New Panasonic Full Frame with SL Mount?

[LD_50]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Well, I would be happy with an M-size SL2, even though I don't think it will happen, though I agree some people prefer bigger kit (not just men, a woman pro photographer I know is happiest with her biggest Nikon DSLR or a massive video camera on her shoulder).

M sized SL2 would be tough to use with the native lenses. The SL is already basically M sized with a grip and larger battery.

 

CL seems to be the better fit for an M sized EVF camera.

[ajayk]

Oh! I was only guessing and it’s out ... Sigma full frame with Leica lenses:

 

https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/news/sigma-full-frame-mirrorless-camera-is-coming?utm_source=Adestra&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=26211&utm_term=8409650&utm_content=429498

[ajayk]

So game’s up ... Panasonic Full Frame and Sigma Fill frame with SL mount

Edited September 26, 2018 by ajayk

[ramarren]

This is the best news, now we will have a superb Panasonic 47MP with Leica lenses up to 150mm and Sigma lenses beyond that. May be in future Sigma body with leica lenses also.

Leica lenses up to 270mm with the superb APO Vario-Elmarit-SL 90-270mm lens ...!

[thighslapper]

So game’s up ... Panasonic Full Frame and Sigma Fill frame with SL mount

 

 Rubbish ...... Both the Panasonics are everything I don't want in a camera apart from IBIS and 47mpx. 

 

I'm never buying another camera festooned in buttons and feature/menu bloat ever again. 

 

Even if the SL2 just upped the mpx and left the rest the same I would stick with it. 

[ramarren]

I sold my SL and SL zooms because it was literally more camera and lens than I wanted or needed after I retired. I replaced the SL body with the CL body ... and it is for me the perfect complement to my M. Virtually the same size, a bit lighter, completely compatible with my M and R lenses, and the smaller format simply means I drop down one focal length and open up one stop—both easy and both easily doable.

 

I'll probably buy one or two native lenses, over time. Having two more companies making bodies and lenses for the L-mount is a plus: more choice.

[darylgo]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

So game’s up ... Panasonic Full Frame and Sigma Fill frame with SL mount

 

Perhaps, otoh did you see the Panasonic S models?  A disorganized mess.  I would consider renting the Panasonic from time to time for a feature unavailable on the SL but not to use on a regular basis.  In addition, there was a time when Nikon and Canon had rangefinder models, iirc the Nikon used the Contax mount and the Canon used the Leica mount.  Whoever hears about these (models) today?  

[ramarren]

Perhaps, otoh did you see the Panasonic S models?  A disorganized mess.  I would consider renting the Panasonic from time to time for a feature unavailable on the SL but not to use on a regular basis.  In addition, there was a time when Nikon and Canon had rangefinder models, iirc the Nikon used the Contax mount and the Canon used the Leica mount.  Whoever hears about these (models) today?

 

That was forty-eight years ago and more. People on the Rangefinder Forum still talk about them, but after forty-eight years, anyone who used them as a part of their working kit is long since retired or expired... !

[jonoslack]

That was forty-eight years ago and more. People on the Rangefinder Forum still talk about them, but after forty-eight years, anyone who used them as a part of their working kit is long since retired or expired... !

. . . Or joined the rangefinder forum

[Chaemono]

Perhaps, and I certainly hope you're correct.  But I'm compelled to say that having already invested close to a new Porsche in the M system over the past few years, I'm to a point where I'm not so inclined in this instance to spend solely on the basis of badge and reduced button count, particularly if there is a substantially cheaper, similarly performing, alternative.  Simplicity of UI is both desirable and valuable, no doubt, but there is a limit as to how much I'm willing to fork over for it.  I suspect I'm not alone in this view.

 

No, you are not alone. It's a perfectly rational reaction explained in economics by the Law of Diminishing Marginal Utility.

