Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Dr. Kaufmann, reading this thread, turns to his chief engineer and says: "well, we were only planning to announce a minor firmware release for the TL2, but we will disappoint everyone unless we produce an entirely new camera in the next two weeks. Can we do that?"

  • Like 13
Link to post
Share on other sites

As some outstanding non-Leica lenses have already demonstrated, it is possible for a full-frame lens to offer outstanding optical quality, relatively wide aperture, autofocus, and compact size.

Consider the Sony FE 55/1.8 Zeiss:

- Ultra sharp wide open, quite comparable in sharpness to the 50 APO in fact (I have tested both on the a7rIII side by side)

- 0.50-meter MFD (20 cm shorter than that of most Leica 50 mm lenses)

- 64 mm diameter (1.1 cm fatter than the 50 lux-M)

- 71 mm length (1.7 cm longer than the 50 lux-M)

- 281 grams (54 grams lighter than the 50 lux-M)

- Excellent AF performance (much better AF than that of the 50 lux-M ;)  )

 

I have faith that Leica's lens engineers are up to the task of making AF lenses that perform at least as well as this Sony gem, in a comparable or even smaller package, over the next 24 months.

 

If indeed the new CM is a compact M-like camera with an L mount and an amazing (SL-esque) EVF, and a sensor that is superior to that of the M10 (which is already decent), then I will be first in line to buy one.  Best of all, we would continue to use our treasured M lenses on the CM.  Heck, we would presumably even be able to use our CL lenses on the CM (with cropping).

 

 

You have not mentioned the FE 55/1.8 lens' coma … try photographing illuminations and stars at night. And the FE 35/2.8 lens hood has poor build quality … mine fell apart.  And read the very mixed reviews of the FE 24-70/4.

 

dunk 

Edited by dkCambridgeshire
Link to post
Share on other sites

While not incorrect Dunk, I too have tried many a Leica lens on astro targets, there seems to be nothing as cruel as star images and a CCD sensor.

Back in the film days getting an image, any image, was a success.

Now, sensors and optics have changed, and the seagull shaped stars are downright awful.

So Leica is not immune to coma as well.

Gary

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

You have not mentioned the FE 55/1.8 lens' coma … try photographing illuminations and stars at night. And the FE 35/2.8 lens hood has poor build quality … mine fell apart.  And read the very mixed reviews of the FE 24-70/4.

 

dunk 

 

Dunk,

 

Let's agree upon the fact that my Elmarit-M 28mm/f2.8 is not perfect either...

 

But if Leica cannot produce an AF version of this lens that weighs less than a brick I will gladly invest in a Zeiss Batis 25mm (335g) or in a Sony FE 28mm (200g) and save a lot of money along the way...

 

Respectfully, Joris.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Having read everything written so far, and owning an M10 and an SL that I use (a lot) mostly with many M lenses. I have a few thoughts:

 

The size of the SL camera is currently fine, but could be made smaller (of course) in the new camera.

 

The SL zoom lens barrel's large diameter has very little to do with the optical physics of the L-mount design (except right where the lens barrel joins the camera). It is the result of the stepping motors, the circuit boards, and microprocessors for the AF, the iris blades, and the IS (if present). As well as the weather sealing "O" rings.

 

The next generation of stepping motors, circuit boards, and microprocessors is always smaller (and more integrated) than the last. so that progress alone can shrink the next generation of L-mount lenses.

 

I do miss the M lens focus and aperture calibration markings on the SL zoom lens barrels... 

 

Making these different design decisions in the new L lenses (and new camera body) could greatly change the size weight and handling convenience of the new camera, and still keep it compatible with its siblings.

 

I think that the volume, weight, design and AF operating speed of the new SL Summicron 75 in comparison to the earlier SL Summilux 50 represents a great improvement and well suited to use on a smaller full frame L mount body as well as the existing SL and CL. I intend to get the 35 for that when it’s available. The 24-90 and 90-280 though would seem completely mismatched on a smaller body. I have the 24-90 and it’s very impractical with the CL. For me it’s a reason to keep the SL.

Well we don’t actually know more than a rumour on the new body of course. If it happens, the way it might be marketed will be interesting.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Dr. Kaufmann, reading this thread, turns to his chief engineer and says: "well, we were only planning to announce a minor firmware release for the TL2, but we will disappoint everyone unless we produce an entirely new camera in the next two weeks. Can we do that?"

