Guest VVJ Posted May 6, 2018 Share #381 Posted May 6, 2018 Advertisement (gone after registration) Four buyers would bring the price of an M-mount EVF camera down to 100.000 $, I guess... This is a very valid point. Would the people who want one be willing to pay more than for a regular M-body? It would almost certainly be more expensive. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 6, 2018 Posted May 6, 2018 Hi Guest VVJ, Take a look here Next, a full frame upgrade, ML,. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
djs Posted May 7, 2018 Share #382 Posted May 7, 2018 People interested in M lenses buy rangefinder cameras . Because there is no other option! (We've already had the discussion about the SL and CL at great length.) But I am interested in the wonderful range of M lenses - and, for me, there is no suitable body on which to use them. We also see the M lens range being added to fairly regularly and some of them will be difficult to use on the M without the clip on EVF, which I think is really ugly. Others will consider that a perfectly acceptable solution, of course. The fact that new M lenses keep appearing suggests that Leica see a bright future for the M system - these lenses are not being produced for SL/CL users primarily, so why not increase sales with the EVF M? 5 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hexx Posted May 7, 2018 Share #383 Posted May 7, 2018 (edited) Still could be Q-sized camera with an optional grip for those who’d need one. There are rumours about both Canon and Nikon entering FF mirror less market, but something tells me that those will be ugly SLR shaped things. Edited May 7, 2018 by hexx Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bags27 Posted May 7, 2018 Share #384 Posted May 7, 2018 Still could be Q-sized camera with an optional grip for those who’d need one. There are rumours about both Canon and Nikon entering FF mirror less market, but something tells me that those will be ugly SLR shaped things. Not just rumors. Confirmed by company spokesmen! Canon will announce their plans by Photokina, while Nikon has already said its mirrorless will be out in Spring, 2019. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlashGordonPhotography Posted May 8, 2018 Share #385 Posted May 8, 2018 People interested in M lenses do not want SL lenses so what's the point in allowing them to use them? And why should they wait for an adapter that does not exist to use lenses their camera should be designed for? If Leica does not want to sell M lenses to compact mirrorless users so be it but it won't complain if the M market is shrinking away without being replaced by anything else given the bulk of the SL gear. All this reminds me of the R debacle i'm afraid. I do. I'd love a M styled body that took SL lenses. In "M" mode a movable magnified focusing patch on the EVF. In L mode the SL focus points. And the adaptor already exists..... Gordon Gordon 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cp995 Posted May 8, 2018 Share #386 Posted May 8, 2018 I do. I'd love a M styled body that took SL lenses. In "M" mode a movable magnified focusing patch on the EVF. In L mode the SL focus points. And the adaptor already exists..... Gordon Gordon It should be easy for Leica to build a SL-Mount Kamera with an RF style Body. There is no need for a new PL. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted May 8, 2018 Share #387 Posted May 8, 2018 Advertisement (gone after registration) [...] And the adaptor already exists..... [...] It did not, does not, and will most probably never do. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 8, 2018 Share #388 Posted May 8, 2018 It did not, does not, and will most probably never do.L-mount on the camera. There is an M adapter... I do. I'd love a M styled body that took SL lenses. In "M" mode a movable magnified focusing patch on the EVF. In L mode the SL focus points. And the adaptor already exists..... Gordon Gordon Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted May 12, 2018 Share #389 Posted May 12, 2018 This is a very valid point. Would the people who want one be willing to pay more than for a regular M-body? It would almost certainly be more expensive. Why? The production cost of a ML would be lower than the production cost of a rangefinder-M camera. The viewfinder and rangefinder are expensive parts, and you replace them with electronic components. The brass is replaced with magnesium alloy. I do not see how the cost would be higher. 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted May 12, 2018 Share #390 Posted May 12, 2018 The small CL will take huge SL lenses, like the 90-280. It takes any L-mount lens, but Leica will not sell SL lenses for that camera nor CL cameras for those SL lenses. Who will use a CL with SL lenses? 1% of the CL and SL user base combined? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted May 12, 2018 Share #391 Posted May 12, 2018 [...] The production cost of a ML would be lower than the production cost of a rangefinder-M camera. The viewfinder and rangefinder are expensive parts, and you replace them with electronic components. The brass is replaced with magnesium alloy. I do not see how the cost would be higher. +1. A small part of the rangefinder would have to be conserved though, the roller cam allowing auto zoom contrary to L cameras. 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! 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/279118-next-a-full-frame-upgrade-ml/?do=findComment&comment=3517227'>More sharing options...