 

Economists believe that consumers make decisions at the margin; i.e. should one more unit of the good be obtained or not? The consumer will compare the additional (marginal) utility to be achieved by consuming one more unit of the good, to the additional (marginal) utility that must be given up (buying power) in order to obtain the good. At any particular price, the consumer will continue to buy units of the good as long as the marginal benefit, as expressed by maximum willingness to pay, exceeds the price. The marginal benefit indicates, in dollar terms, what the consumer is willing to pay to acquire one more unit of the good;

 

https://www.investop...enefit-cost.asp

 

 

But Jono ist also right. We spend hours every day with our cameras. We don't just look at the specs, we are much more interested in the experience of shooting. In order to understand why some of us will buy the SL2 instead of the S1R it's helpful to take a look at Murray N. Rothbard's great treatise Man, Economy, and State.

 

Utility is a subjective concept. It denotes "satisfaction" (or "happiness" or "contentment"). It rises if and when an individual increases his or her state of satisfaction. Conversely, if and when someone considers himself in a worse state of affairs, his utility decreases.  What is more, utility is an ordinal concept, meaning that utility cannot be measured in terms of higher or lower utility from the viewpoint of an individual; and changes in utility among different people cannot be measured. All one can say is that utility is higher or lower from the viewpoint of an individual.

 

https://mises.org/li...tility-teach-us

 

Rothbard explains why that is:

"In order for any measurement to be possible, there must be an eternally fixed and objectively given unit with which other units may be compared. There is no such objective unit in the field of human valuation. The individual must determine subjectively for himself whether he is better or worse off as a result of any change."

Man, Economy, and State

 

According to Rothbard, therefore, the S1R and the SL2 cannot be measured against each other. Some of us will be better off buying the S1R and some will increase their state of satisfaction by buying the SL2.

[mmradman]

No, you are not alone. It's a perfectly rational reaction explained in economics by the Law of Diminishing Marginal Utility.

 

Economists believe that consumers make decisions at the margin; i.e. should one more unit of the good be obtained or not? The consumer will compare the additional (marginal) utility to be achieved by consuming one more unit of the good, to the additional (marginal) utility that must be given up (buying power) in order to obtain the good. At any particular price, the consumer will continue to buy units of the good as long as the marginal benefit, as expressed by maximum willingness to pay, exceeds the price. The marginal benefit indicates, in dollar terms, what the consumer is willing to pay to acquire one more unit of the good;

 

https://www.investop...enefit-cost.asp

 

 

But Jono ist also right. We spend hours every day with our cameras. We don't just look at the specs, we are much more interested in the experience of shooting. In order to understand why some of us will buy the SL2 instead of the S1R it's helpful to take a look at Murray N. Rothbard's great treatise Man, Economy, and State.

 

Utility is a subjective concept. It denotes "satisfaction" (or "happiness" or "contentment"). It rises if and when an individual increases his or her state of satisfaction. Conversely, if and when someone considers himself in a worse state of affairs, his utility decreases.  What is more, utility is an ordinal concept, meaning that utility cannot be measured in terms of higher or lower utility from the viewpoint of an individual; and changes in utility among different people cannot be measured. All one can say is that utility is higher or lower from the viewpoint of an individual.

 

https://mises.org/li...tility-teach-us

 

Rothbard explains why that is:

"In order for any measurement to be possible, there must be an eternally fixed and objectively given unit with which other units may be compared. There is no such objective unit in the field of human valuation. The individual must determine subjectively for himself whether he is better or worse off as a result of any change."

Man, Economy, and State

 

According to Rothbard, therefore, the S1R and the SL2 cannot be measured against each other. Some of us will be better off buying the S1R and some will increase their state of satisfaction by buying the SL2.

Assuming both S1R and SL2 hit market on same date and sport same specification cheaper one would sell in higher numbers. There was a time when Leica camera was either best or only choice for Leica lens, as of yesterday Leica is sharing camera mount with two parter businesses. Even most recent announcement today of Russian Leica M with 35mm f1 lens - Russian Noctilux indicate to me that venture into luxury watches is not enough to survive.

 

According to Puts there is big portion of Leica buyers who purchase anything they produce and mostly stockpile, it seems numbers of collectors and badge worshippers are dwindling.

