R10 "Easy Predictions" from Erwin Putt

[cnguyen]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm still an R fan despite having an M8 so this is good news for R shooters.

 

In a recent issue of the German Fotomagazin, there is an article about the 'secret plans' of Leica product development. Not exactly that, but a guestimate by a journalist with good connections within the company. He looks through his crystal ball into the content of interviews with Leica managers. What does he predict?: an M9 and an R10, daring and creative. The M9 is the current M8 with 16 Mb sensor as you will also find in the R10. The M9 (probability rating 90%!) has 16 Mb on the same sensor size as the current M8, will have a Live View function, electronic rangefinder support or an electronic finder as an accessory device. The M8 will stay in production but now as an a-la-carte model (probability rating 95%). A digital CM is also predicted but with a PR of only 30%. With a PR of 90% we will see a new R10 in the current body shape of the R9, but with 16 Mb sensor and AF lenses. In the past we had the R and RE series of bodies, so there will also be an R10E (PR of 50%).

[Advertisement]

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

[Riley]

is PR probability ratio ?

[cnguyen]

i missed that too the first time I read it. He meant prrobabilty rating the higher number the more likely it will become reality.

[Riley]

ok so its

M9 16Mb LV EAF 90%

M8 a-la-carte 95%

CM 30%

R10 AF 90%

R10E 50%

 

i was sorta hoping for a fixed lens CM

[R10dreamer]

I wonder what exactly is meant by auto-focus lenses. Does that mean that the existing lenses can still be used? Does that mean an "in focus" indicator within the viewfinder? Does that mean all new lenses for the R system (can't imagine that happening as the expense would be incredible)?

 

Whatever the case I hope the 16 mp is true. Also hope for full frame and a 50 or 64 ISO.

 

Maybe in 2008?

[ho_co]

Remember, these predictions are from Fotomagazin and simply quoted by Puts.

 

Note also that he points out that simply following these predictions would be a disaster for Leica.

 

--HC

[rosuna]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The Four Thirds system is very interesting for Leica.

[Riley]

Remember, these predictions are from Fotomagazin and simply quoted by Puts.

 

Note also that he points out that simply following these predictions would be a disaster for Leica.

 

--HC

 

i think Puts and others like MR over at luminous landscape said 4/3rds would be gone too

yet somehow everyone missed the fall of Konika/Minolta and Pentax

 

so much for predictions...

 

Leica could, and probably should do more though

4/3rds could use some wide primes

and another fixed lens 4/3 or APS C rangefinder would be a very good idea about now

and of course R10 needs to happen

[zapp]

I'm still an R fan despite having an M8 so this is good news for R shooters.

 

In a recent issue of the German Fotomagazin, there is an article about the 'secret plans' of Leica product development. Not exactly that, but a guestimate by a journalist with good connections within the company. He looks through his crystal ball into the content of interviews with Leica managers. What does he predict?: an M9 and an R10, daring and creative. The M9 is the current M8 with 16 Mb sensor as you will also find in the R10. The M9 (probability rating 90%!) has 16 Mb on the same sensor size as the current M8, will have a Live View function, electronic rangefinder support or an electronic finder as an accessory device. The M8 will stay in production but now as an a-la-carte model (probability rating 95%). A digital CM is also predicted but with a PR of only 30%. With a PR of 90% we will see a new R10 in the current body shape of the R9, but with 16 Mb sensor and AF lenses. In the past we had the R and RE series of bodies, so there will also be an R10E (PR of 50%).

 

This is not a prediction by Erwin Putts, but a copy from his webpage citing the prediction of a german photo paper.

[dist]

I have the fotomagazin issue right here in front of me. I can translate some or all of the prose if there's enough interest. I consider the article a collection of rather cleverly made up musings about various possible or desirable development paths, but with no more or less substance than the various utterings found in this here forum

The probabilty ratios are somewhat ludicrous though...

Cheers,

[jaapv]

About a year ago there was a semi-official statement by Leica, in an interview in LFI, that there WOULD be an R10, it would be an integrated concept (no more DMR ) and the sensor size would be 24x36 or more . And I believe Mr. Lee has been hinting similarly. So the predictions of E.P. are fully in line with the leaks from Solms and not just speculation, at least for the R10. Tht gives credibility to the rest as well.

[jaapv]

I have the fotomagazin issue right here in front of me. I can translate some or all of the prose if there's enough interest. I consider the article a collection of rather cleverly made up musings about various possible or desirable development paths, but with no more or less substance than the various utterings found in this here forum

The probabilty ratios are somewhat ludicrous though...

Cheers,

 

Thank you for your avatar. I have a dent in the lower left hand corner of my laptop screen now! :D

[Irek]

I have just read full article on Erwin Putt internet site and I think his other comments are more valuable than citation of article about probability.

He is talking about some quirks in M8 design which make this system camera so difficult in use in comparision with M3 revolution in 1950 years. For instance: lens coding stops using of others manufacturers lens; complicated jpg algorithms inside camera. I can add special system for lens aperture evaluations.

On the other side.

Hasselblad has introduced new wide lens lately (28 mm for H3 system). They choose theirs own way to integrate lens with camera. To avoid dimensions and weight increase they choose to not design lens with extremelly good optic characteristics. Instead they have commited to some flaws of smaller and lighter lens and choose to refine photo file by software on computer. During importing RAW photos to computer, at first optical corrections of photo is done on the base of lens specific datas. After that typical work on RAW file can be followed.

