A New Year Wish for the M System

[fotografr]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, sinjun said:

I too would like an EVF camera with the M form factor which was optimised for M mount lenses... with thin sensor cover glass and perhaps special microlenses. But it might be better if it were not made by Leica, since then it would likely be much more affordable. It would be nice to think that Cosina or Zeiss might be up for it.

TT Artisan and 7 Artisans are Chinese companies that have been producing coded M mount lenses at a fraction of the cost of their Leica counterparts. They can afford to do this because they are heavily subsidized by the Chinese government. Perhaps those of you who desire a full frame camera with EVF that is designed to accept M lenses should make a suggestion to those two companies to see if they would agree to study it. Then everybody can be happy.

 

Edited February 17, 2021 by fotografr

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[adan]

Possibly a language thing going on here.

In English, "instead of" means "in place of, replacing, taking the place of." (ersetzen, remplacer). Like künstlich or ersatz kaffee. An "ersatz" Leica M probably impresses no one.

If you want a separate EVF camera in addition to the existing rangefinder cameras, that needs to be phrased differently. And if you want an M-mount on it, then again, "a camera with an M-mount" is different from an "M camera." There have been many cameras "with an M mount"; none of them were "M cameras." Zeiss-Ikon ZM, Konica Hexar RF, misc. Voigtlander Bessa-R variants, Epson R-D1, Minolta CLE, Leitz-Minolta CL, Leica CL, Red Flag (Chinese), etc. etc.

http://camera-wiki.org/wiki/Red_Flag_20

_______________

I'm not sure why the Q is considered a good candidate for adding an M-mount. It is a fixed-lens camera, with a lot of its engineering built around the fact that the lens cannot be changed (and thus it has no "mount" - or even a separate shutter). One would probably have to throw away 90% of the current Q (everything except the large sensor and the viewfinder) to make it accept M lenses.

The same is probably true for the CL/TL - everything from the size of the sensor (and its mounting CB) to the back-focus is just wrong, and would have to be redesigned from scratch.

[lct]

2 hours ago, lct said:

Some of us just want an M mount camera with an EVF instead of a rangefinder. As simple as that. 

8 minutes ago, adan said:

Possibly a language thing going on here.

As simple and as clear (i hope) as that .

[cirke]

Call it as you want or turn it as you like 

No one talked about replacing the RF but  making another M-mount  camera with an EVF
This would make it possible to sell the very expensive M lenses to much more people.

Edited February 17, 2021 by cirke

[astrostl]

3 hours ago, fotografr said:

TT Artisan and 7 Artisans are Chinese companies that have been producing coded M mount lenses at a fraction of the cost of their Leica counterparts. They can afford to do this because they are heavily subsidized by the Chinese government. Perhaps those of you who desire a full frame camera with EVF that is designed to accept M lenses should make a suggestion to those two companies to see if they would agree to study it. Then everybody can be happy.

Neither TT nor 7A are making coded lenses, and they don't even come with flange pits for self-coding. I wish they did! Kipon still does that.

As for government subsidies, a citation is needed. Cosina (Japan) has plenty of Voigtlander M lenses at a fraction of the cost of their Leica counterparts too.

If you told me a non-Leica company was releasing a full-frame M mount EVF body, my first guess would be Cosina-Voigtlander bringing back the Bessa line.

[fotografr]

1 hour ago, astrostl said:

Neither TT nor 7A are making coded lenses, and they don't even come with flange pits for self-coding. I wish they did! Kipon still does that.

As for government subsidies, a citation is needed. Cosina (Japan) has plenty of Voigtlander M lenses at a fraction of the cost of their Leica counterparts too.

If you told me a non-Leica company was releasing a full-frame M mount EVF body, my first guess would be Cosina-Voigtlander bringing back the Bessa line.

Well, that's odd because I own a 7Artisans lens that's coded.

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Just now, fotografr said:

Well, that's odd because I own a 7Artisans lens that's coded.

So do i on one lens (7art 35/2) but it was an early copy. They may have learnt a bit of occidental law since then . 

