Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

By the way never ever believed any rumour about the discontinuation of the T.

Leica doesn't put a new product on the market and leave it bleed to death after just one iteration. They have only long term strategy in mind when producing new products.

 

Digilux 3, 4/3rds DSLR system anyone?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Digilux 3, 4/3rds DSLR system anyone?

 

 

Well lets just say they learned from the digilux, the market has evolved and the camera's you mention were not first versions in a new system,

before they abandoned them!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By the way never ever believed any rumour about the discontinuation of the T.

Leica doesn't put a new product on the market and leave it bleed to death after just one iteration. They have only long term strategy in mind when producing new products.

I would agree. I think that many of the aspects of the M are very hard to manufacture because it was designed at a time when manufacturing was done differently and labor rates were much lower. I think that the CNC milled case design and many of the fabrication techniques fed right into the SL and that it is designed for manufacturability unlike the M and possibly even serviceability which is rare and hard to do these days. 

 

i hope to see some elaboration of the TL mount cameras. A T2 with an upgraded sensor and associated processor, an X like TL.

Maybe even a Q or M like SL. The idea being to provide essentially the same camera with different form factors and UIs to reach different markets,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ben,

 

Nice technical brainstorming, but where is the viable business model in this approach?

 

Like Leica is doing for years, they should keep it simple. The form and UI from the current model just work. For future iterations the priority should be expanding the system with lenses, incorporate new technology that comes available and make it more durable. Keep the form as it is, recognisable and futuristic.

 

It just works for the moment!

This business model actually makes more sense than what the Japanese are doing.

 

Once you reach sufficiency and the market saturates, churn doesn't work as well. It is part of the reason camera phones have killed the compact camera market and why the iPad played a big role in decimating the PC market. This is also why most of the software companies are moving to subscription models.

 

As a brand Leica basically competes with itself when it introduces a new camera. By not relying on the churn of new products and turning existing products into into durable goods with periodic service revenue you maintain customer contact providing follow on sale opportunities like lenses, foster brand loyalty and help justify the price premium. The value of the current T drops precipitously when the T2 is released. However when there is an upgrade it keeps the current customers happy and invested in your system.

 

Doing this also reduces demands on your engineering staff and can allow you to reduce or redirect R&D budget. At the time of introduction of a new product it reduces the number of new components that must be sourced and stored to be assembled. It also boosts the volume and reduces the unit cost of the most expensive components, the sensor and the logic board.

 

Diversification across a product line helps address different market segments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Digilux 3, 4/3rds DSLR system anyone?

These were Panasonic cameras at heart. Panasonic then turned towards Micro FourThirds and Leica didn’t follow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well lets just say they learned from the digilux, the market has evolved and the camera's you mention were not first versions in a new system,

before they abandoned them!

 

You're wrong, the Digilux 3 was their first DSLR and first M4/3rds camera. Abandoned after only one iteration, just to correct you

 

It was a pointless camera really, 4/3rds sensor, and porro type finder, yet larger than an ASPC DSLR! No wonder it bombed.

Edited by earleygallery

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

You're wrong, the Digilux 3 was their first DSLR and first M4/3rds camera. Abandoned after only one iteration, just to correct you

 

 

If you persist, stand corrected, never too old to learn!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These were Panasonic cameras at heart. Panasonic then turned towards Micro FourThirds and Leica didn’t follow.

 

Actually, The Digilux 3 4/3 format camera was based on an Olympus chassis i.e. the E330 - which Panasonic also utilised for their L1 4/3 camera. In 2006, Leica had signed up to the 4/3 consortium with Fuji, Kodak, Olympus, Panasonic, Sanyo, and Sigma … to develop the 4/3 system. Leica only produced the Digilux 3 camera but in conjunction with Panasonic, some exceptionally fine 4/3 format 'Leica' lenses were developed which have been discussed at length on the forum previously … and which contrary to popular opinion, included significant Leica design expertise. I still use three Leica 4/3 lenses with my M4/3 Olympus cameras. 

 

dunk

Edited by dkCambridgeshire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't agree that a reduced SL is what is, I like the T touch philosphy and the style

 

The problem with the T was simply the cost and limited range of the lenses vis-a-vis rivals

As the price goes down it becomes more attractive, but the lenses need to come down more

 

the main thing to add for the T2 would be inbuilt EVF and secondary would be image stabilisation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't agree that a reduced SL is what is, I like the T touch philosphy and the style

 

The problem with the T was simply the cost and limited range of the lenses vis-a-vis rivals

As the price goes down it becomes more attractive, but the lenses need to come down more

 

the main thing to add for the T2 would be inbuilt EVF and secondary would be image stabilisation

NO NO NO. I don't understand why you all want the EVF built in. First there is no room for it, look at:  battery compartment, flash and screen.