 

And the engineer replies: "So you are requesting that we should go ahead and release those new weather sealed Q28, Q50, and Q75 and kill the competition as well as our own camera/lens lineups once and for all?"

Edited by tgdinamo
  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

And the engineer replies: "So you are requesting that we should go ahead and release those new weather sealed Q28, Q50, and Q75 and kill the competition as well as our own camera/lens lineups once and for all?"

 

What happened to the Q35?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Noted on final output quality. The gap between brands is getting smaller and smaller due to computer aided designs and software correction.

 

But think of it like this: in 5 years you will most likely need to buy a new Fuji lens. In 65 years your grandchildren will still be using your Leica lens. 

 

 

Despite having spent decades with a variety of M cameras attached to my body, I'm no longer convinced that M cameras and lenses can justify their price differential compared with such marvellous cameras as Fuji's best.

 

I know, however, that it's not all about the photographs, but as I get older, the photos matter more and more to me, and the disposable bodies less so. So Leica need to produce something very special to persuade me to stay loyal. I'm teetering.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Jono,

 

I very much appreciate your insightful reviews on your wonderful website.

 

Maybe my expectations have been raised somewhat by the Q when Leica squeezed a full fame 28mm 1.7 into a compact body. And then there's the RX1, though that was arguably too small. I understand that it's a fixed lens, and I understand it would require a majoring engineering feat to pull it off for ILCs, but that's what innovation is all about. Considering its 35mm heritage, and the role its played in wrapping high quality camera systems into smaller packages, that's what Leica is about. 

 

It may not happen with the CM but it could be thought of as a priority in the short term. It would make Leica stand out of the increasingly crowded mirrorless market, which is now necessary considering that the gap on image quality between brands and sensor size is shrinking rapidly!

 

While the Japanese brands continue to grow 'big' with FF mirrorless, Leica could go the other way and grow small, if you get what I mean...

 

We already have the Summicron L lenses Jaap (at least the first couple). They would balance extremely badly on a Q sized body. No other manufacturer has managed to make good quality AF Full frame lenses which are small (for good reason). I can’t see Leica dropping the quality to make smaller lenses, and I can’t see why they would damage the sales of the M by bringing out such a camera.

I know nothing (really - which is why I can talk) but this seems like a very unlikely rumour to me. I know that if it were really possible then it would sell like hot cakes (with small AF lenses) . . . . But Magic is magic!

Edited by jonatdonuts
  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Noted on final output quality. The gap between brands is getting smaller and smaller due to computer aided designs and software correction.

 

But think of it like this: in 5 years you will most likely need to buy a new Fuji lens. In 65 years your grandchildren will still be using your Leica lens.

 

That’s a pretty thin argument when you consider that a Fuji lens may well cost around 10-20% of its Leica equivalent and will in reality last much longer than 5 years. They are actually very well built and thoughtfully designed metal-bodied lenses that take full advantage of modern technology. They will also almost certainly outlast any digital camera you care to use, from any manufacturer.

 

There are good reasons why I’ve been using Leica M cameras and lenses for around 35 years now, from the moment I could first afford to. But many of those reasons no longer pertain, as other manufacturers have made huge progress and eliminated many of the old differences.

 

I think Leica needs to be more inventive and also stop being quite so reliant on the halo effect of its most expensive products, stop being an “aspirational” brand, and get back to making cameras that do their jobs more effectively than the competition. At a price that more people who like taking photos can afford.

Edited by Peter H
  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

If Leica is releasing a FF ILC camera that is supposed to fill the gap between the M and SL, then I'm sure they don't intend the SL lenses to be used on it.

 

Considering one of the highlights of this rumor was that the new sensor would be incredible for low light and dynamic range, I would expect such a camera to launch with relatively small AF lenses based on the Summarit (f/2.4) branding. That would make the lenses more affordable, smaller, lighter, but still offering excellent optical performance, in a camera that performs much better in low light (high ISO).

 

The Sony A7S for example, doesn't ever actually need fast lenses. If the camera performs just as good at ISO 50000 as others do at ISO 6400, then, well, who needs f/1.4 lenses?

 

Go small and light (CM, Summarit) or go fast and heavy (SL, SL glass). Or mix it up as you see fit, as all lenses are in fact compatible with all cameras. Which is great, but it can be confusing for people who still think in the old "silo" based way of thinking. I assume Leica's goal with their new mount and cameras is to remove the need for people thinking about compatability at all. If you purchase a Leica camera, all Leica lenses will by default of course be compatible with that camera. I'm sure that is one of Leica's goals. Simplify and remove unecesseary obstacles. Remove the need to adapt lenses. One mount fits all use cases across several different camera setups.