[astrostl]

38 minutes ago, fotografr said:

Well, that's odd because I own a 7Artisans lens that's coded.

Citations here and here ("The 6bit code already has been deleted from all the Leica M lenses, please kindly note it, thanks!" at the bottom of the current support page). The original 35/2 was coded years ago, but they discontinued the coded version and haven't coded or pitted any lenses since. And AFAIK TTArtisan has never coded or pitted.

Repeating from the rest of the post you snipped: As for government subsidies, a citation is needed. Cosina (Japan) has plenty of Voigtlander M lenses at a fraction of the cost of their Leica counterparts too. Do you have a citation for your assertion that 7A and TT are receiving subsidies from the Chinese government?

[fotografr]

10 minutes ago, astrostl said:

Citations here and here ("The 6bit code already has been deleted from all the Leica M lenses, please kindly note it, thanks!" at the bottom of the current support page). The original 35/2 was coded years ago, but they discontinued the coded version and haven't coded or pitted any lenses since. And AFAIK TTArtisan has never coded or pitted.

Repeating from the rest of the post you snipped: As for government subsidies, a citation is needed. Cosina (Japan) has plenty of Voigtlander M lenses at a fraction of the cost of their Leica counterparts too. Do you have a citation for your assertion that 7A and TT are receiving subsidies from the Chinese government?

My coded lens was purchased new directly from 7A about a year ago. I have a friend who purchased a coded TT Artisan 35 /1.4, also new from the company, about six months ago. Hard to dispute the facts. If you require photographic evidence, I'll be happy to oblige. As for proof that they are subsidized, no I do not have "citations." It's well known that the Chinese government subsidizes businesses there and it is quite reasonable to assume that's the case here considering what they charge for the lenses and the quality of the products.

Edited February 18, 2021 by fotografr

[fisheess]

14 hours ago, fotografr said:

TT Artisan and 7 Artisans are Chinese companies that have been producing coded M mount lenses at a fraction of the cost of their Leica counterparts. They can afford to do this because they are heavily subsidized by the Chinese government. Perhaps those of you who desire a full frame camera with EVF that is designed to accept M lenses should make a suggestion to those two companies to see if they would agree to study it. Then everybody can be happy.

 

I as a Chinese am also very intrigued by your claim that both companies are subsidized by the government. A citation is definitive necessary. 

AFAIK they are just companies founded by enthusiasts in search for profit.

[fotografr]

2 hours ago, fisheess said:

I as a Chinese am also very intrigued by your claim that both companies are subsidized by the government. A citation is definitive necessary. 

AFAIK they are just companies founded by enthusiasts in search for profit.

My comment was not meant to be derogatory and was in no way intended to cast dispersions on the Chinese. I've read the statement by 7 Artisans about how they decided to start their company. I have no way of determining whether they have a citation or not but it seems reasonable to assume there is some kind of subsidy. The lens I purchased is a solid, heavy, well-made f/1.1 coded lens that is quite sharp and came nicely packaged. The cost was US $314. Maybe somebody can explain to me how that's possible without some kind of subsidy. By the way, that $314 included free express shipping from China.

Edited February 18, 2021 by fotografr

[lct]

5 minutes ago, fotografr said:

The lens I purchased is a solid, heavy, well-made f/1.1 coded lens that is quite sharp and came nicely packaged. The cost was US $314. Maybe somebody can explain to me how that's possible without some kind of subsidy.

Difficult to say in socialist market economy but low wages play a significant role i guess.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialist_market_economy

[Cobram]

21 minutes ago, lct said:

Difficult to say in socialist market economy but low wages play a significant role i guess.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialist_market_economy

Two important things:

 - wages in China are not so low any more and in automated/modern production the major part of cost is related to the material itself, not workers wages (believe it or not)

 - we pay in dollars/euros, but they (chinese companies) get payment in Renminbi! So yes, the government is behind the economy.

As you can detect by my bad english "accent", I'm from an ex east Europe (socialist) country. Socialist (communist party) economy is very different to western model. If you don't live in such an economy you can not uderstand it.

