leica r10 digital *** mount change ***

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hehe perhaps Carsten who knows? I'm not parano, at least i don't think so , but the best way to encourage people to buy an expensive body is to assure them that they can find out good cheap lenses in the first place and what's the best way to keep s/h prices low? Otherwise i don't quite like some choices made by Leica recently so i feel somewhat concerned about those they might have made about the R10, but it's just me.

[rsolomon]

........but the best way to encourage people to buy an expensive body is to assure them that they can find out good cheap lenses in the first place and what's the best way to keep s/h prices low?

 

i think your theory about cheap lenses supporting an expensive camera body is WAY off and i for one do not agree with this statement at all. To me lenses are a key element in final image quaility- perhaps the major element.

 

In general for my equipment purchases i look to invest in lenses, and upgrade the bodies as wanted/needed.

 

LCT i think you have this one backwards

[carstenw]

I think it helps the acceptance of an expensive camera like the M8 to be able to buy a few CV lenses and get great image quality at reasonable cost (for the lenses). Still, I am not sure how many people would buy the M8 if the very expensive Leica lenses did not exist.

[mym6is12]

LCT, I am positively sure that Leica can use their present R mount on the R10... I am sure you will be able to use your newly acquired R lenses on the R10 with or without an adapter.

 

It makes sense to use the existing R mount mechanics with the existing ROM contacts. They could just add an active bidirectional optical serial data bus (extrapolation of the M8 mount passive concept). An active serial link could transfer focus drive information etc. , with power supplied over the current ROM contacts.

 

Otherwise to maintain the current R flange-focal plane distance, they need either interchangeable mounts; a extra large mount with recessed R adapter or an adapter with about 5mm thickness and new shorter flange distance (seems unlikely if a large sensor/mirror/format).

[lct]

...LCT i think you have this one backwards

Perhaps you're right my friend but remember how much you've paid for your R8 or R9. $4,000 or less? That kind of figure will be most probably obsolete next year so how many people can afford to pay $6K or 7K for one body plus at least $3K for two lenses? You and me perhaps but how many others?

[lct]

...To me lenses are a key element in final image quaility- perhaps the major element....

To me as well. AFAIC the cheap lenses i was referring to are s/h 3-cam Summicrons (35, 50 & 90), Telyt (180) and Elmarits (24 & 28) plus a super-cheap Elmar 35-70. Despite their affordable price, i do expect that they'll give me the best image quality.

[rsolomon]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

maybe we're closer then we think.

 

when you say "cheap" i will think value, meaning you get a lot of quality for that price, and like most things beyond some "price point" you pay alot more $$ for small increase in quality.

 

i agree (right now) you can get a lot of value for your $$ on the second hand leica R lens market

[rsolomon]

remember how much you've paid for your R8 or R9. $4,000 or less? That kind of figure will be most probably obsolete next year so

 

maybe we should be investing in lenses and not so much on camera bodies, with the heavy electronics in todays camera bodies no matter what leica produces with the R10 it will most likely only has a 2-3 year shelf life.....

[lct]

..you can get a lot of value for your $$ on the second hand leica R lens market

Sure but how long would this last if Leica said right now that the R10 will retain 100% backward compatibility?

[rsolomon]

i do not beleive that the second hand Leica R market is related to the R10 backwards compability discussions.i beleive that the prices are droping on second hand R equipment because more people are looking to sell second hand R equipment......and the reason for that is summed up (in very general terms) below.

 

1. Leica doesn't provide the emotional tie to exisiting R users (relative to M): you spend a lot of money on R equipment but the feeling is Leica cares a bit more about the M line then R. ex: look at leica's reponse to the firmware issues on M8, when leica produced DMR formware 1.2 it took way to long to produce 1.3 - i do admit 1.3 was very good

 

 

2. DMR :Leica produced the right product, but to late: i beleive the DMR was the perfect product and delivered fantasitic quaility, but missed the market timing. if the DMR product came out 18 months earlier the demand would have been high enough to produce the second run. and people would not even be pushing leica for a R10 as harsly as they are, the DMR really is a great tool/product

 

3. Competion: getting closer and being considered "good enough" by mainstream people who buy photgraphic equipment. The difference in quality is arguablly to close to spend more on Leica.

 

4. Digital: Leicas does 2 things great in my opinion: produce high quality lenses and produce high quality mechanical products, todays camera bodies are more like computers then cameras of just 10 years ago. The electronics area is showing to be a weak spot for them.

 

For example in the old days (10 years ago) the camera manufacturers had a few critical functions, the camera body was to support lenses, to light meter, and to move the shutter , the film and processing played an independent role. Today the camera manufacturer continues with the previous functions but is now reposible for the "film/ sensor" and the processing/firmware.

 

... perhaps this is to much to ask from a small company like leica.

 

5: Market size/Marketing: the pie is growing, the number of cameras sold over the past few years is huge, the people who use cameras is more diverse then ever, most teenage kids have cameras today, where is leica in the marketing game ? as generations move through their life and upgrade their camera equipment it seems to me fewer know of leica or even care - most perfer the camera manufacture that has done well with them for some years..likley C or N.