 

Leica's BIG challenge though, is their compact and excellent M-line of lenses. At one point Leica HAS to cannibalize the M-line and compete with itself if it wants the L mount to be a success. Leica is mostly known for having small, light and excellent glass. That is what people want and expect from Leica, and what made Leica unique. With the current SL lenses those users might as well buy the latest Sony or Canon or whatever glass and camera. So at one point Leica absolutely needs to downsize L mount lenses to be more or less on par with M mount lenses, otherwise I don't think the L mount be an overall success.

 

And as Leica transitions into making hybrid cameras with Panasonic tech and manufacturing, the prices needs to go down. Seriously. The CL is insanely pricey for what it is. So is the Q. The M10 is kinda excused, as the rangefinder is such a niche, which can kind of defend the expense. But the Q, CL, TL, and SL cameras use technology that is very widespread, and they compete with other similar cameras directly, whereas the M cameras has zero competition. There are no other rangefinder cameras being made, so there is no competition.

Edited by indergaard
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Jono,

 

I very much appreciate your insightful reviews on your wonderful website.

 

 

While the Japanese brands continue to grow 'big' with FF mirrorless, Leica could go the other way and grow small, if you get what I mean...

Thank you!

And I do agree - I think a Q sized body with an L mount (and an M adapter) is a fantastic idea - so many people who don’t like rangeffinder focusing would love it . . . . . perhaps they’ll do it, perhaps they’ll even do it on June 14th, but I doubt it. . . . And if they do I might even buy one!

 

But as far as FF with AF, perhaps they could manage a few smaller primes, but the zooms just won’t be (just as the Sony ones aren’t), to me that means that if you have a bag with 3kg of lenses it doesn’t matter if the camera body weighs a few hundred grams more - I don’t think it’s that significant. . . . Sometimes a larger body is better. What really interests me is what the SL replacement body will be like (assuming that there is one). I would like to think that will be a little smaller, and if so . . Where does it leave this camera?

 

I think the supposed camera can be boiled down to two things that people want:

 

1. A small FF EVF camera to use with M lenses

Rightly or wrongly I don’t think that Leica will do that whilst M sales are good

2. A small EVF camera with new small very high quality AF primes

I think this one requires magic (at least at the moment)

  • Like 8
Link to post
Share on other sites

- Ultra sharp wide open, quite comparable in sharpness to the 50 APO in fact (I have tested both on the a7rIII side by side)

.

I agree the 55 f1.8 is a good lens - but you can’t test it side by side on an A7 unless you’ve done the Kolari mod - the thicker cover glass means that the 50 APO doesn’t perform nearly as well as it does on the M10 (or the SL come to that).
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not just AF that makes an EVF based body attractive, it's exposure control as well. If you have lots of experience, then an OVF with centre weighted metering is good enough. Otherwise an EVF with exposure simulation and histogram is an enormous benefit. I would happily use a new CL/CM with small M lenses for this reason alone.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Apologies, I had wrongly assumed we were talking about full frame equivalents. 

 

Canon’s 50mm Summilux equivalent is roughly 35% of the cost and with heavy, regular use in hot, humid environments, gave up after 6 years, which is quite a good return. The more complex zooms lasted for 4-5 years (either broken down or AF playing up). Meanwhile, I have a Summilux that’s more than 55 years old which has seen heavy use, at least for the time I’ve had it for the past 12 years, and will look like it will continue working for another 55 years. Of course, we are comparing apples and oranges here (manual versus autofocus), and this is not a very scientific test with so many variables (extreme versus moderate environments, heavy versus moderate / infrequent use etc). 

 

APSC lenses indeed represent great value considering how great the tech is these days. If you were to take a shot with the same settings in good light from a Fuji, a Sony, a Canon, a Nikon, a Leica, edit it the same way in lightroom, and print them out to 16x20, it would be almost possible to tell the difference as to which camera shot which photo. 

 

In terms of innovative design and vision, I think Leica has actually done great work under the new leadership. The M9 and X1 arguably paved the way for today's mirrorless full frame and APSC cameras (including the Fuji systems), while the Q is a bold masterpiece that paid off. In terms of actual raw tech hardware, however, Leica will always be at a huge disadvantage. We are talking about a small, niche photography / optics company pitted against Canikon and Fuji, which are massive conglomerates. And let's not even mention Sony, which is first and foremost an electronics company, with photography being a mere division.  

