AKW Posted January 22, 2019 Share #761 Posted January 22, 2019 Advertisement (gone after registration) ...I mean for the EVF-camera, M-size, I hope. Of course M11 will be a camera with M-mount and rangefinder. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 22, 2019 Posted January 22, 2019 Hi AKW, Take a look here M 11 will be around in less than 4 years. The speculations and facts.. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
rosuna Posted January 22, 2019 Share #762 Posted January 22, 2019 (edited) 17 hours ago, jonoslack said: Hmmm, I'm not sure that I agree with the first paragraph. I think that it would be quite possible to make a good L mount camera which was geared towards use with M mount lenses (possibly with a more elaborate adapter which could detect focus movement). . . . but could use SL and TL lenses as well. Whether Leica choose to do it is quite another matter. Best That L mount camera that could use SL lenses has to be big, heavy, with a good grip... SL lenses need that... You can use that SL camera with M lenses but... it is not a M camera. It is not the best (or good) design for M lenses: Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Imagine this on a M-size body: The M system and SL system are completely different: A good body for SL lenses is not good for M lenses. A good body for M lenses is not good for SL lenses. Adapters or removable grips are not a solution for that problem. You can use S lenses on a CL body, with adapter and grip... but that is not a "solution" for S system users... It is a botched solution. Edited January 22, 2019 by rosuna 2 3 Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Imagine this on a M-size body: The M system and SL system are completely different: A good body for SL lenses is not good for M lenses. A good body for M lenses is not good for SL lenses. Adapters or removable grips are not a solution for that problem. You can use S lenses on a CL body, with adapter and grip... but that is not a "solution" for S system users... It is a botched solution. ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/268919-m-11-will-be-around-in-less-than-4-years-the-speculations-and-facts/?do=findComment&comment=3669527'>More sharing options...
evikne Posted January 22, 2019 Share #763 Posted January 22, 2019 I cannot see any good way to implement SL features in an M body. Maybe the best is to keep them separated after all. But it will be exciting to see what Leica comes up with. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kwesi Posted January 22, 2019 Share #764 Posted January 22, 2019 The problem with this thread is that it is attempting to design 2 M style cameras in tandem. Essentially trying to solve a minor focussing accuracy problem with complicated hardware. The solution is really quite simple. An EVF with the resolution and eye relief of the one on the SL as an add on to the M11. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paulus Posted January 22, 2019 Author Share #765 Posted January 22, 2019 I think this thread shows why Leica always will think for themselves: what they actually want in a camera ( and read this of course 😉) . I think everything has almost been in subject. Maybe really time for them to show what they have invented and give us some slack. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jankap Posted January 22, 2019 Share #766 Posted January 22, 2019 Am 11.1.2019 um 09:06 schrieb adan: (It's a tough job, but someone has to do it!) -Leica M8 - no EVF -M240 series - viewfinder used generally not mentioned Please add a If digital. Without IBIS, AF, RF, VF, AA-glass and flash. But with FF-sensor, M-mount, short focus mount, touchLCD, Visoflex- USB- and flash-connectors, long-times knob. 😇 Jan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonoslack Posted January 22, 2019 Share #767 Posted January 22, 2019 Advertisement (gone after registration) 5 hours ago, rosuna said: A good body for SL lenses is not good for M lenses. A good body for M lenses is not good for SL lenses. Adapters or removable grips are not a solution for that problem. Hi Rubén Well - I simply don't agree I use SL lenses on the CL (which is much smaller than the M) Actually I use it a great deal with the 75 Summicron SL (great combination). I understand that if you make an M sized L mount full frame body then it's going to be odd with the SL zooms (as your pics show) - but it won't be odd with the SL Summicrons (which are lovely lenses). And with a new adapter that detected focusing movement it would work really well with M lenses. Best 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted January 22, 2019 Share #768 Posted January 22, 2019 On 1/21/2019 at 1:57 PM, rosuna said: My point is this: a good L mount camera with L-M adapter is not a good solution for using M lenses with EVF... and a good M mount camera designed for M lenses would not be a good body design for using SL lenses on it. Body and lenses are interconnected and a good system needs a balance between the lens and the body. Exactly and i don't see why an M camera should need an adapter to use M lenses, let alone that such an adapter does not exist with auto image magnification and would not come for free in the package somewhat expectedly. Also the sensor of such a swiss army camera would be designed for both M and L lenses and would give inferior results with M lenses compared to sensors designed specifically for the latters inevitably. All this trouble to allow a couple of monstrous AF lenses to be used on a compact manual body... 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 22, 2019 Share #769 Posted January 22, 2019 The sensor argument is simply incorrect. Enlarging the incidence angle has no negative effect on smaller incidence angles. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted January 22, 2019 Share #770 Posted January 22, 2019 43 minutes ago, jaapv said: The sensor argument is simply incorrect. Enlarging the incidence angle has no negative effect on smaller incidence angles. Ah, but LCT's point on L cameras for L lenses and M cameras for M lenses remains a good one, Jaap. While it is true that the SL remains a very good universal platform for all Leica lenses, that doesn't take away from the point that if you own M lenses, like the M camera system, but would like an EVF variant, the SL might not be the camera for you. I see no point in making what is effectively an M camera (in form and function), with an EVF and L mount - what would be the point? So you can use SL and TL lenses? Why? If you want an L mount camera, then there are three very good options. We are told there is an even better SL2 option around the corner somewhere. If L mount lenses are your thing, I see no reason at all for wanting an M camera with an L mount. Think about it for a moment - this L mount M camera would need to cater for AF and in body aperture and shutter control and all the other functionality which makes the L cameras so very good, and you need to add an adapter to use M lenses (which was the whole point in the first place). An M camera with an EVF is something quite different.. