Next generation M glass...

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

30 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

More likely that there could be two M lines, offered simultaneously, depending of course  on a viable market. If Leica can sell Ms without screens, or with black and white only, why not two viewing options? The RF also doesn’t have to be killed off, if in fact it can be modernized.  

+1

[haikos]

I think the idea of an evf M would be a mistake from a business standpoint; it could hurt sales of the SL and the Q because a customer would likely choose one over the other instead of potentially both.

M shooters want to use an optical rangefinder and manual focus lenses, SL shooters want to use autofocus and the latest tech with the option of shooting M glass, and Q shooters want a high end fixed lens evf autofocus camera.

I notice that many people who have an SL and/or Q also have an M-xyz and associated lenses of the product lines. Wouldn’t Leica want to sell us 2+ product lines instead of 1?

I also think making a vintage or less perfect/character lens lineup would put Leica in direct competition with Voigtlander who will beat Leica in every aspect of that battle first and foremost being price and bang/buck; I think the lines have been drawn on that avenue. Save for some one-off vintage reissues once in a while like the 28/5.6 which is so niche that only Leica would do it.

All that said, I am really interested to see what next gen M glass comes from Wetzlar. What aspects would they want to address or innovate?

[BernardC]

3 hours ago, lct said:

No problem with any 35mm lens but a 90/1.5 lens is at the limit of the RF accuracy due to the effective base length of the rangefinder. 

A 35/0.7, 50/0.95, 75/1.25, and 90/1.5 all require similar focus accuracy. Technically you would need a 35/0.68 to match the depth of field of a 50/0.95, but the difference is immaterial.

At least the 75 and 90 make it easier to use a VF magnifier, increasing the effective base length of the rangefinder.

[lct]

50 minutes ago, BernardC said:

A 35/0.7, 50/0.95, 75/1.25, and 90/1.5 all require similar focus accuracy. Technically you would need a 35/0.68 to match the depth of field of a 50/0.95, but the difference is immaterial.

At least the 75 and 90 make it easier to use a VF magnifier, increasing the effective base length of the rangefinder.

For an effective base length (EBL) of 50.60 mm, any 35mm lens can be focused at any aperture on current Leica rangefinders. At least down to f/0.3 or something. Same for 50mm lenses down to f/0.5 more or less. But things become more difficult with 75mm and 90mm lenses whose critical apertures are about f/1.2 and f/1.7 respectively. I mean on the M10 as the M240's EBL is shorter (47.09 mm). An EVF or an optical magnifier are then recommended for those lenses i have no experience with i must say. For those interested, those figures are based upon the formula b = e*f^2/k*z where b is the critical base length, e the visual acuity (0.0003), f the focal length, k the aperture and z the circle of confusion (0.030). Don't ask me more please as it is a formula i've been using for many years but i don't remember where it comes from. 

[Peters]

Unless they can find a seamless way. to. integrate an EVF into the OVF, I certainly wouldn't want the excellent rangefinder degraded. One way to keep those clamoring for an EVF happy is to release a better EVF attachment via a brass brightline body. At least it would look cool!

[pgk]

1 hour ago, lct said:

..... e the visual acuity (0.0003) .....

Not sure what this actually represents but given the general demographic of Leica users I would say that acuity will be lower than perhaps average. The second problem with any rangefinder formula is visual acuity/lighting conditions/contrast/subject failure. I'm in the camp of thinking that the M should be a rangefinder camera, but that said I can accept that if Leica can make a profit producing an EVF only 'M' then so be it.

[IkarusJohn]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

5 hours ago, Jeff S said:

More likely that there could be two M lines, offered simultaneously, depending of course  on a viable market. If Leica can sell Ms without screens, or with black and white only, why not two viewing options? The RF also doesn’t have to be killed off, if in fact it can be modernized.  

I’d also bet on the rumored M10 R having 40+ MP (sensor from M10 Monochrom with color array), but without IBIS.  

But Leica is full of surprises.  

Jeff

Is that (1) film M cameras with electronics (MP) and (2) film M cameras without (M-A)?  Or (1) digital M cameras (M10, M10-M, M10-D and M10-R) and (2) film M cameras (MP and M-A)?

M cameras have had EVF’s since the M(240), and curiously, the traditional OVF M camera has continued in production.  I seem to recall the arrival of the digital M (the M8) 14 years ago spelt the end of the M camera for some naysayers ... Sure, the video and Swiss army knife of the M(240) was a step too far, but the charm of the M is that the M3 cameras many still own and use, and 66 years of M lenses still work, while the latest digital Ms have high resolution sensors, EVF’s, high speed lenses, refreshed OVF’s.  I think it can survive a variant with a built in EVF.  

It has survived Lenny Kravitz, after all.

Edited May 10, 2020 by IkarusJohn

[dkmoore]

5 hours ago, Jeff S said:

I’d also bet on the rumored M10 R having 40+ MP (sensor from M10 Monochrom with color array), but without IBIS.  

This is exactly what is coming. The same exact camera as the M10M but with color array filter. Not just conjecture but fact. 
 

I was hoping for IBIS but not yet unfortunately. I am another that surely hopes the rangefinder isn’t killed off. Not to mention the M series cameras are by FAR the best looking camera on the market. Hands down. And that does help when you want to keep old technology relevant. Not to mention I love the rangefinder experience. 

[IkarusJohn]

On 5/8/2020 at 12:09 AM, Donut said:

So apparently Leica are working on a new generation of M lenses. According to the rumours here, we are looking at high speed lenses built to resolve the full capability of a forthcoming high resolution M camera. 

I am not sure as to whether or not higher resolving capacity is necessary, however. Modern M glass on the Leica SL2 resolves 47MP with no hiccups, even the 50mm Summilux from 2004. 

Thoughts? 

Turning back to the topic, I find it interesting that the “entry level” 2.4 Summarit-M line has been discontinued.

We’ve seen the re-working of the 90 Thambar and 28 Summaron (the “classic range”), the APO-Summicron 50, 28 & 90 Summilux and 75 Noctilux.  It looks to me like Leica has a strategy of developing the best lenses they can for the M system, focussing on it’s niche appeal, rather than mass market.

My pick would be

• a refresh of the 50 Summilux ASPH, perhaps giving it an APO differentiator.  Some would like it smaller, I’m sure
• a new 35mm - a Noctilux would be interesting,  The Summilux and the Summicron have both been recently refreshed (neither lens I particularly bonded with)
• another look at 21mm?  The Summilux is a nice lens, but could be improved

Surely, there are some much loved classics?  A new 35 AA Summilux?  For some reason, I expect the M lenses to be limited to 21-28-35-50-75-90.  I don’t think they will expend too much energy wider than 21 or longer than 90.

My wishlist?  75 & 35 Noctilux - I need neither, and have other uses for the required gold ...