I think it's the right way in digital world. To integrate optical characteristics of lens with power of software algorithms. That allow to avoid a lot of design work of new lens, lens can be smaller and lighter and of course camera nad lens can be a lot cheaper, I think.

 

What do you think about this concept.

Regards

Irek

[dist]

Thank you for your avatar. I have a dent in the lower left hand corner of my laptop screen now! :D

 

You could have squeezed the bug by simply closing your laptop's lid

[Riley]

I have just read full article on Erwin Putt internet site and I think his other comments are more valuable than citation of article about probability.

He is talking about some quirks in M8 design which make this system camera so difficult in use in comparision with M3 revolution in 1950 years. For instance: lens coding stops using of others manufacturers lens; complicated jpg algorithms inside camera. I can add special system for lens aperture evaluations.

On the other side.

Hasselblad has introduced new wide lens lately (28 mm for H3 system). They choose theirs own way to integrate lens with camera. To avoid dimensions and weight increase they choose to not design lens with extremelly good optic characteristics. Instead they have commited to some flaws of smaller and lighter lens and choose to refine photo file by software on computer. During importing RAW photos to computer, at first optical corrections of photo is done on the base of lens specific datas. After that typical work on RAW file can be followed.

I think it's the right way in digital world. To integrate optical characteristics of lens with power of software algorithms. That allow to avoid a lot of design work of new lens, lens can be smaller and lighter and of course camera nad lens can be a lot cheaper, I think.

 

What do you think about this concept.

Regards

Irek

 

with respect, i disagree

there are many cameras that utilise 'in camera' processing and the innovative lens codes are merely an extension of that, you could liken them to lens firmware that lenses equipped to dSLRs also use, and they are then an equally 'disabled' for exclusive use with other cameras .

 

the most telling of all, if you so believed in Erwin's concept, you could do that anyway PP. The reality is, you would have to notate each exposure as the lens data wouldnt be available in the EXIF.

[Guest Motivfindender]

with respect, i disagree

there are many cameras that utilise 'in camera' processing and the innovative lens codes are merely an extension of that, you could liken them to lens firmware that lenses equipped to dSLRs also use, and they are then an equally 'disabled' for exclusive use with other cameras .

 

the most telling of all, if you so believed in Erwin's concept, you could do that anyway PP. The reality is, you would have to notate each exposure as the lens data wouldnt be available in the EXIF.

 

downsizing lens quality would mean a "Japanesization" of leica.

Why buying Leica lenses, if they were not superior to others?

 

Many people DON´T buy leica Bodies anymore, but like to marry their leica lenses with C, N or O Bodies.

They would stop buying new Leica lenses and start buying now ALL their equipment from N-C-O.

Would be the end of the R-system, maybe even the end of leica´s 4/3 programm.

a real suicide.

 

On the other hand: They would sell more to those, who just want to buy prestige instead of quality, like in the beginning of Mercedes ridiculous "A" class.

But Mercedes was at that time powerfull, Leica ist weak on economical regards....

 

nevertheless - at long terms, this would be a buy-out of the name leica - like a top-restaurant switching to selling nothing than chips and fish....

 

Dirk

[Riley]

downsizing lens quality would mean a "Japanesization" of leica.

Why buying Leica lenses, if they were not superior to others?

 

Many people DON´T buy leica Bodies anymore, but like to marry their leica lenses with C, N or O Bodies.

 

Japanesization or modernisation, that then, gives them a reason to buy Leica bodies

 

They would stop buying new Leica lenses and start buying now ALL their equipment from N-C-O.

 

They use other equipment because there are failings within the native system, as an example Canon L lenses dont do wide very well, so 5D users seek Leica and Zeiss glass. Those failings wont go away because Leica chooses to code new lenses.

 

Would be the end of the R-system, maybe even the end of leica´s 4/3 programm.

a real suicide.

Dirk

 

4/3rds lenses already have firmware aboard, for instance, when updating the firmware of Olympus cameras, it also checks the firmware for flash (if fitted) and the lens installed. 4/3rds lenses are compatible within the 4/3 system, that is one of the systems advantages.

 

Surely no-one would dispute that R camera system couldnt use some progressive updating. The R system should probably go AF anyway. If that makes them less suitable for Canon users, so be it.

[Angora]

IMHO to get high quality prints you have to obtain the best since the very beginning of the « picturing process » : lens -> camera -> Photoshop -> printer -> paper.

 

If one start thinking that it's possible to downgrade quality at one stage, then catch it up at another, it's a risky bet.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[jaapv]

IMHO to get high quality prints you have to obtain the best since the very beginning of the « picturing process » : lens -> camera -> Photoshop -> printer -> paper.

 

If one start thinking that it's possible to downgrade quality at one stage, then catch it up at another, it's a risky bet.

 

Undisputable -with the lens determining about 80% of the final quality...

[AlanG]

...I think it's the right way in digital world. To integrate optical characteristics of lens with power of software algorithms. That allow to avoid a lot of design work of new lens, lens can be smaller and lighter and of course camera nad lens can be a lot cheaper, I think.

 

What do you think about this concept.

Regards

Irek

 

I think that is where camera and lens designers will have to go - a completly integrated approach. I have been using DxO software for some time to optimize my lenses and see the day where every manufacturer has something similar in the camera firmwhere.

 

The first digital camera I bought, the Olympus C2000Z, about 8 years ago. It had a barrel distortion at the wide end but came with software that corrected it. I thought that was pretty neat for an early consumer digital camera.