I know we're on an M section, but we got talking about the professional side of the business .... so with that excuse(!), would S lenses work natively (i.e., without any adapter) on a mirrorless medium format body (e.g., like a larger sensor version of the SL?).

Or are such currently SLR lenses specifically designed such that they only work flawlessly with an SLR?

A mirrorless body would feature a shorter flange distance requiring an adapter for S system lenses – take a look at what Hasselblad does with the X1D. I suppose that lenses would get a firmware update as they are designed for phase-detection while a mirrorless body would probably use a contrast-based AF. I have no idea whether Leica has any plans for a mirrorless S but then I guess all MF manufacturers are considering mirrorless options. Hasselblad has started a trend and Fuji will probably have something to show at photokina.

[dkmoore]

Never can tell who knows what but Steve Huff believes a new M will be released at Photokina as reported recently on his site. He seems to typically have good information but so does many people on this forum. 

 

The rumor mill is a little too quiet for my liking!

[kkonkkrete]

A mirrorless body would feature a shorter flange distance requiring an adapter for S system lenses – take a look at what Hasselblad does with the X1D. I suppose that lenses would get a firmware update as they are designed for phase-detection while a mirrorless body would probably use a contrast-based AF. I have no idea whether Leica has any plans for a mirrorless S but then I guess all MF manufacturers are considering mirrorless options. Hasselblad has started a trend and Fuji will probably have something to show at photokina.

 

 

I really don't know how Hasselblad did it with such a short flange distance.  Very hard to get good corners with those angles.  Still ... excited to see if Leica and others follow this important new direction.

[Neko]

Never can tell who knows what but Steve Huff believes a new M will be released at Photokina as reported recently on his site. He seems to typically have good information but so does many people on this forum. 

 

The rumor mill is a little too quiet for my liking!

 People who are linked in a way or another with Leica will never reveil what they know. They don´t want to damage M240 sales.

[AlanJW]

Agreed. Digital images, colour or black and white, become compromised and look more and more digital with every adjustment you make.

Agree mostly.  I do think it is much harder to tell the difference with B&W.  I recently had a one man show in Chicago (closed now so no horn tooting) that included 25 images that went back to the 1970s.  20 were digital. 5 were film. Most (more than 20) were black and white. All were printed similarly about 12 x 8 in 16 x 20 frames, and all matted identically.  I challenged the gallery owner, and his curator, who are both very knowledgable and experienced, to pick out the film images from the digital. They each got exactly one right (the same one).  Most of my adjustments to the digitals were B&W conversion (SilverEfex) and some use of shadow and highlight adjustment.  Maybe it is because I started in B&W 50+ years ago and have an old fashioned idea of what an image should look like.  Yes, if you overdo it you can truly screw up an image. I also screwed up plenty of images in the darkroom by fooling around with different contrast papers and dodging and burning.  Too much of any kind of adjustment is not good. 

 

BTW, of the 25 images, there were about 7 that were not Leica.  Nobody could pick those out either. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[mjh]

I really don't know how Hasselblad did it with such a short flange distance.  Very hard to get good corners with those angles.

The flange distance has no bearing on image quality issues in the corners. The flange distance only defines where the body ends and the lens tube begins. If there is no mirror to accommodate you generally go for a short flange distance as it increases your options for lens design.