adli Posted August 30, 2016 Share #1281 Posted August 30, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) If you can achieve so wide dof in a portrait with a 75/1.4 I definitively want one! My 75 cron is narrower. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted August 30, 2016 Posted August 30, 2016 Hi adli, Take a look here New Leica M in September 2016? The speculations.. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Giulio Zanni Posted August 30, 2016 Share #1282 Posted August 30, 2016 If you can achieve so wide dof in a portrait with a 75/1.4 I definitively want one! My 75 cron is narrower.You don't have to fill the frame, keep some distance to increase the DoF and crop in post Sent from my HUAWEI GRA-L09 using Tapatalk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted August 30, 2016 Share #1283 Posted August 30, 2016 You forgot the most likely option: camera (RF) is in need of calibration. This is why I hope some day we could perhaps see a well implemented digital rangefinder patch Since it would still rely on mechanical linkages (with the lens) it would still be prone to variance. For those who think that the point of posts is becoming lost, I suggest that the existing RF M system camera is approaching or may already have reached its limit in terms of what improvements can be made. To seriously improve it further, there will have to be electronic information sharing between lens and body and this is unrealistic if legacy lenses are to be widely used - and the T and SL both do this already to some extent anyway, as much as is possible using 6-bit coding. The problem is that the 'ultimate' M rangefinder has limitations and none can be addressed if it is to survive in its present, relatively simplistic form. So we either accept those limitations or it becomes a bastardised and Heath Robinson style camera with compromised modifications which try to address these limitations. For me it has limitations which I am more than happy to live with because I like its simplistic form. My suspicion is that for others those limitations are seen as obstacles but there is a reticence to accept that addressing them is only possible by developing new products like the T and SL (I can only speak about the T when used with M lenses which can produce excellent images with them) although these too will be a compromise when using legacy M lenses. Modifying the existing rangefinder M camera to overcome its limitations is no doubt possible but will fundamentally change it from being a simplistic camera to a complex one which in my opinion goes against its entire ethos. Any new M should concentrate on refining the body if and where possible IMO, not uprating its specification simply to keep pace with what are IMO misplaced desires for mostly irrelevant changes. BUT this is only my opinion and we will have to see what Leica consider possible /marketable won't we? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted August 30, 2016 Share #1284 Posted August 30, 2016 Rangefinders can remain simple with accessory EVFs. Was the great idea of the M240. Suffice it to update the EVF and to implement a quiet (or electronic) shutter in LV mode and we'll get the best of both worlds as expected four years ago. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neko Posted August 30, 2016 Share #1285 Posted August 30, 2016 Rangefinders can remain simple with accessory EVFs. Was the great idea of the M240. Suffice it to update the EVF and to implement a quiet (or electronic) shutter in LV mode and we'll get the best of both worlds as expected four years ago. And more mp version. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted August 30, 2016 Share #1286 Posted August 30, 2016 And more mp version. I'd prefer a faster and slimmer body personally. YMMV. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted August 30, 2016 Share #1287 Posted August 30, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) MPs don't take up space. At least, the photographic variety doesn't Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted August 30, 2016 Share #1288 Posted August 30, 2016 MPs don't take up space. At least, the photographic variety doesn't I'm no techie at all but i guess more MPs take up space in that the camera needs a bigger buffer to keep or preferably improve its speed and responsiveness. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted August 30, 2016 Share #1289 Posted August 30, 2016 Memory chips don't take up space by capacity either Remember your first 128 mb SD cards? Compare the size to 128 gb ones. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted August 30, 2016 Share #1290 Posted August 30, 2016 Memory chips don't take up space by capacity either Remember your first 128 mb SD cards? Compare the size to 128 gb ones. OK but how do you explain that the M240's buffer is so small, or if it is not that small how do you explain that it is not possible to shoot more than 6 or 7 raw files in fast succession w/o interruption with it? None of my digital cameras has ever been so slow including my eight years old Canon 5D. I have always thought that the lack of room was the culprit. If it is not the case, how explaining this slowness or weakness actually? Just curious. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted August 30, 2016 Share #1291 Posted August 30, 2016 Well... thinking of my attitudes and considering the relative "youth" of my 240, my mood about the speculated "new" M" at the moment is this : - More MP only ---> won't buy on this - "Advanced" accessory EVF ---> won't buy on this - Both of the above (possibly with somthing more on the sensor side, apart MP) : start to think of... - Both AND something on the RF side ---> temptation is real. Bought M8 in May 2007... considering that surely, anyway, won't order at announcement but will wait for trustable feedbacks.... this would mean 3 cameras bought new in 10 years... which is someway on the high side for my habits... but affordable if worths... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted August 30, 2016 Share #1292 Posted August 30, 2016 OK but how do you explain that the M240's buffer is so small, or if it is not that small how do you explain that it is not possible to shoot more than 6 or 7 raw files in fast succession w/o interruption with it? None of my digital cameras has ever been so slow including my eight years old Canon 5D. I have always thought that the lack of room was the culprit. If it is not the case, how explaining this slowness or weakness actually? Just curious. I think it is more a question of processing power and possibly heat dissipation. The word "size" of the buffer does not refer to physical size. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edwardkaraa Posted August 30, 2016 Share #1293 Posted August 30, 2016 I think it is more a question of processing power and possibly heat dissipation. The word "size" of the buffer does not refer to physical size. I think you're right. Sometimes more ram compensates for lack of processing speed but can't help with things like refresh rates of the EVF. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sblitz Posted August 30, 2016 Share #1294 Posted August 30, 2016 Perhaps its just me, there seems to be interest in the new whatever Leica brings out but none of the "mania" that anticipated the next new version only a few years back. I get the feeling there is no great overwhelming need to get the next new thing. It could be cameras have become like PCs, the time for holding existing versions has extended significantly, no longer to necessary to swap with each new version. The leaps are too small to matter? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted August 31, 2016 Share #1295 Posted August 31, 2016 The leaps are too small to matter? Any real 'leaps' to be made in the future will almost certainly require fundamental changes in specification/form factor. As I have said before elsewhere in the forum, many changes would require data transfer between lenses and camera body for optimisation, something which is simply not possible for an M series camera unless it is completely redesigned, and its lenses too. So to answer your query, IMO the 'leaps' will now be incremental - the cameras as they stand are pretty well 'fit for purpose' and modifications are going to be minor unless the whole design is to be messed up by adding specification for the sake of doing so. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exodies Posted August 31, 2016 Share #1296 Posted August 31, 2016 Communication between body and lens can be done wirelessly, like an RFID. This wouldn't require any change to the mount. Older lenses could be fitted with a simple rfid which identified the lens; operational characteristics of which would be stored in the camera. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted August 31, 2016 Share #1297 Posted August 31, 2016 Communication between body and lens can be done wirelessly, like an RFID. This wouldn't require any change to the mount. Older lenses could be fitted with a simple rfid which identified the lens; operational characteristics of which would be stored in the camera. Simply identifying a lens is not enough to optimise for ever increasing MPixels. Transmission of lens, focus distance and aperture would all be required, as I assume would a power source (battery). Easier to start from scratch and build an errr, SL call it. So why is nobody requesting that an RF is added to the SL or T I wonder - just as feasible ? If your solution is viable can you give examples of its use? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adli Posted August 31, 2016 Share #1298 Posted August 31, 2016 Question from customer to Leica: I want an M-less M camera. Answer from Leica to customer: We have already buildt several, called T, Q and SL. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted August 31, 2016 Share #1299 Posted August 31, 2016 Question from customer to Leica: I want an M-less M camera. Answer from Leica to customer: We have already buildt several, called T, Q and SL. http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/264005-photokina-2016/?p=3104591 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cirke Posted August 31, 2016 Share #1300 Posted August 31, 2016 Question from customer to Leica: I want an M-less M camera. Answer from Leica to customer: We have already buildt several, called T, Q and SL. Good to know ... it will be without me then Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.