 

and there are others too

[lct]

Brilliant Richard but you underestimate the attraction for digital IMHO.

R prices right now are ridiculously low as most people have never heard of the R10 and the happy few who read forums like this are facing rumors repeating at nauseam that the lens mount will be different.

As soon as Leica will confirm backward compatibility, hopefully, prices will start to raise, this is my bet at least and our only (?) point of disagreement.

[mjh]

Can't tell for Pentax but i don't see any change between pre- and post-D3 Nikon mount so far. Fits FF and DX lenses as well as older ones without any adapter.

Yes (except that the entry-level models D40 and D40x cannot use older lenses), and the same goes for Pentax. This year’s Pentax DSLRs can use any K-mount lens without any adapter – for example, I've used a 30 years old Pentax lens on a K10D, and the lens is fully supported, including focus confirmation from the AF and image stabilization.

[sdai]

As soon as Leica will confirm backward compatibility, hopefully, prices will start to raise, this is my bet at least and our only (?) point of disagreement.

 

Can't say you're wrong, sir ... this was exactly how I saw they-call-it-demo Noctiluxes going for 1700, or maybe 1800 US and mint 75 luxes going betwee 1300-1500 just 2 months before the M8 was officially announced ... I'm sure a lot of early buyers flipped them on eBay for a quick turn around

[sdai]

Regarding cheap alternatives ... remember Sigma, Tamron and Tokina out there, I think it'll just be a matter of time for them to reverse engineer the "new" R mount.

 

Actually, I'm not exactly sure about the patent on exisiting mount thing, I know for certain that neither Nikon nor Canon has ever given permission to Sigma et al. to build these off brand lenses, if that could happen to Nikon, Canon ... it could happen to Leica - as well.

[sdai]

I.e. it wouldn't be possible to use a standard shutter from Copal or whoever, but the camera would have to bear the cost of developing a new model with some difficult compromises among

• cost
  
• reliability
  
• noise and vibration
  
• sync speed

?

 

These shouldn't cause significant issue, John ... Nidec Copal can do many customized shutter units on spec. and they can handle much bigger shutter mechanisms ... 24x36 or 28x35 should be peanuts.

 

As of flash sync speed, it's more likely going to be limited by the design of the CCD and its electronic shutter controlling exposure ... anyway, I don't know much in this area, it's just my impression.

[mjh]

Regarding cheap alternatives ... remember Sigma, Tamron and Tokina out there, I think it'll just be a matter of time for them to reverse engineer the "new" R mount.)

Why should they? It would be too much effort for a very small market. Leica’s market share in the DSLR world is minimal and isn’t likely to grow so much to make it worthwhile for the likes of Tamron, Sigma, or Tokina to even consider it. The only way to gain significant market share would be to introduce a << $1000 model, and I just don’t see Leica doing that. (If the only Canon and Nikon DSLRs were the EOS-1Ds Mark III, EOS-1D Mark III, and D3, then Tamron et al. wouldn’t care about the Canon or Nikon market either.)

[ptomsu]

Why should they? It would be too much effort for a very small market. Leica’s market share in the DSLR world is minimal and isn’t likely to grow so much to make it worthwhile for the likes of Tamron, Sigma, or Tokina to even consider it. The only way to gain significant market share would be to introduce a << $1000 model, and I just don’t see Leica doing that. (If the only Canon and Nikon DSLRs were the EOS-1Ds Mark III, EOS-1D Mark III, and D3, then Tamron et al. wouldn’t care about the Canon or Nikon market either.)

 

This is exactly what is the case, why those companies produce and develop lenses for Nikon / Canon etc.

[sdai]

Why should they? It would be too much effort for a very small market. Leica’s market share in the DSLR world is minimal and isn’t likely to grow so much to make it worthwhile for the likes of Tamron, Sigma, or Tokina to even consider it. The only way to gain significant market share would be to introduce a << $1000 model, and I just don’t see Leica doing that. (If the only Canon and Nikon DSLRs were the EOS-1Ds Mark III, EOS-1D Mark III, and D3, then Tamron et al. wouldn’t care about the Canon or Nikon market either.)

 

Of course, I was only thinking ... Michael.

 

Perhaps Zeiss will do it ... ZR lenses on a budget? LOL

 

I think the profit margin in optics is incredibly high, even on a per unit basis ... otherwise I don't see a good reason why they would bother with ZM, ZF and even ZK mounts.

[mjh]

I think the profit margin in optics is incredibly high, even on a per unit basis ... otherwise I don't see a good reason why they would bother with ZM, ZF and even ZK mounts.

Simplifying a bit (but not much): cheap bodies create a market for cheap lenses, expensive bodies create a market for expensive lenses.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[rsolomon]

.....Simplifying a bit (but not much): cheap bodies create a market for cheap lenses, expensive bodies create a market for expensive lenses....

 

i would have agreed with this prior to the takeover of digital,.....but to me, there has been a shift in the paradigm

 

the digital world is not designed for expensive and long last lasting products....infact i would expect prices to go down as digital: features/functions/speed/reliability go up. a camera body is basically a computer......lenses are not