[Chaemono]

Disparaging remarks about Leica buyers by someone who has never used the SL. Stigmatize the brand in the hope that Sony sells one more of their cameras with a dated sensor.

[mmradman]

Perhaps, and I certainly hope you're correct.  But I'm compelled to say that having already invested close to a new Porsche in the M system over the past few years, I'm to a point where I'm not so inclined in this instance to spend solely on the basis of badge and reduced button count, particularly if there is a substantially cheaper, similarly performing, alternative.  Simplicity of UI is both desirable and valuable, no doubt, but there is a limit as to how much I'm willing to fork over for it.  I suspect I'm not alone in this view.

 

Regardless, I'm not knocking what they're doing, I'm actually rather excited by it.  I've desired a complimentary, EVF-based body for my M glass for quite a while now, but found the SL simply not compelling enough.  Perhaps this time around the value proposition will indeed be sufficient.  I do, however, find I'm asking myself whether or not Leica has arrived at this point as a result of seeing this as a salvage operation for a failed experiment. Put another way, does this signal a shift away from boutique camera manufacture to concentrate more on the optical side of the house.  ie. a decade hence will they look more like a Zeiss than a diminutive FuSoCaNikon?

Fully agree.

 

There must be some serious business imperative behind al this sudden cooperation and sharing of technology. Selling outdated digital technology at premium prices, except probably M system, is not working.

[mmradman]

Disparaging remarks about Leica buyers by someone who has never used the SL. Stigmatize the brand in the hope that Sony sells one more of their cameras with a dated sensor.

Who is that?

[Chaemono]

Who is that?

 

The little pink guy here. Who did you think?

 

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!

[LD_50]

Fully agree.

 

There must be some serious business imperative behind al this sudden cooperation and sharing of technology. Selling outdated digital technology at premium prices, except probably M system, is not working.

How would a newly announced cooperation be anything other than “sudden?” Leica of course has been working with Panasonic for a long time.

 

What defines the Leica strategy as “not working?” The only details I’ve seen on their finances have shown growth for several straight years in sales and earnings.

 

In the past 2 years Leica has announced a new M, C, and S camera, which would indicate they are not moving to being just a lens company.

[mmradman]

How would a newly announced cooperation be anything other than “sudden?” Leica of course has been working with Panasonic for a long time.

What defines the Leica strategy as “not working?” The only details I’ve seen on their finances have shown growth for several straight years in sales and earnings.

In the past 2 years Leica has announced a new M, C, and S camera, which would indicate they are not moving to being just a lens company.

Ok, let me rephrase it for you, announcement, actually two announcements, were sudden, we had some rumors for a while but big announcements happened in the last 48 hours. Obviously work involving partners must gone in the background for a long time.

[thighslapper]

Fully agree.

 

There must be some serious business imperative behind al this sudden cooperation and sharing of technology. Selling outdated digital technology at premium prices, except probably M system, is not working.

 

 

...... errr ..... because the camera market is inexorably shrinking and the technology has reached the point where it can fulfil all but the most demanding of users requirements.

 

The only big traditional 'camera' market left is the 'enthusiastic amateur' ...... which is the only group susceptible to marketing hype and daft enough to change their equipment because Huff, Ken, Tony & Chelsea, Ming and a selection of others tell them to ..... 

 

There are going to be no winners in this war of attrition ...... only survivors. If three people build a raft it's probably going to be better and quicker than if you did it alone .....

 

I personally think Leica, Sigma and Panasonic have made a good strategic move in terms of long term survival. 

Edited September 26, 2018 by thighslapper

[mmradman]

The little pink guy here. Who did you think?

 

Energizer Bunny.jpeg

If pink rabbit gives you satisfaction enjoy.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[LD_50]

Ok, let me rephrase it for you, announcement, actually two announcements, were sudden, we had some rumors for a while but big announcements happened in the last 48 hours. Obviously work involving partners must gone in the background for a long time.

I meant they have been openly working with Panasonic for a long time.

 

I agree this is a good move to stay competitive with a shrinking market at the high end.