 

What Leica does have control over, however, is branding, and this is where there is considerable room for improvement. There is so much rich history there, together with a roster of famous photographers from past and present. I'm sure many photographers would have found Nick Ut and Alex Webb more inspirational than Paul Smith or Lenny Kravitz. 

 

 

 

That’s a pretty thin argument when you consider that a Fuji lens may well cost around 10-20% of its Leica equivalent and will in reality last much longer than 5 years. They are actually very well built and thoughtfully designed metal-bodied lenses that take full advantage of modern technology. They will also almost certainly outlast any digital camera you care to use, from any manufacturer.

There are good reasons why I’ve been using Leica M cameras and lenses for around 35 years now, from the moment I could first afford to. But many of those reasons no longer pertain, as other manufacturers have made huge progress and eliminated many of the old differences.

I think Leica needs to be more inventive and also stop being quite so reliant on the halo effect of its most expensive products, stop being an “aspirational” brand, and get back to making cameras that do their jobs more effectively than the competition. At a price that more people who like taking photos can afford.

Edited by jonatdonuts
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I don't think a standalone FF EVF-M only would be a good move. But a switchable OVF to EVF M might be welcomed in the future, providing they can do it without compromising on quality. It would be a considerate move, especially for those who prefer tele lenses and / or the more experienced generation whose eyesight isn't as good as it used to be (probably from shooting too much with the M). 

 

However, if they restyled their visoflex after their beautiful brightline viewfinders, encased in brass with the script etc. and found a way to keep it to the same size, I think that would be a more than suitable stopgap. 

 

Thank you!
And I do agree - I think a Q sized body with an L mount (and an M adapter) is a fantastic idea - so many people who don’t like rangeffinder focusing would love it . . . . . perhaps they’ll do it, perhaps they’ll even do it on June 14th, but I doubt it. . . . And if they do I might even buy one!

But as far as FF with AF, perhaps they could manage a few smaller primes, but the zooms just won’t be (just as the Sony ones aren’t), to me that means that if you have a bag with 3kg of lenses it doesn’t matter if the camera body weighs a few hundred grams more - I don’t think it’s that significant. . . . Sometimes a larger body is better. What really interests me is what the SL replacement body will be like (assuming that there is one). I would like to think that will be a little smaller, and if so . . Where does it leave this camera?

I think the supposed camera can be boiled down to two things that people want:

1. A small FF EVF camera to use with M lenses
Rightly or wrongly I don’t think that Leica will do that whilst M sales are good
2. A small EVF camera with new small very high quality AF primes
I think this one requires magic (at least at the moment)

Edited by jonatdonuts
Link to post
Share on other sites

Jono, point well taken, but consistent with my observations, Leica lenses 50 mm or longer have little difficulty achieving their acuity potential, especially in the center of the field, on the A7riii. Indeed, my copy of the 50 APO continues to outresolve the middle of the 42 MP center on the A7riii, so it is not limited by adaptation to the Sony body. The corners are softer but my comparison with between the 55/1.8 and the 50/APO was center-to-center.

 

With respect to build quality mentioned by others, I agree that Leica M lens build quality is second to none, and substantially better than Sony’s. I’m optimistic that Leica engineers can come up with a lens analogous to the Sony/Zeiss 55/1.8 that is optically superb, no larger than the Sony, yet has Leica M build quality. I’ll happily accept 1.5x the weight.

 

If Leica can release a set of AF primes over the next 24 months with decently large maximum apertures (1.8-2.4) spanning something like 28-35-50-75-90 focal lengths the rumored CM line will be off to a very strong start.

 

I’m a huge M fan, and M lenses consume the plurality of my disposable income. But I welcome this rumor with hopefulness that it marks not only the beginning of an exciting new line of Leica products, but also bodes well for the ability of my favorite photography company to evolve in a highly competitive industry.

 

Now if only the CM would come with a front-back moving sensor that enables partially autofocus on M lenses... :)

 

I agree the 55 f1.8 is a good lens - but you can’t test it side by side on an A7 unless you’ve done the Kolari mod - the thicker cover glass means that the 50 APO doesn’t perform nearly as well as it does on the M10 (or the SL come to that).

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...