The sad thing is:

we are angry to chinese people cause we blame them for loosing jobs in Europe/USA due to outsourscing to China, Chinese people blame us - Europe and especially America citizens for buying cheap goods and somehow exploiting their work force. So at the end low and middle class citizens all over the world are becoming agressive towards each other because of...

 

I hope my comment is not offensive to anyone. If it is, I will delete it. 

Edited February 18, 2021 by Cobram

[fotografr]

36 minutes ago, lct said:

Difficult to say in socialist market economy but low wages play a significant role i guess.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialist_market_economy

I agree, but I doubt if $314 even covered the cost of materials for the lens I bought, much less the equipment needed to produce it, development costs, factory space, so on. 

This is all off topic anyway. My original suggestion still stands, which was that if they can produce and sell M type lenses for a fraction of what Leica charges, perhaps they could be persuaded to produce what some people in this thread have been clamering for, which is a full frame camera modeled on the M, but which has an EVF. For this part of our discussion I'm not sure why it matters one way or the other if a Chinese government subsidy is involved. 

(Note to Cobram: I don't think anyone should be offended by your comment. On the contrary your input is appreciated.)

Edited February 18, 2021 by fotografr

[Cobram]

3 minutes ago, fotografr said:

I agree, but I doubt if $314 even covered the cost of materials for the lens I bought, much less the equipment needed to produce it, development costs, factory space, so on. 

This is all off topic anyway. My original suggestion still stands, which was that if they can produce and sell M type lenses for a fraction of what Leica charges, perhaps they could be persuaded to produce what some people in this thread have been clamering for, which is a full frame camera modeled on the M, but which has an EVF. I'm not sure why it matters one way or the other if a Chinese government subsidy is involved. 

TTartisan M mount camera will be interesting option. If I can dream: digital version of Zeiss IKON M mount camera will be very very nice competition due to ?better/different? rangefinder spot (easier to see).

[lct]

The Leica 6-bit coding is protected by a licence for which Chinese companies would have to pay royalties i guess but i have no info about that. Anyway, camera brands like Cosina/Epson (R-D1) and Ricoh (GXR M mount) used to sell digital M mount cameras with little success already and Zeiss said it is not interested if memory serves me well.

[fotografr]

2 minutes ago, lct said:

The Leica 6-bit coding is protected by a licence for which Chinese companies would have to pay royalties i guess but i have no info about that. Anyway, camera brands like Cosina/Epson (R-D1) and Ricoh (GXR M mount) used to sell digital M mount cameras with little success already and Zeiss said it is not interested if memory serves me well.

Someone should pass that along to 7Artisans. This is my f/1.1 lens.

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!

[lct]

Just now, fotografr said:

Someone should pass that along to 7Artisans. This is my f/1.1 lens

My early 7art 35/2 has the same but 7art changed its politics since then if i understand well.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[lct]

No 6-bit coding on the 7artisans website apparently
https://www.7artisans.com/en/h-pd-50.html#_pp=105_3765

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!

[astrostl]

48 minutes ago, fotografr said:

Someone should pass that along to 7Artisans. This is my f/1.1 lens.

Nobody needs to pass that along to them. You have already been given a link to people on this very forum in 2019 discussing the fact that 7Artisans no longer codes that lens, and a link to 7Artisan's own support site directly stating that they don't code any of their M lenses. As for TTArtisan (different company), I've seen no coding of any lens from them including the 35/1.4.

1 hour ago, fotografr said:

For this part of our discussion I'm not sure why it matters one way or the other if a Chinese government subsidy is involved. 

You introduced the subject yourself by making a politically-loaded assertion of fact for which you cannot provide evidence: "They can afford to do this because they are heavily subsidized by the Chinese government." 7A and TT's "normal" (not a body cap lens, not gold-plated, etc.) price range is currently $288-$755 on B&H Photo. There are plenty of popular and well-reviewed Cosina-Voigtlander (Japanese) lenses in that range too, so it's not clear to me why a subsidy would be required to deliver such instruments.