Second: it would destroy the whole design and concept, third: Leica has a tradition with separate viewfinders in the past. See Leica Wiki/VIOOH and TUVOO

Kind of nostalgia? Yes definitely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would prefer a built in EVF instead of the flash. A killer argument for me.

A T can be used with macro lenses, with tele lenses, with wa lenses, cases where a built in flash is useless.

Jan

Edited by jankap

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm with Jan, never use the flash, get annoyed with the extra size etc of the Viso.

Gary

 

The only time I use the internal flash, is to trigger my off-camera flash, handhold for portraits, for macro on a tripod. This because I can't use the flash mount for the radio triggers or a flash, because there is an EVF on top.

 

Now that's ironic!!!!

 

Never used it for "fill in" flash, which is the only task for this small flash, that it is capable off, I think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am in the camp, keep the external EVF.  Only changes I would want is make it stick out less by making available in silver.  Better EVF like the SL, or I will end up buying black which would be fine.  And better image stabilization would be nice. I don't want a tiny EVF built in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The diversity of opinions is why I believe that Leica should not just have one T2 but a diversity of L mount/T and S series cameras all with the same sensor and logic board.

 

1) just a refresh of the current T with an updated sensor and logic board.

2) one which extends the T concept a bit further and has the electronics from the EVF built into the camera instead of the flash

3) one which has the L mount but instead of the touch screen UI it more closely resembles the X series UI.

4) They should probably also diversify the full frame L mount with a Q like SL mount camera more like what people were expecting when they pulled the SL out of a hat.

 

It really is: Same camera, different cases, with different firmware loads and all they have to do is change where the flex-cables run inside the case. With the sensor and logic board the same the backend image processing pipeline will be the same between the firmware variants, it will only be the front end UI that will be different. Wiring switches up to IO pins instead of processing touchscreens and such.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would want (in descending priority order)

* Better high ISO performance

* Built in EVF (by taking out the flash)

* In-body image stabilization

* Snappier performance

* More rounded corners for better comfort

* Ability to turn off in camera noise reduction (useful for astrophotographers and nightscapes where you use master darks instead)

* M lens profiles built in

 

I wouldn't mind keeping the same 16 megapixels. Form factor is good. APS-C is fine for a smaller camera like the 'T'.

 

- Jared

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would prefer a built in EVF instead of the flash. A killer argument for me.

A T can be used with macro lenses, with tele lenses, with wa lenses, cases where a built in flash is useless.

Jan

 

Internal EVF definitely. For me, the external EVF is an eyesore and impractical when stowing the camera (I had to replace the first one because it snapped off in the bag. Now I'm taking it off before stowing the camera).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would imagine a T2 to be the same body, upgraded processor, and 24mp sensor. They have a great look with the T, and I think they'd keep that going.

The Leica full frame has 24 Mpixels, the T has 16Mpixels: the T has more (almost 30%) pixels per square mm... which is more than enough for me....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me a natural and preferable evolution for the T2 would be:

- Keep it's size, that' s what makes me use it every day!

- Don't  change the UI, for everyone who uses one, me included, it is its USP!

  Improve it in speed, tactility, flexibility etc.

- An EVF, next generation, SL quality or better.

  For me, integrating it in the body, would only make sense, if the body doesn't get any bigger.

  So one solution could be to get rid of the flash, rearrange the internals and put the big eyepatch on the corner.

  You win a flash mount back to be used again, which you can't with the current EVF.

- Improved sensor and faster and more capable processor, with Leica ( by Panasonic) identity, DR and colours.

  Only expand to 24 Mp if pixels have the same quality or better.

- Integrate M- and R-lens profiles like in the SL.

- Movable focuspoint (with joystick) like the SL.

- Make it weatherproof; with only two dials, lens mount, EVF and the battery as the only openings,

   it wouldn't be to difficult or expensive.

 

With the FW 1.4.3 the T is almost perfect.

One item should be available though: a battery charger that is much faster than the charger that it is delivered with now: modern Li-ion batteries are not hurt (on the contrary) by fast charging, and the standard charger takes ages to charge the T battery....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...