On The Meaning And Implications Of No New M At Photokina

[Bill Livingston]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Bill !!! the 7+ has a 28 AND a 56 mm

I know... but I'm resisting every temptation whilst holding out for an SL in an M body ...

 

 

 

Just like everyone else is (really).

[cirke]

a SL into an M body is also what I am waiting for

[Bill Livingston]

a SL into an M body is also what I am waiting for

I know...

 

And there is a LOT more than just two of us...

[eujin]

Is the SL's sensor made by CMOSIS or some other vendor? And is it the same as the one found in the Q? 

[LocalHero1953]

Some other vendor. And it's not the same as the Q.

[hmathias]

Someting like this perhaps.

 

patent.jpg

 

http://www.google.com/patents/DE102012009975B4?cl=en

 

A few comments on earlier points raised: There is no reason why this patent (link above) couldn't be describing an optical viewfinder with a rangefinder made from 2 triangulating digital cameras on microchips. Such a device would potentially be more accurate than an optical rangefinder because they could incorporate servo-zoom lenses for greater accuracy (zoom them in for use with long focal length camera lenses. Low rez IQ wouldn't be an issue for range-finding use of these cameras on microchips.

 

And the Leica Cinema lenses that were designed and sold so far are really popular as rental digital cinema lenses for non-Leica cameras (ARRI and Panaflexes). Although Leica makes an M optical adapter for their cine lenses that isn't their primary use. At a cost of around 280,000.00 USD per set they don't require filmmakers to use Leica M or SL cameras with these lenses to justify their inclusion in the product lineup. The same high image quality that draws us to Leica still camera lenses draws cinematographers to them.

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am pretty sure an electronic rangefinder would only be developed with an electronic viewfinder in mind. Combining an optical viewfinder image with a digitally generated rangefinder patch would only complicate matters and re-introduce the calibration issues an electronic rangefinder should solve.

 

There is no reason why this patent (link above) couldn't be describing an optical viewfinder with a rangefinder made from 2 triangulating digital cameras on microchips. Such a device would potentially be more accurate than an optical rangefinder because they could incorporate servo-zoom lenses for greater accuracy (zoom them in for use with long focal length camera lenses. Low rez IQ wouldn't be an issue for range-finding use of these cameras on microchips. [...]

 

Following mjh's opinion would mean that Leica are preparing themselves to transform definitely the M into a TTL camera if i understand him correctly. Unless an hybrid viewfinder could incorporate both an optical and a digital rangefinder i guess. Any idea about the feasibility of such an incorporation?

[pop]

Following mjh's opinion would mean that Leica are preparing themselves to transform definitely the M into a TTL camera if i understand him correctly. Unless an hybrid viewfinder could incorporate both an optical and a digital rangefinder i guess. Any idea about the feasibility of such an incorporation?

The patent discussed above combines an optical viewfinder with a digital rangefinder. They have an electronic shutter in the path of the OVF, so that you can change from EVF to OVF at the flick of a switch. I presume that the same arrangment could to LV off the sensor as well.

[hmathias]

Following mjh's opinion would mean that Leica are preparing themselves to transform definitely the M into a TTL camera if i understand him correctly. Unless an hybrid viewfinder could incorporate both an optical and a digital rangefinder i guess. Any idea about the feasibility of such an incorporation?

 

 

As it is shown, nothing in the illustrated patent requires TTL, or eliminates it. The patent shows an M type optical finder with a superimposed dual video camera (presumably  on a chip) rangefinder. The viewfinder function could be optical, or it could be an LCD, or even switchable as both — but that option isn't shown in the drawing.

[thighslapper]

I think you have to go back to first principles to predict what the new M will have and when it will appear.

 

The size is fixed by the optical path of the RF and M lenses and their design, battery efficiency and size ...... and importantly, history..... you can shave a few mm off here and there and the odd 50g but you are not going to end up with anything much different to the M240.

 

Sensor sensitivity and resolution can go up ...... but it needs to be Legacy M lens friendly and Leica are unlikely to stick in 36 or 50mpx + just for headline value. 

 

The processing power and competent firmware is already there in the current SL and Q .... as is the hi-res EVF technology. 

 

If Leica are just going to stick this lot into a new M, they could do it tomorrow and the upgrade would be useful, but hardly earth shattering or stunningly appealing.... but that might just be what appears at Photokina.

 

But ...... that leaves some big changes that are taking time and are complicated ........

 

The 'digital optical rangefinder' patent wouldn't be registered if there was no intention of trialling it ...... but to me it brings a whole host of problems, and although simple in concept may be proving a real headache to get working reliably and accurately ...... and possibly it was a non-starter in practice that has been abandoned. They might be tinkering with other forms of hybrid EVF/Optical viewfinders. Getting that wrong would be a disaster for diehard optical RF users and alienate a lot of past buyers. 

 

Then there is the possibility of configuring the M-Mount to allow AF lens use ....... which would expand the M's appeal ..... but would take time to implement in a sensible way and poses physical design issues.

 

Maybe the M is destined to go the way of it's film predecessors ...... still available, but perfected to a point where new models, if any, offer only cosmetic or minor incremental changes. 

[adli]

Wery well put!

 

I think you have to go back to first principles to predict what the new M will have and when it will appear.

 

The size is fixed by the optical path of the RF and M lenses and their design, battery efficiency and size ...... and importantly, history..... you can shave a few mm off here and there and the odd 50g but you are not going to end up with anything much different to the M240.

 

Sensor sensitivity and resolution can go up ...... but it needs to be Legacy M lens friendly and Leica are unlikely to stick in 36 or 50mpx + just for headline value. 

 

The processing power and competent firmware is already there in the current SL and Q .... as is the hi-res EVF technology. 