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 22, 2019 Share #771 Posted January 22, 2019 On 1/11/2019 at 2:03 AM, rosuna said: A compact SL for M lenses makes no sense (we already have that kind of "solution" from many camera makers). A compact SL for L lenses makes no sense (ergonomics, size, balance). I totally agree that I would not use large SL lenses on an M-style camera. I wouldn't use them on the CL either. Yet, Leica gave SL and CL the same mount. But using M lenses on a compact body does make sense. However, those other makes are not optimal for M lenses. Leica can certainly improve on that. My CL wears M lenses half the time I really don't notice the adapter, once it is on, it is on and the camera has an M mount. I prefer image magnification on demand anyway. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
M11 for me Posted January 22, 2019 Share #772 Posted January 22, 2019 Can you quickly explain why you use the M glass? Is it just because you have it or because it provides you with the better results? Thx in advance. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 22, 2019 Share #773 Posted January 22, 2019 Very compact, faster than the zooms and I like the rendering. 2 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
evikne Posted January 22, 2019 Share #774 Posted January 22, 2019 It may have been discussed before, but isn't it feasible to just make an SL quality Visoflex for the M10/M11? It would have been a good enough solution for me. – And kept the great design of the M cameras untouched. 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted January 22, 2019 Share #775 Posted January 22, 2019 11 minutes ago, evikne said: It may have been discussed before, but isn't it feasible to just make an SL quality Visoflex for the M10/M11? It would have been a good enough solution for me. – And kept the great design of the M cameras untouched. Yes possible but it would be bulky, irrespective if the OLED screen is vertical or more probably horizontal. I assume from the shape of my SL, that the large 4+ MP EVF screen is horizontal with a pentaprism above it. However technology always advances and I would assume something better than the M10/M10-P's Visoflex EVF would soon be achievable. If you look how much smaller the current Visoflex with the same 2+ MP count is, compared to the older Olympus VF-4 screen, this demonstrates the advances in EVF technology. Wilson 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted January 22, 2019 Share #776 Posted January 22, 2019 46 minutes ago, jaapv said: Very compact, faster than the zooms and I like the rendering. +1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kwesi Posted January 23, 2019 Share #777 Posted January 23, 2019 10 hours ago, evikne said: It may have been discussed before, but isn't it feasible to just make an SL quality Visoflex for the M10/M11? It would have been a good enough solution for me. – And kept the great design of the M cameras untouched. 10 hours ago, wlaidlaw said: Yes possible but it would be bulky, irrespective if the OLED screen is vertical or more probably horizontal. I assume from the shape of my SL, that the large 4+ MP EVF screen is horizontal with a pentaprism above it. However technology always advances and I would assume something better than the M10/M10-P's Visoflex EVF would soon be achievable. If you look how much smaller the current Visoflex with the same 2+ MP count is, compared to the older Olympus VF-4 screen, this demonstrates the advances in EVF technology. Wilson Evkine, I agree that this would be the most effective solution. Perhaps the M10 would be able to use it, the M11 certainly. Wilson, it may be a bit more bulky than the 020 but that's ok since it's not permanently attached. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted January 23, 2019 Share #778 Posted January 23, 2019 On 1/22/2019 at 2:32 AM, Kwesi said: I couldn't agree more. Leicarumors just posted avery interesting comparison between an M10 a Sony A7 and a Phase One. The best part is when the 75/1.25 is mounted on the latest phase One with jaw dropping results. Really makes you hope the M11 finally breaks away from the 24mp choke hold . Link below https://leicarumors.com/2019/01/20/mega-shootout-best-of-the-best-sony-leica-and-phase-one-comparison.aspx/ ... and Leica needs new back-illuminated sensors... 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted January 23, 2019 Share #779 Posted January 23, 2019 1 hour ago, rosuna said: ... and Leica needs new back-illuminated sensors... The problem is the volume of the order that Leica can place for such a back illuminated sensor, which also has the angled micro-lenses and shallow pits, that provide the current 24MP FF Leica sensors with such good image quality, especially with wide lenses. A sensor maker may well say, give me an order for 100,000 of them and no problem at all. An order for 10,000 would be far less attractive for such a custom sensor. This is always going to be the problem with a boutique manufacturer, such as Leica, unless they can piggy back on another manufacturer's product, like they did with the CL sensor from Sony. Maybe the Panasonic S1R 47MP sensor (or a mildly customised version of it) will be the answer. I don't know if it has been disclosed as yet, whether this is back illuminated or not. It is also going to be very interesting to see if Sigma will bring out an FF camera with a Foveon type stacked array sensor rather than Bayer pattern sensor, in L mount. Could that be an alternative for Leica? Wilson 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kwesi Posted January 23, 2019 Share #780 Posted January 23, 2019 1 hour ago, rosuna said: ... and Leica needs new back-illuminated sensors... Absolutely. The M10 has finally brought Leica back to its proper size, but let's not forget that it was a combination of the best films available and the the M ergonomics and lenses that has made it what it is today. The only thing now that desperately needs improvement is the sensor. It's ok but not up to today's best and that's a shame. Hopefully Leica addresses this in the M11 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now