Guest VVJ Posted May 12, 2018 Share #392 Posted May 12, 2018 (edited) Why? The production cost of a ML would be lower than the production cost of a rangefinder-M camera. The viewfinder and rangefinder are expensive parts, and you replace them with electronic components. The brass is replaced with magnesium alloy. I do not see how the cost would be higher. Volume. A M-mount EVF camera, I really don't see a huge target audience. As there will be less buyers you can expect the cost to be higher. The M without LCD also costed more than the M with LCD... Edited May 12, 2018 by JorisV Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 12, 2018 Share #393 Posted May 12, 2018 It takes any L-mount lens, but Leica will not sell SL lenses for that camera nor CL cameras for those SL lenses. Who will use a CL with SL lenses? 1% of the CL and SL user base combined? If you want an AF lens up to 400 mm equivalent you have little choice... 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 12, 2018 Share #394 Posted May 12, 2018 +1. A small part of the rangefinder would have to be conserved though, the roller cam allowing auto zoom contrary to L cameras. roller_cam.jpg I really don't miss automatic image magnification. the small thumb movement on the thumb wheel more than compensates for the annoyance of the image jumping to large the moment you touch the focus ring, and don't want to lose your framing... But maybe Kolari can mod your Sony to do it 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted May 12, 2018 Share #395 Posted May 12, 2018 [...] But maybe Kolari can mod your Sony to do it Of course it cannot do it, otherwise i would not need a Leica. Auto zoom is the only significant Leica superiority so far. Fortunately for Leica most of its competitors have a thick sensor stack but this situation won't last forever. Interesting to see what Nikon will do given that it sells thin sensor stack DSLRs already. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tgdinamo Posted May 12, 2018 Share #396 Posted May 12, 2018 Volume. A M-mount EVF camera, I really don't see a huge target audience. As there will be less buyers you can expect the cost to be higher. The M without LCD also costed more than the M with LCD... But the current M system audience is also shrinking (which is very likely one of the main reasons Leica ovearall prices are going up given this has been their bread and butter system forever). The demand is probably shrinking because of the expensive RF bodies fewer people are interested in (older people still want it but eyes can't handle it, younger people don't get RFand/or can't afford it - whatever the reason may be the demand is shrinking). However, the Leica M lenses demand does not seem to be shrinking (at least that's my perception) so Leica is in a tough spot - maybe it's technically impossible to build a modern EVF body that takes advantage of those M lenses natively (so that the future M system does more than if you just mount the M lens on some Sony with converter), but unless they figure something out to keep seling those M lenses with their own cameras they have a problem, becasue the rest of their current camera systems (as great as they may be technically), are not viewed as having the same competitive advantages where it has some unique aspect nobody else could replicate (ie smallest size FF + lense with best IQ and great handling). The Q is interesting and probably somehow pointing the way to Leica's future. I read somewhere that it sold a lot a lot more than Leica expected, and it must be because it is the smallest and cheapest FF sumilux lens package available with lens/sensor combo producing IQ as good as the corresponding M package (for sure I bought my Q for that exact reason and I'm sure many others have as well). 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 12, 2018 Share #397 Posted May 12, 2018 Of course it cannot do it, otherwise i would not need a Leica. Auto zoom is the only significant Leica superiority so far. Fortunately for Leica most of its competitors have a thick sensor stack but this situation won't last forever. Interesting to see what Nikon will do given that it sells thin sensor stack DSLRs already. It is not just the thick filter stack; the microlens array configuration is even more important, the well depth too. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted May 12, 2018 Share #398 Posted May 12, 2018 It is not just the thick filter stack; the microlens array configuration is even more important, the well depth too. My Sony mod has no special microlens config. AFAIK and does better than my M240 already. Well depth i don't know, what is it? 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 12, 2018 Share #399 Posted May 12, 2018 I put a question mark against " better than the M240". Could you please substantiate? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bags27 Posted May 12, 2018 Share #400 Posted May 12, 2018 (edited) If you want an AF lens up to 400 mm equivalent you have little choice... Even with the 1/2 sensor, the 420 equivalent is barely a true birder lens, but the pictures it produces are spectacular. Edited May 12, 2018 by bags27 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.