 

If Leica are just going to stick this lot into a new M, they could do it tomorrow and the upgrade would be useful, but hardly earth shattering or stunningly appealing.... but that might just be what appears at Photokina.

 

But ...... that leaves some big changes that are taking time and are complicated ........

 

The 'digital optical rangefinder' patent wouldn't be registered if there was no intention of trialling it ...... but to me it brings a whole host of problems, and although simple in concept may be proving a real headache to get working reliably and accurately ...... and possibly it was a non-starter in practice that has been abandoned. They might be tinkering with other forms of hybrid EVF/Optical viewfinders. Getting that wrong would be a disaster for diehard optical RF users and alienate a lot of past buyers. 

 

Then there is the possibility of configuring the M-Mount to allow AF lens use ....... which would expand the M's appeal ..... but would take time to implement in a sensible way and poses physical design issues.

 

Maybe the M is destined to go the way of it's film predecessors ...... still available, but perfected to a point where new models, if any, offer only cosmetic or minor incremental changes. 

[pgk]

The size is fixed by the optical path of the RF and M lenses and their design.....

 

Which also means that focus accuracy cannot be improved. Well it can, but legacy lenses have a tolerance which cannot be altered and building new lenses to even tighter tolerances might result in really eye-watering and bottom-clenching prices . So any electronic viewfinder might make it easier to focus (using an enlarged RF patch possibility) but won't increase focus accuracy. Back to square one. Which leaves us with a delightful and extremely competent design which does what it does very well indeed .

[reddawn]

Hi

 

Given 2016 is the 10th year anniversary of the digital M, and given Photokina is usually such a big event, it would really be somewhat of a disappointment if there is to be no new M announced during Photokina.

 

To me, there are many small refinements they could have done to the basic M240 architecture to make the new M different enough to attract new buyers as well as tempt existing M owners to upgrade, for example:

 

- ability to support a higher resolution EVF add-on

- using the same "quieter" shutter that the M262 / M-D uses

- addition of Wifi capability, working with the the same Leica mobile app that the Leica SL uses
- removing the long exposure limitations and making dark frame subtraction optional.

These changes would not compromise the basic integrity of the M gestalt, yet help bring the M to more modern standards.

For the wilder ideas, I think it would be wiser for Leica to make a companion mirrorless camera rather than risk pissing off us M lovers  Some of the ideas suggested in this thread are fascinating, and many of the ideas are already in place today in other manufacturers' cameras, so they are not entirely as far-fetched as we think, for example...

- AF with M lenses: already a reality today with the Sony A7ii / A7rii with the amazing TechArt AF adapter, which really works. I was wondering if it would be possible for Leica to use the existing TL mount of the Leica SL / T to do the same - coming up with a M to TL adapter which can drive autofocus. After all, we already have the Novoflex Canon AF adapter and now, the upcoming equivalent for Nikon lenses.
 

- If you guys have used Fuji's X-Pro1 or X-Pro2 before, you would know it IS technically possible to have an optical viewfinder with an EVF as a "rangefinder patch" to confirm focus - allowing users to view and shoot using an optical viewfinder, while at the same time accurately focusing using modern EVF technology immune to RF calibration issues. It seems Leica is now working with Fuji (the Sofort camera rumour), so maybe, just maybe, there's further cooperation to bring that hybrid finder tech over to Leica.....

[Peter H]

I agree with Reddawn that the prospect of a something Fujiesque is enticing.

 

The X-Pro 2 viewfinder is fascinating. As a pure OVF it is not quite as good as the peerless M's, but it's not far behind. As a pure EVF it's not quite as good as the peerless SL's, but it's not far behind. But when you combine the virtues of both in the one viewfinder, it is extraordinary and a beautiful thing to use as well as wonderfully useful in more situations than you can probably imagine until you've used it.

 

The prospect of an M with a similar arrangement is exciting. Whether it's realistic, I have no idea.

[lct]

EVF and digital rangefinder are not the same thing. Focussing accurately with an EVF is easy thanks to image magnification but this is true only with standard and telephoto lenses. With wides, especially 28mm and below, it can work but in the best cases, it takes more or less longer. What is interesting in the digital rangefinder, as clear as i understand it, is it works like an optical RF. Its accuracy does not depend on the focal length or the aperture of the lens. Great with wides but less so with fast telephotos i suspect. 

[jaapv]

Unless the system could switch to an amplified patch when it detects a longer lens.

[lct]

Unless the system could switch to an amplified patch when it detects a longer lens.

 

Indeed but would this amplification improve focussing accuracy the same way as optical magnification can do? 

[edwardkaraa]

Which also means that focus accuracy cannot be improved. Well it can, but legacy lenses have a tolerance which cannot be altered and building new lenses to even tighter tolerances might result in really eye-watering and bottom-clenching prices . So any electronic viewfinder might make it easier to focus (using an enlarged RF patch possibility) but won't increase focus accuracy. Back to square one. Which leaves us with a delightful and extremely competent design which does what it does very well indeed .

Fully agreed. I think the M system is perfect as it is. Any attempts at improving it will almost certainly produce unfavorable results. I am of the opinion that Leica instead should have made the SL in the same spirit of Leica with simple miniaturized body and lenses. It should have been a Q like body with interchangeable small compact autofocus lenses. This is where they really missed a huge opportunity.

[pgk]

I am of the opinion that Leica instead should have made the SL in the same spirit of Leica with simple miniaturized body and lenses. It should have been a Q like body with interchangeable small compact autofocus lenses.

 

The dCL perhaps ?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[jaapv]

Indeed but would this amplification improve focussing accuracy the same way as optical magnification can do? 

I don't know. Leica would, presumably.